Exhibit A - Resolution Certifying EIR — Fresno City Council, October 16, 2025 (part 2 of 3)

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.

Level of Significance With Mitigation: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.

4.7.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project would have a significant effect on the environment if it—in combination with other projects—would contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to geology and soils. For geology and soils, the cumulative study area consists of the City of Fresno Planning Area.

Fresno is relatively immune to some seismic hazards: to surface rupture of a known active fault due to the lack of nearby faults in the region, and liquification and lateral spreading due to the nature of the soils underlying Fresno and the history of low to moderate ground shaking in the region.

Compliance with construction standards and geotechnical requirements from the California Building Code, as required by the City’s Municipal Code, and the City’s General Plan policies would reduce potential impacts related to ground-shaking, expansive soils and soil erosion in Fresno.

4.7-25

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Compliance with the City’s General Plan and implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-6 would reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant.

Implementation of the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact with mitigation related to geology and soils.

Mitigation Measure: Refer to Mitigation Measure GEO-6.

Level of Significance With Mitigation: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.7-26
This page intentionally left blank

4.8-1

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
This section summarizes existing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and discusses global climate change, its causes, and the contribution of human activities. This section also estimates the likely GHG emissions that would result from construction and operational activities associated with implementation of the proposed project.

4.8.1 Existing Environment Setting
The following discussion describes existing GHG emissions in the city of Fresno and the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB), beginning with a discussion of typical GHG types and sources, impacts of global climate changes, the regulatory framework surrounding these issues, and current emission levels.

The study area for project impacts regarding GHG is the City of Fresno Planning Area because potential development under implementation of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program is limited to areas within the Planning Area where the emissions are generated. It should be noted that GHG impacts are inherently cumulative impacts.

The study area for the analysis of cumulative GHG impacts is the State of California. This analysis will be based on a summary of projections approach as provided in Section 15130(b)(1)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines. The applicable projections include those provided by the State pursuant to AB 32 and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Scoping Plan prepared to address AB 32 requirements.

4.8.1.1 Background
The following section provides background information on GHGs and global climate change.

Greenhouse Gases. Global climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans in recent decades. The Earth’s average near-surface atmospheric temperature rose 0.6 ± 0.2° Celsius or 1.1 ± 0.4° Fahrenheit in the 20th century. The prevailing scientific consensus on climate change is that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities. The increased amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other GHGs are the primary causes of the human-induced component of warming. GHGs are released by the burning of fossil fuels, land clearing, agriculture, and other activities, and lead to an increase in the greenhouse effect.1
GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or form from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are:

1 The temperature on Earth is regulated by a system commonly known as the “greenhouse effect.” Just as the glass in a greenhouse lets heat from sunlight in and reduces the heat escaping, greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere keep the Earth at a relatively even temperature.

Without the greenhouse effect, the Earth would be a frozen globe; thus, although an excess of greenhouse gas results in global warming, the naturally occurring greenhouse effect is necessary to k eep our planet at a comfortable temperature.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-2
• Carbon dioxide (CO2)
• Methane (CH4)
• Nitrous oxide (N2O)
• Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
• Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
• Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
Over the last 200 years, humans have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmosphere. These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere, and enhancing the natural greenhouse effect, which is believed to be causing global warming. While manmade GHGs include naturally-occurring GHGs such as CO2, methane, and N2O, some gases, like HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 are completely new to the atmosphere.

Certain gases, such as water vapor, are short-lived in the atmosphere. Others remain in the atmosphere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term. Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs above because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation. For the purposes of this air quality analysis, the term “GHGs” will refer collectively to the six gases listed above.

These gases vary considerably in terms of Global Warming Potential (GWP), which is a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas. The global warming potential is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas to absorb infrared radiation and length of time that the gas remains in the atmosphere (“atmospheric lifetime”). The GWP of each gas is measured relative to CO2, the most abundant GHG; the definition of GWP for a particular GHG is the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of the GHG to the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of CO2 over a specified time period. GHG emissions are typically measured in terms of pounds or tons of “CO2 equivalents” (CO2e). Table 4.8.A shows the GWP for each type of GHG. For example, SF6 is 23,900 times more potent at contributing to global warming than CO2.

Table 4.8.A: Global Warming Potential of Greenhouse Gases Gas Atmospheric Lifetime
(Years)
Global Warming Potential
(100-year Time Horizon)
Carbon Dioxide 50-200 1
Methane 12 25
Nitrous Oxide 114 310
HFC-23 270 11,700
HFC-134a 14 140
HFC-152a 1.4 140
PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CF4) 50,000 6,500
PFC: Hexafluoromethane (C2F6) 10,000 9,200
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 23,900
Source: Second Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building on the Framework (CARB 2017b).

4.8-3

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

The following discussion summarizes the characteristics of the six GHGs and black carbon. Black carbon also contributes to climate change and is therefore discussed below.

Carbon Dioxide. In the atmosphere, carbon generally exists in its oxidized form, as CO2. Natural sources of CO2 include the respiration (breathing) of humans, animals and plants, volcanic outgassing, decomposition of organic matter, and evaporation from the oceans. Human-caused sources of CO2 include the combustion of fossil fuels and wood, waste incineration, mineral production, and deforestation. Natural sources release approximately 150 billion tons of CO2 each year, far outweighing the 7 billion tons of man-made emissions of CO2 each year.

Nevertheless, natural removal processes, such as photosynthesis by land- and ocean-dwelling plant species, cannot keep pace with this extra input of man-made CO2, and consequently, the gas is building up in the atmosphere.

In 2021, total annual CO2 accounted for approximately 81.2 percent of California's overall GHG emissions.2 Transportation is the single largest source of CO2 in California, which is primarily composed of on-road travel. Electricity production, industrial and residential sources also make important contributions to CO2 emissions in California.

Methane. Methane (CH4) is produced when organic matter decomposes in environments lacking sufficient oxygen. Natural sources include wetlands and oceans. Decomposition occurring in landfills accounts for the majority of human generated CH4 emissions in California and in the United States as a whole. Agricultural processes such as intestinal fermentation in dairy cows, manure management, and rice cultivation are also significant sources of CH4 in California. Total annual emissions of CH4 accounted for approximately 9.8 percent of GHG emissions in California in 2021.3
Nitrous Oxide. Nitrous oxide (N2O) is produced naturally by a wide variety of biological sources, particularly microbial action in soils and water. Tropical soils and oceans account for most natural source emissions. Nitrous oxide is a product of the reaction that occurs between nitrogen and oxygen during fuel combustion. Both mobile and stationary combustion emit N2O, and the quantity emitted varies according to the type of fuel, technology, and pollution control device used, as well as maintenance and operating practices. Agricultural soil management and fossil fuel combustion are the primary sources of human generated N2O emissions in California.

Nitrous oxide emissions accounted for approximately 3.4 percent of GHG emissions in California in 2021.4
Hydrofluorocarbons, Perfluorocarbons, and Sulfur Hexafluoride.HFCs are primarily used as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances regulated under the Montreal Protocol.5 PFCs and

2 CARB. 2022. GHGs Descriptions & Sources in California. Website: ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-descriptions- sources (accessed May 2025).
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid.
5 The Montreal Protocol is an international treaty that was approved on January 1, 1989, and was designated to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of several groups of halogenated hydrocarbons believed to be responsible for ozone depletion.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-4
SF6 are emitted from various industrial processes, including aluminum smelting, semiconductor manufacturing, electric power transmission and distribution, and magnesium casting. There is no aluminum or magnesium production in California; however, the rapid growth in the semiconductor industry has resulted in greater use of PFCs. HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 accounted for about 5.6 percent of GHG emissions in California in 2021.6 Black Carbon. Black carbon is the most strongly light-absorbing component of particulate matter (PM) formed by burning fossil fuels such as coal, diesel, and biomass. Black carbon is emitted directly into the atmosphere in the form of particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5) and is the most effective form of PM, by mass, at absorbing solar energy. Per unit of mass in the atmosphere, black carbon can absorb 1 million times more energy than CO2.7 Black carbon contributes to climate change both directly, such as absorbing sunlight, and indirectly, such as affecting cloud formation. However, because black carbon is short-lived in the atmosphere, it can be difficult to quantify its effect on global warming.

Most United States emissions of black carbon come from mobile sources (52 percent), particularly from diesel-fueled vehicles.8 The other major source of black carbon is open biomass burning, including wildfires, although residential heating and industry also contribute. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) estimates that the annual black carbon emissions in California will be reduced approximately 50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030.9 Emissions Inventories. An emissions inventory that identifies and quantifies the primary human- generated sources and sinks of GHGs is a well-recognized and useful tool for addressing climate change. This section summarizes the latest information on global, United States, and California GHG emission inventories.

Global Emissions. Worldwide emissions of GHGs in 2020 totaled 22.9 billion metric tons of CO2e (MT CO2e). Global estimates are based on country inventories developed as part of the programs of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.10 United States Emissions. In 2021, the year for which the most recent data are available, the United States emitted about 5,586.0 million metric tons of CO2e (MMT CO2e) after accounting for sequestration from the land sector. Overall, emissions in 2021 increased by 6 percent since and were 17 percent lower than 2005 levels. The increase in total GHG emissions was driven by an increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. In 2021, CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion increased by 7 percent relative to the previous year. This increase in fossil fuel

6 CARB. 2022. op. cit.
7 United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2017. Black Carbon, Basic Information. February 14, 2017. Website: 19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/www3/airquality/blackcarbon/basic.html (accessed May 2025).
8 Ibid.
9 CARB. 2017a. Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy. March. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ sites/default/files/2020-07/final_SLCP_strategy.pdf (accessed May 2025). 10 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). 2022. GHG Data from UNFCCC.

Website: https://di.unfccc.int/time_series (accessed May 2025).

4.8-5

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

consumption emissions was due primarily to economic activity rebounding after the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the five major sectors—residential and commercial, agricultural, industry, transportation, and electricity generation—transportation accounted for the highest amount of GHG emissions in 2021 (approximately 28 percent), with electricity generation second at 25 percent and emissions from industry third at 23 percent.11 State of California Emissions. The State emitted approximately 381.3 MMT CO2e emissions in 2021, 12.1 MMT CO2e higher than 2020 levels and 49.7 MMT CO2e below the 2020 GHG limit of 431 MMT CO2e.12 CARB estimates that transportation was the source of approximately 38 percent of the State’s GHG emissions in 2021. The next largest sources included industrial sources at approximately 19 percent and electricity generation at 16 percent. The remaining sources of GHG emissions were commercial and residential activities at 10 percent, agriculture at 8 percent, high GWP at 6 percent, and waste at 2 percent.13

4.8.2 Regulatory Setting

4.8.2.1 Federal Policies and Regulations
Federal Clean Air Act. The United States has historically had a voluntary approach to reducing GHG emissions. However, on April 2, 2007, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the authority to regulate CO2 emissions under the federal Clean Air Act. While there currently are no adopted federal regulations for the control or reduction of GHG emissions, the EPA commenced several actions in 2009 to implement a regulatory approach to global climate change.

This includes the 2009 EPA final rule for mandatory reporting of GHGs from large GHG emission sources in the United States. Additionally, the EPA Administrator signed an endangerment finding action in 2009 under the federal Clean Air Act, finding that six GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) constitute a threat to public health and welfare, and that the combined emissions from motor vehicles cause and contribute to global climate change, leading to national GHG emission standards.

In October 2012, the EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), on behalf of the United States Department of Transportation, issued final rules to further reduce GHG emissions and improve corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for light-duty vehicles for model years 2017 and beyond (77 Federal Register 62624). The NHTSA’s CAFE standards have been enacted under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act since 1978. This national program requires automobile manufacturers to build a single light-duty national fleet that meets all requirements under both federal programs and the standards of California and other states. This program would increase fuel economy to the equivalent of 54.5 miles per gallon, limiting vehicle emissions to 163

11 USEPA. 2023. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2021. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2019 (accessed May 2025).
12 CARB. 2023. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2021, Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators Report. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023- 12/2000_2021_ghg_inventory_trends.pdf (accessed May 2025). 13 Ibid.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-6
grams of CO2 per mile for the fleet of cars and light-duty trucks by model year 2025 (77 Federal Register 62630).

On March 31, 2022, the NHTSA finalized the CAFE standards for Model Years 2024–2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. The amended CAFE standards would require an industry-wide fleet average of approximately 49 miles per gallon for passenger cars and light trucks in model year 2026, by increasing fuel efficiency by 8 percent annually for model years 2024–2025, and 10 percent annually for model year 2026. The final standards are estimated to save about 234 billion gallons of gas between model years 2030 to 2050.

4.8.2.2 State Policies and Regulations
The CARB is the lead agency for implementing climate change regulations in the State. Since its formation, the CARB has worked with the public, the business sector, and local governments to find solutions to California’s air pollution problems. Key efforts by the State are described below.

Assembly Bill 1493 (2002). In a response to the transportation sector’s significant contribution to California CO2 emissions, Assembly Bill (AB) 1493 was enacted on July 22, 2002. AB 1493 requires the CARB to set GHG emission standards for passenger vehicles and light duty trucks (and other vehicles whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation in the State) manufactured in 2009 and all subsequent model years. CARB approved these standards (starting in model years 2009 to 2016) in 2004, but the EPA did not grant the needed waiver of Clean Air Act Preemption until June 30, 2009. CARB responded by amending its original regulation, now referred to as LEV III, to take effect for model years starting in 2017 to 2025. The Trump administration revoked California’s waiver in 2019, but the Biden administration restored California’s waiver in 2021.

Executive Order S-3-05 (2005). Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order (EO) S-3- 05 on June 1, 2005, which proclaimed that California is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

To combat those concerns, the executive order established California’s GHG emissions reduction targets, which established the following goals:
• GHG emissions should be reduced to 2000 levels by 2010 • GHG emissions should be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 • GHG emissions should be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 The Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) is required to coordinate efforts of various State agencies to collectively and efficiently reduce GHGs. A biannual progress report must be submitted to the Governor and State Legislature disclosing the progress made toward GHG emission reduction targets. In addition, another biannual report must be submitted illustrating the impacts of global warming on California’s water supply, public health, agriculture, the coastline, and forestry, and report possible mitigation and adaptation plans to address these impacts.

The Secretary of CalEPA leads a Climate Action Team (CAT) made up of representatives from State agencies as well as numerous other boards and departments. The CAT members work to coordinate statewide efforts to implement global warming emission reduction programs and the State’s

4.8-7

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Climate Adaptation Strategy. The CAT is also responsible for reporting on the progress made toward meeting the statewide GHG targets that were established in the executive order and further defined under AB 32, the “Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.” The first CAT Report to the Governor and the Legislature was released in March 2006. It laid out 46 specific emission reduction strategies for reducing GHG emissions and reaching the targets established in the EO. The most recent report was released in 2022.

Assembly Bill 32 (2006), California Global Warming Solutions Act. California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is AB 32, passed by the State legislature on August 31, 2006. This effort aims at reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The CARB has established the level of GHG emissions in 1990 at 427 MMT CO2e. The emissions target of 427 MMT CO2e requires the reduction of 169 MMT CO2e from the State’s projected business-as-usual 2020 emissions of 596 MMT CO2e.

AB 32 requires the CARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main State strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline and to reduce GHGs that contribute to global climate change. The CARB approved the Scoping Plan on December 11, 2008; it contains the main strategies California will implement to achieve the reduction of approximately 169 MMT CO2e, or approximately 30 percent, from the State’s projected 2020 emissions level of 596 MMT CO2e under a business-as-usual scenario (this is a reduction of 42 MMT CO2e, or almost 10 percent from 2002–2004 average emissions). The Scoping Plan also includes CARB recommended GHG reductions for each emissions sector of the State’s GHG inventory. The Scoping Plan calls for the largest reductions in GHG emissions to be achieved by implementing the following measures and standards: Improved emissions standards for light-duty vehicles (estimated reductions of 31.7 MMT CO2e):
• The Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (15.0 MMT CO2e)
• Energy efficiency measures in buildings and appliances and the widespread development of combined heat and power systems (26.3 MMT CO2e)
• A renewable portfolio standard for electricity production (21.3 MMT CO2e) The CARB approved the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan on May 22, 2014. The First Update identifies opportunities to leverage existing and new funds to further drive GHG emission reductions through strategic planning and targeted low carbon investments. The First Update defines CARB climate change priorities until 2020, and sets the groundwork to reach long-term goals set forth in EOs S-3-05 and B-16-2012. The Update highlights California’s progress toward meeting the “near-term” 2020 GHG emission reduction goals as defined in the initial Scoping Plan. It also evaluates how to align the State’s “longer-term” GHG reduction strategies with other State policy priorities for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use. CARB released a second update to the Scoping Plan, the 2017 Scoping Plan,14 to reflect the 2030 target set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32.

14 CARB. 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-8
The 2022 Scoping Plan15 was approved in December 2022, assesses progress towards achieving the SB 32 2030 target, and lays out a path to achieve carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the State’s long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities.

Senate Bill 97 (2007). SB 97, signed by the Governor in August 2007 (Chapter 185, Statutes of 2007; Public Resources Code, Sections 21083.05 and 21097), acknowledges climate change is a prominent environmental issue that requires analysis under CEQA. This bill directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to prepare, develop, and transmit to the California Resources Agency guidelines for mitigating GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions, as required by CEQA.

The California Natural Resources Agency adopted the amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines in November 2018, which went into effect in December 2018. The amendments do not identify a threshold of significance for GHG emissions, nor do they prescribe assessment methodologies or specific mitigation measures. The amendments encourage lead agencies to consider many factors in performing a CEQA analysis, but preserve the discretion granted by CEQA to lead agencies in making their own determinations based on substantial evidence. The amendments also encourage public agencies to make use of programmatic mitigation plans and programs when they perform individual project analyses.

Senate Bill 375 (2008). SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, which establishes mechanisms for the development of regional targets for reducing passenger vehicle GHG emissions, the State adopted on September 30, 2008. On September 23, 2010, the CARB adopted the vehicular GHG emissions reduction targets that had been developed in consultation with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPOs); the targets require a 6 to 15 percent reduction by 2020 and between 13 to 19 percent reduction by 2035 for each MPO. SB 375 recognizes the importance of achieving significant GHG reductions by working with cities and counties to change land use patterns and improve transportation alternatives. Through the SB 375 process, MPOs such as the Fresno Council of Governments will work with local jurisdictions in the development of Sustainable Communities Strategy designed to integrate development patterns and the transportation network in a way that reduces GHG emissions while meeting housing needs and other regional planning objectives. As shown in Table 4.8.B, pursuant to SB 375, the Central Valley/San Joaquin reduction targets for per capita vehicular emissions are 13 to 16 percent by 2035.

15 CARB. 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan Update. December. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/ files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf (accessed May 2025).

4.8-9

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Table 4.8.B: Senate Bill 375 Regional Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Reduction Targets
Metropolitan Planning Organization By 2020 (%) By 2035 (%) San Francisco Bay Area 10 19
San Diego 15 19
Sacramento 7 19
Central Valley/San Joaquin 6–13 13–16
Los Angeles/Southern California 8 19
Source: California Air Resources Board (2018).

Executive Order B-30-15 (2015). Governor Jerry Brown signed EO B-30-15 on April 29, 2015, which added the immediate target of:
• GHG emissions should be reduced to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

All State agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions were directed to implement measures to achieve reductions of GHG emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 targets. CARB was directed to update the AB 32 Scoping Plan to reflect the 2030 target, and, therefore, is moving forward with the update process. The mid-term target is critical to help frame the suite of policy measures, regulations, planning efforts, and investments in clean technologies and infrastructure needed to continue reducing emissions.

Senate Bill 350 (2015) Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act. SB 350, signed by Governor Jerry Brown on October 7, 2015, updates and enhances AB 32 by introducing the following set of objectives in clean energy, clean air, and pollution reduction for 2030:
• Raise California’s renewable portfolio standard from 33 percent to 50 percent • Increasing energy efficiency in buildings by 50 percent by the year 2030 The 50 percent renewable energy standard will be implemented by the California Public Utilities Commission for the private utilities and by the California Energy Commission for municipal utilities.

Each utility must submit a procurement plan showing it will purchase clean energy to displace other non-renewable resources. The 50 percent increase in energy efficiency in buildings must be achieved using existing energy efficiency retrofit funding and regulatory tools already available to state energy agencies under existing law. The addition made by this legislation requires State energy agencies to plan for and implement those programs in a manner that achieves the energy efficiency target.

Senate Bill 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2016, and Assembly Bill 197. In summer 2016, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed SB 32 and AB 197. SB 32 affirms the importance of addressing climate change by codifying into statute the GHG emissions reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 contained in Governor Brown’s April 2015 EO B-30-15. SB 32 builds on AB 32 and keeps us on the path toward achieving the State’s 2050 objective of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels, consistent with an

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-10
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change analysis of the emissions trajectory that would stabilize atmospheric GHG concentrations at 450 parts per million CO2e and reduce the likelihood of catastrophic impacts from climate change.

The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provides additional direction to CARB related to the adoption of strategies to reduce GHG emissions. Additional direction in AB 197 meant to provide easier public access to air emissions data that are collected by CARB was posted in December 2016.

Senate Bill 100. On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown signed SB 100, which raises California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard requirements to 60 percent by 2030, with interim targets, and 100 percent by 2045. The bill also establishes a State policy that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all State agencies by December 31, 2045.

Under the bill, the State cannot increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the Western grid or allow resource shuffling to achieve the 100 percent carbon-free electricity target.

Executive Order B-55-18. EO B-55-18, signed September 10, 2018, sets a goal “to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter.” EO B-55-18 directs the CARB to work with relevant State agencies to ensure future Scoping Plans identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal. The goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 is in addition to other statewide goals, meaning not only should emissions be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, but that, by no later than 2045, the remaining emissions be offset by equivalent net removals of CO2e from the atmosphere, including through sequestration in forests, soils, and other natural landscapes.

Assembly Bill 1279. AB 1279 was signed in September 2022 and codifies the State goals of achieving net carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative GHG emissions thereafter. This bill also requires California to reduce statewide GHG emissions by 85 percent compared to 1990 levels by 2045 and directs CARB to work with relevant State agencies to achieve these goals.

Title 24, Building Standards Code and CALGreen Code. The California Building Standards Code, or Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations contains the regulations that govern the construction of buildings in California. Within the Building Standards Code, two parts pertain to the incorporation of both energy efficient and green building elements into land use development. Part 6 is California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Non-Residential Buildings. These standards were first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption and are updated on an approximately 3-year cycle to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods.

In November 2008, the California Building Standards Commission established the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code), which sets performance standards for residential and non-residential development to reduce environmental impacts and encourage sustainable construction practices. The CALGreen Code addresses energy efficiency, water conservation, material conservation, planning and design, and overall environmental quality. The CALGreen Code is updated every 3 years and was most recently updated in 2022 to include new mandatory

4.8-11

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

measures for residential as well as non-residential uses; the new measures took effect on January 1, 2023.

Cap and Trade. The development of a cap-and-trade program was included as a key reduction measure of the CARB AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The cap-and-trade program will help put California on the path to meet its goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and ultimately achieving an 80 percent reduction from 1990 levels by 2050. The cap-and-trade emissions trading program developed by the CARB took effect on January 1, 2012, with enforceable compliance obligations beginning January 1, 2013. The cap-and-trade program aims to regulate GHG emissions from the largest producers in the State by setting a statewide firm limit, or cap, on allowable annual GHG emissions. The cap was set in 2013 at approximately 2 percent below the emissions forecast for 2020. In 2014, the cap declined approximately 2 percent. Beginning in 2015 and continuing through 2020, the cap has been declining approximately 3 percent annually. The CARB administered the first auction on November 14, 2012, with many of the qualified bidders representing corporations or organizations that produce large amounts of GHG emissions, including energy companies, agriculture and food industries, steel mills, cement companies, and universities.

On January 1, 2015, compliance obligation began for distributors of transportation fuels, natural gas, and other fuels. The cap-and-trade program was initially slated to sunset in 2020 but the passage of SB 398 in 2017 extended the program through 2030.16
Executive Order N-79-20. EO N-79-20, which Governor Gavin Newsom on September 23, 2020, sets the following goals for the State: 100 percent of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks shall be zero-emission by 2035; 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the State shall be zero-emission by 2045 for all operations where feasible and by 2035 for drayage trucks; and 100 percent of off-road vehicles and equipment in the State shall be zero-emission by 2035, where feasible.

California Integrated Waste Management Act. To minimize the amount of solid waste that must be disposed of in landfills, the State Legislature passed the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), effective January 1990. According to AB 939, all cities and counties were required to divert 25 percent of all solid waste from landfill facilities by January 1, 1995, and 50 percent by January 1, 2000. Through other statutes and regulations, this 50 percent diversion rate also applies to State agencies. In order of priority, waste reduction efforts must promote source reduction, recycling and composting, and environmentally safe transformation and land disposal. In 2011, AB 341 modified the California Integrated Waste Management Act and directed the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to develop and adopt regulations for mandatory commercial recycling. The resulting 2012 Mandatory Commercial Recycling Regulation requires that on and after July 1, 2012, certain businesses that generate 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week shall arrange recycling services. To comply with this requirement, businesses may either separate recyclables and self-haul them or subscribe to a recycling service that includes mixed waste processing. AB 341 also established a statewide recycling goal of 75 percent; the 50 percent disposal reduction mandate still applies for cities and counties under AB 939, the Integrated Waste Management Act. In April 2016, AB 1826 further modified the

16 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2014. Cap-and-Trade Program. Website: www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ capandtrade/capandtrade.htm (accessed May 2025).

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-12
California Integrated Waste Management Act, requiring businesses that generate a specified amount of organic waste per week to arrange for recycling services for that organic waste in a specified manner. In September 2020, CalRecycle determined that statewide disposal of organic waste had not been reduced by 50 percent below 2014 levels by 2020. As a result, CalRecycle reduced the threshold so that a business that generates two cubic yards or more per week of commercial solid waste can arrange for the organic waste recycling services. Furthermore, jurisdictions are no longer able to grant an exemption for a business whose generation is less than one cubic yard of organic waste per week.

Low Carbon Fuel Standard. In January 2007, EO S-01-07 established a low carbon fuel standard (LCFS). This EO calls for a statewide goal to be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020, and that an LCFS for transportation fuels be established for California. The LCFS applies to all refiners, blenders, producers, or importers (“Providers”) of transportation fuels in California, including fuels used by off-road construction equipment. In June 2007, CARB adopted the LCFS under AB 32 pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 38560.5, and, in April 2009, CARB approved the new rules and carbon intensity reference values with new regulatory requirements taking effect in January 2011. The standards require providers of transportation fuels to report on the mix of fuels they provide and demonstrate they meet the LCFS intensity standards annually. This is accomplished by ensuring that the number of “credits” earned by providing fuels with a lower carbon intensity than the established baseline (or obtained from another party) is equal to or greater than the “deficits” earned from selling higher intensity fuels. In response to certain court rulings, CARB re-adopted the LCFS regulation in September 2015, and the LCFS went into effect on January 1, 2016. In 2018, CARB approved amendments to the regulation to readjust carbon intensity benchmarks to meet California’s 2030 GHG reductions targets under SB 32. These amendments include opportunities to promote zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption, carbon capture and sequestration, and advanced technologies for decarbonization of the transportation sector.

Advanced Clean Cars Program. In January 2012, CARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars program, which combines the control of GHG emissions and criteria air pollutants, as well as requirements for greater numbers of ZEVs, into a single package of regulatory standards for vehicle model years 2017 through 2025. The new regulations strengthen the GHG standard for 2017 models and beyond. This will be achieved through existing technologies, the use of stronger and lighter materials, and more efficient drivetrains and engines. The program’s ZEVs regulation requires battery, fuel cell, and/or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (EV) to account for up to 15 percent of California’s new vehicle sales by 2025. The program also includes a clean fuels outlet regulation designed to support the commercialization of zero-emission hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned by vehicle manufacturers by 2015 by requiring increased numbers of hydrogen fueling stations throughout the State. The number of stations will grow as vehicle manufacturers sell more fuel cell vehicles. By 2025, when the rules will be fully implemented, the statewide fleet of new cars and light trucks will emit 40 percent fewer GHGs and 75 percent fewer smog-forming emissions than 2012 model year vehicles.

The Advanced Clean Cars II regulations will rapidly scale down light-duty passenger car, pickup truck and SUV emissions starting with the 2026 model year through 2035. The regulations are two- pronged. First, it amends the ZEV regulation to require an increasing number of ZEVs, and relies on

4.8-13

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

currently available advanced vehicle technologies, including battery-electric, hydrogen fuel cell electric and plug-in hybrid electric-vehicles, to meet air quality and climate change emissions standards. These amendments support Executive Order N-79-20 that requires all new passenger vehicles sold in California to be zero emissions by 2035. Second, the Low-emission Vehicle Regulations were amended to include increasingly stringent standards for gasoline cars and heavier passenger trucks to continue to reduce smog-forming emissions.

Executive Order B-48-18. In January 2018, Governor Brown signed EO B-48-18, requiring all State entities to work with the private sector to have at least 5 million ZEVs on the road by 2030, as well as install 200 hydrogen fueling stations and 250,000 EV charging stations by 2025. It specifies that 10,000 of the EV charging stations should be direct current (DC) fast chargers. This order also requires all State entities to continue to partner with local and regional governments to streamline the installation of ZEV infrastructure. The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development is required to publish a Plug-in Charging Station Design Guidebook and update the 2015 Hydrogen Station Permitting Guidebook to aid in these efforts. All State entities are required to participate in updating the 2016 Zero-Emissions Vehicle Action Plan to help expand private investment in ZEV infrastructure with a focus on serving low-income and disadvantaged communities. Additionally, all State entities are to support and recommend policies and actions to expand ZEV infrastructure at residential land uses, through the LCFS Program, and recommend how to ensure affordability and accessibility for all drivers.

4.8.2.3 Regional Policies and Regulations
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. Fresno is within the SJVAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). The SJVAPCD has regulatory authority over certain stationary and industrial GHG emission sources and provides voluntary technical guidance on addressing GHGs for other emission sources in a CEQA context.

District initiatives related to GHGs are described below.

Climate Change Action Plan. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) was adopted on August 21, 2008. The CCAP includes suggested best performance standards for proposed development projects. However, the SJVAPCD’s CCAP was adopted in 2009 and was prepared based on the State’s 2020 GHG targets, which are now superseded by State policies (i.e., the 2019 CALGreen Code) and the 2030 GHG targets, established in SB 32.

San Joaquin Valley Carbon Exchange and Rule 2301. The SJVAPCD initiated work on the San Joaquin Valley Carbon Exchange in November 2008. The Exchange was implemented with the adoption of Amendments to Rule 2301 Emission Reduction Credit Banking on January 19, 2012.

The purpose of the carbon exchange is to quantify, verify, and track voluntary GHG emissions reductions generated within the San Joaquin Valley.

The SJVAPCD incorporated a method to register voluntary GHG emission reductions with amendments to Rule 2301. The purposes of the amendments to the rule include the following:

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-14
• Provide an administrative mechanism for sources to bank voluntary GHG emission reductions for later use.
• Provide an administrative mechanism for sources to transfer banked GHG emission reductions to others for any use.
• Define eligibility standards, quantitative procedures, and administrative practices to ensure that banked GHG emission reductions are real, permanent, quantifiable, surplus, and enforceable.

The SJVAPCD is participating in a new program developed by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) to encourage banking and use of GHG reduction credits referred to as the CAPCOA Greenhouse Gas Reduction Exchange (GHGRx). The GHGRx provides information on GHG credit projects within participating air districts. The District is one of the first to have offsets available for trading on the GHGRx.

Fresno Council of Governments. Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) is responsible for regional transportation planning in Fresno County and participates in developing mobile source emission inventories used in air quality attainment plans.

Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) are State-mandated plans that identify long-term transportation needs for a region’s transportation network. FCOG’s 2022 RTP charts the long-range vision of regional transportation in Fresno county through the year 2046. The RTP identifies existing and future transportation related needs, while considering all modes of travel, analyzing alternative solutions, and identifying priorities for the anticipated available funding for the 1,100 projects and multiple programs included within it. Senate Bill 375 (SB 375), which went into effect in 2009, added statutes to the California Government Code to encourage planning practices that create sustainable communities. It calls for each metropolitan planning organization to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as an integrated element of the RTP that is to be updated every 4 years. The SCS is intended to show how integrated land use and transportation planning can lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks. Fresno COG has included the SCS in its 2022 RTP.

City of Fresno General Plan. The City of Fresno General Plan provides goals, policies, and action items that work to meet or exceed all current and future state-mandated targets for reducing emissions of GHGs. The policies and action items from the General Plan, listed below, would apply to the proposed project.

Policy RC-5-a: Support State Goal to Reduce Statewide GHG Emissions. As is consistent with State law, strive to meet AB 32 goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and strive to meet a reduction of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 as stated in Executive Order S-03-05. As new statewide GHG reduction targets and dates are set by the State update the City’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan to include a comprehensive strategy to achieve consistency with those targets by the dates established.

4.8-15

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Policy RC-5-c: GHG Reduction through Design and Operations. Increase efforts to incorporate requirements for GHG emission reductions in land use entitlement decisions, facility design, and operational measures subject to City regulation through the following measures and strategies:
• Promote the expansion of incentive-based programs that involve certification of projects for energy and water efficiency and resiliency. These certification programs and scoring systems may include public agency “Green” and conservation criteria, Energy Star™ certification, CALGreen Tier 1 or Tier 2, Leadership in Energy Efficient Design (LEED™) certification, etc. • Promote appropriate energy and water conservation standards and facilitate mixed-use projects, new incentives for infill development, and the incorporation of mass transit, bicycle and pedestrian amenities into public and private projects. • Require energy and water audits and upgrades for water conservation, energy efficiency, and mass transit, pedestrian, and bicycle amenities at the time of renovation, change in use, change in occupancy, and change in ownership for major projects meeting review thresholds specified in an implementing ordinance.
• Incorporate the City’s “Guidelines for Ponding Basin/Pond Construction and Management to Control Mosquito Breeding” as conditions of approval for any project using an on-site stormwater basin to prevent possible increases in vector-borne illnesses associated with global climate change.
• Periodically evaluate the City’s facility maintenance practices to determine whether there are additional opportunities to reduce GHGs through facility cleaning and painting, parks maintenance, road maintenance, and utility system maintenance. • Periodically evaluate standards and mitigation strategies for highly vehicle-dependent land uses and facilities, such as drive-through facilities and auto-oriented development Policy RC-5-d: SCS and CAP Conformity Analysis. Ensure that the City includes analysis of a project’s conformity to an adopted regional Sustainable Community Strategy or Alternative Planning Strategy (APS), an adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP), and any other applicable City and regional greenhouse gas reduction strategies in effect at the time of project review.

Policy RC-5-e: Ensure Compliance. Ensure ongoing compliance with GHG emissions reduction plans and programs by requiring that air quality measures are incorporated into project design, conditions of approval, and mitigation measures.

Policy RC-5-g: Evaluate Impacts with Models. Continue to use computer models such as those used by SJVAPCD to evaluate greenhouse gas impacts of plans and projects that require such review.

Policy RC‐7‐c: Best Practices for Conservation. Require all City facilities and all new private development to follow United States Bureau of Reclamation Best Management Practices for water conservation, as warranted and appropriate.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-16
Policy RC‐8‐a: Existing Standards and Programs. Existing Standards and Programs. Continue existing beneficial energy conservation programs, including adhering to the California Energy Code in new construction and major renovations.

Policy RC‐11‐a: Waste Reduction Strategies. Maintain current targets for recycling and re-use of all types of waste material in the city and enhance waste and wastewater management practices to reduce natural resource consumption, including the following measures:
• Continue to require recyclable material collection and storage areas in all residential development.
• Establish recycling collection and storage area standards for commercial and industrial facilities to size the recycling areas according to the anticipated types and amounts of recyclable material generated.
• Provide educational materials to residents on how and what to recycle and how to dispose of hazardous waste.
• Provide recycling canisters and collection in public areas where trash cans are also provided. • Institute a program to evaluate major waste generators and identify recycling opportunities for their facilities and operations.
• Continue to partner with the California Integrated Waste Management Board on waste diversion and recycling programs and the CalMax (California Materials Exchange) program. • Evaluate the feasibility of a residential, restaurant, and institutional food waste segregation and recycling program, to reduce the amount of organic material sent to landfill and minimize the emissions generated by decomposing organic material. • Evaluate the feasibility of “carbon footprinting” for the City’s wastewater treatment facilities, biomass and composting operations, solid waste collection and recycling programs.
• Expand yard waste collection to divert compostable waste from landfills. • Study the feasibility and cost-benefit analysis of a municipal composting program to collect and compost food and yard waste, including institutional food and yard waste, using the resulting compost matter for City park and median maintenance.

4.8.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to air quality that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

4.8-17

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.8.3.1 Significance Criteria
Based on State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, the proposed project would have a significant impact related to greenhouse gas emissions if it would:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

Section 15064.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines states “A lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project.” In performing that analysis, the lead agency has discretion to determine whether to use a model or methodology to quantify GHG emissions, or to rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. In making a determination as to the significance of potential impacts, the lead agency then considers the extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting, whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project, and the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.

The City's 2021 GHG Reduction Plan was rescinded, and the SJVAPCD also does not have adopted thresholds of significance for GHG emissions. Therefore, this analysis evaluates the proposed project’s potential GHG emissions based on its design elements, consistent with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) GHG thresholds. The BAAQMD adopted the Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plans (Justification Report),17 which identifies GHG significance thresholds that would be applicable to the proposed project. These thresholds evaluate a project based on its effect on achieving California’s long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. Based on this research, the BAAQMD has determined that new land use development projects must incorporate specified design elements to contribute the “fair share” toward implementation of the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. If a project is designed and built to incorporate the identified design elements related to natural gas, energy, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and electric vehicles (EVs), then it would contribute its portion of what is necessary to achieve California’s long-term climate goals—its “fair share”—and an agency reviewing the project under CEQA can conclude that the project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change. The document concludes that if a project does not incorporate these design elements, then it should be found to result in a significant climate impact because it would hinder California’s efforts to address climate change.

The Justification Report provides substantial evidence supporting the use of these thresholds for projects throughout California because the thresholds are applicable to meeting the State’s

17 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans. April.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-18
established GHG reduction goals. In the absence of any City or SJVAPCD specific guidelines or thresholds, this analysis evaluates the proposed project for consistency with the identified project design elements as the applicable thresholds of significance to establish whether the proposed project is achieving its “fair share” of emission reductions to support long-term State goals for GHG emissions and carbon neutrality.

According to the Justification Report, a project would have a less than significant impact related to GHG emissions if it would include the following project design elements:

1. Buildings
a. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and nonresidential development).
b. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary electrical usage as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines.

2. Transportation
a. Achieve a reduction in project-generated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research's Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA:

1. Residential projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per capita

2. Office projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per employee

3. Retail projects: no net increase in existing VMT
b. Achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2.
c. Or be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).

These project design elements are utilized in the following analysis as the thresholds of significance to evaluate the project’s potential GHG emissions impact.

Per the significance thresholds described above, a less than significant GHG impact would occur if the project were consistent with the identified design standards, as evaluated below.

4.8-19

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.8.3.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts and impact significance related to greenhouse gas emissions that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

GHG‐1 The project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

The intent of the proposed project is to streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects while funding future VMT-reducing transportation improvements to reduce Citywide VMT.

The program itself does not propose any demolition or development activities within Fresno. Future transportation improvements would be City-initiated or occur as part of development projects and would occur in incremental phases over time, based largely on funding availability, economic considerations, market demand, and other planning considerations. The phasing and exact details of each future VMT-reducing improvement would be evaluated by the City on a case-by-case basis.

Therefore, construction and operational GHG emissions are not quantified as part of this programmatic analysis.

Direct project-related GHG emissions include emissions from construction activities, area sources, and mobile sources, while indirect sources include emissions from electricity and natural gas consumption, water demand, and solid waste generation. However, the proposed project-related GHG emissions would not include emissions from indirect sources as the funded transportation improvements would not involve any building construction that may use natural gas, water, or generate solid waste during operation. Similarly, future transportation improvements would not generate area source emissions as no building construction would occur. Additionally, future funded transportation improvements would reduce mobile source emissions as the intent of the proposed program is to reduce Citywide VMT.

Further, all future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of development projects, would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA (e.g., preparation of a Categorical Exemption, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report) to evaluate project-level GHG impacts and to identify any required mitigation. As such, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

GHG‐2 The project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

This section includes analysis of the proposed project’s consistency with State and local plans, policies, and regulations that have been adopted for the purpose of reducing GHGs. As discussed above, the SJVAPCD has adopted a CCAP, which includes suggested best performance standards for proposed development projects. However, the SJVAPCD’s CCAP was adopted in 2009 and was prepared based on the State’s 2020 GHG targets, which are now superseded by State policies (i.e.,

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-20
the 2022 California Green Building Code) and the 2030 GHG targets, established in SB 32, as well as State goals for carbon neutrality, as included in Executive Orders and codified in AB 1279. As discussed in the preceding section, the proposed project is consistent with Justification Report.

Therefore, in this section, the proposed project is analyzed for consistency with the goals of EO B-30-15, SB 32, AB 197, and the 2022 Scoping Plan and the FCOG RTP. 2022 Scoping Plan. The following discussion evaluates the proposed project according to the goals of the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO B-30-15, SB 32, and AB 197.

EO B-30-15 added the immediate target of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. CARB released a second update to the Scoping Plan, the 2017 Scoping Plan,18 to reflect the 2030 target set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. SB 32 affirms the importance of addressing climate change by codifying into statute the GHG emissions reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 contained in EO B-30-15. SB 32 builds on AB 32 and keeps us on the path toward achieving the State’s 2050 objective of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.

The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provides additional direction to the CARB related to the adoption of strategies to reduce GHG emissions. Additional direction in AB 197 intended to provide easier public access to air emissions data that are collected by CARB was posted in December 2016.

In addition, the 2022 Scoping Plan assesses progress toward the statutory 2030 target, while laying out a path to achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the State’s long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities.

The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on building clean energy production and distribution infrastructure for a carbon-neutral future, including transitioning existing energy production and transmission infrastructure to produce zero-carbon electricity and hydrogen, and utilizing biogas resulting from wildfire management or landfill and dairy operations, among other substitutes. The 2022 Scoping Plan states that in almost all sectors, electrification will play an important role. The 2022 Scoping Plan evaluates clean energy and technology options and the transition away from fossil fuels, including adding four times the solar and wind capacity by 2045 and about 1,700 times the amount of current hydrogen supply. As discussed in the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO N-79-20 requires that all new passenger vehicles sold in California will be zero-emission by 2035, and all other fleets will have transitioned to zero-emission as fully possible by 2045, which will reduce the percentage of fossil fuel combustion vehicles.

Water conservation and efficiency measures are intended to continue efficiency programs and use cleaner energy sources to move and treat water. Increasing the efficiency of water transport and reducing water use would reduce GHG emissions. As noted above, future projects implemented as part of the VMT Reduction Program would comply with the CALGreen Code, which includes a variety of different measures, including the reduction of wastewater and water use.

18 CARB. 2017c. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November.

4.8-21

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the plans and policies adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, including the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan, Executive Order B-30-15, SB 32, and AB 1279.

Fresno Council of Governments’ 2022 Regional Transportation Plan. The Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) reflects transportation planning for Fresno County through 2046. The vision, goals, and policies in the 2022 RTP are intended to serve as the foundation for both short and long-term planning and guide implementation activities. The core vision in the 2022 RTP is to create a region of diverse, safe, resilient, and accessible transportation options that improve the quality of life for all residents by fostering sustainability, equity, a vibrant economy, clean air, and healthy communities. The 2022 RTP contains transportation projects to help more efficiently distribute population, housing, and employment growth, and forecast development that is generally consistent with regional-level general plan data. The actions in the 2022 RTP address all transportation modes (highways, local streets and roads, mass transportation, rail, bicycle, aviation facilities and services) and consist of short- and long-term activities that address regional transportation needs. While the actions are organized by the five key policy areas, many of them are cross-cutting and support multiple goals and policies. Some actions are intended to support the Sustainable Communities Strategy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions directly, while others are focused on the RTP’s broader goals. The 2022 RTP does not require that local General Plans, Specific Plans, or zoning be consistent with the 2022 RTP, but provides incentives for consistency for governments and developers.

The proposed project would not interfere with the FCOG’s ability to achieve the region’s GHG reductions. Furthermore, the proposed project is not regionally significant per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15206 and as such, it would not conflict with the 2022 RTP targets, since those targets were established and are applicable on a regional level.

The proposed project would comply with existing State regulations adopted to achieve the overall GHG emissions reduction goals identified in the 2022 RTP and would be consistent with applicable State plans and programs designed to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.8.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 requires an analysis of cumulative impacts, which are defined as, “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The cumulative analysis below considers the proposed project’s impacts in conjunction with future buildout of the General Plan.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 25

4.8-22
GHG‐3 The project, in combination with other projects, would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to greenhouse gas emissions.

GHG impacts are by their nature cumulative impacts. Localized impacts of climate change are the result of the cumulative impact of global emissions. The combined benefits of reductions achieved by all levels of government help to slow or reverse the growth in greenhouse gas emissions. In the absence of comprehensive international agreements on appropriate levels of reductions achieved by each country, another measure of cumulative contribution is required. This serves to define the State’s share of the reductions regardless of the activities or lack of activities of other areas of the United States or the world. Therefore, a cumulative threshold based on consistency with State targets and actions to reduce GHGs is an appropriate standard of comparison for significance determinations.

As discussed above, the Justification Report has determined that projects need to incorporate design elements to do their “fair share” of implementing the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. If a project is designed and built to incorporate the design elements, then it would contribute its portion of what is necessary to achieve its “fair share,” and it can be concluded that the project would result in a less than significant impact related to GHG emissions. If a project does not incorporate these design elements, then a project would result in a significant GHG impact. Therefore, since the proposed project would meet all of the project design features recommended in the Justification Report to support the project achieving its “fair share” of emission reductions, the proposed project would not result in the generation of GHG emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment, and the cumulative GHG impacts would be considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.9-1

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
This section describes the environmental setting, including regulatory framework and existing conditions, and potentially signiﬁcant environmental impacts of the proposed project on hazards and hazardous materials.

4.9.1 Existing Environment Setting

4.9.1.1 Hazardous Materials Deﬁnitions
Hazardous materials refer to substances or waste products that exhibit potential harm to human health, safety, and/or the environment. Hazardous materials can be potentially corrosive, poisonous, ﬂammable, and/or undergo a chemical reaction that may cause harm. These materials can be used in everyday products (e.g., household cleaners, industrial solvents, pesticides, electronics, plastic products, etc.) and can include toxic chemicals. These products are commonly used in agriculture, commercial, industry, hospitals, and households.
“Hazardous materials” described in this section includes all materials deﬁned in the California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 25260 as a:
“Substance or waste that, because of its physical, chemical, or other characteristics, may pose a risk of endangering human health or safety or of degrading the environment. ‘Hazardous material’ includes but is not limited to…A hazardous substance as deﬁned in Section 25281 or 25316; a hazardous waste as deﬁned in Section 25117; A waste as deﬁned in Section 470 or Section 13050 of the Water Code.”
1 “Hazardous substances” are substances that can adversely aﬀect a person’s health, or quality of the environment (e.g., carcinogenic, airborne contaminant, contaminates water, etc.). “Hazardous waste” is any discarded hazardous material and includes hazardous materials purposefully disposed of, or inadvertently released, unless the material has been speciﬁcally excluded by regulation.

Hazardous wastes are broadly characterized by their ignitability, toxicity, corrosivity, reactivity, radioactivity, or bioactivity. Waste as referenced in HSC Section 470 and Section 13050 of the Water Code is used oil or sewage (radioactive, of human or animal origin, etc.).

Hazardous materials, including certain chemicals are regulated under various State and federal agencies such as the: United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the California Governor’s Oﬃce of Emergency Services, and other agencies.

The federal and State levels have deﬁned hazardous waste similarly; however, certain distinctions have separated federal and State agencies. Hazardous waste is addressed at the federal level with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), non-RCRA hazardous wastes is addressed at the State level. Federal, State, and local programs have set various regulations in

1 Find Law. 2020. California Code, Health and Safety Code Section 25260. Website:
codes.ﬁndlaw.com/ca/health-and-safety-code/hsc-sect-25260.html (accessed May 2024).

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-2
handling (treating, storing, and transportation) and disposing hazardous waste to prevent mishandling and potential impact to public health and environment. Some materials are designated “acutely” or “extremely” hazardous under relevant statues and regulations.

4.9.1.2 Hazardous Materials Sites
Hazardous materials are routinely used, stored, and transported in the Planning Area as established by the City’s General Plan, and are associated with industrial and commercial/retail businesses, as well as in educational facilities, hospitals, and households. Hazardous waste generators in the Planning Area include industries, businesses, public and private institutions, and households.

Federal, state, and local agencies maintain comprehensive databases that identify the location of facilities using large quantities of hazardous materials, as well as facilities generating hazardous waste. Some of these facilities use certain classes of hazardous materials that require risk management plans to protect surrounding land uses.

The Fresno County Health Department’s Certiﬁed Uniﬁed Program Agency (CUPA) is responsible for implementing a uniﬁed hazardous materials and hazardous waste management regulatory program.

The agency provides oversight of businesses that:
• Require Hazardous Materials Business Plans;
• Require California Accidental Release Prevention plans or Federal Risk Management Plans; • Operate Underground Storage Tanks;
• Operate Aboveground Storage Tanks;
• Generate Hazardous Waste(s);
• Have Onsite Treatment of Hazardous Waste(s)/Tiered Permits.

Compliance is achieved through routine inspections of all regulated facilities, and investigation of citizen-based complaints and inquiries regarding improper handling and/or disposal of hazardous materials and/or hazardous wastes. Hazardous waste source reduction is a primary goal of the CUPA.

Additionally, the agency provides oversight for the remediation of contaminated sites.

Hazardous Waste Storage and Leaking Sites. State laws relating to the storage of hazardous materials in underground storage tanks include permitting, monitoring, closure, and cleanup requirements. Regulations set forth construction and monitoring standards, monitoring standards for existing tanks, release reporting requirements, and closure requirements. A Permit to Operate from Fresno County Environmental Health Department is required in order to operate an underground storage tank system within the Planning Area. Environmental Health staﬀ inspects UST facilities on an annual basis to assure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. The purpose of this program is to assure that hazardous materials stored in underground tanks are not released into the groundwater and/or the environment. The Permit to Operate incorporates a set of conditions for operation and continuous monitoring of the underground storage tank system.

Sites within the Planning Area that have been previously contaminated by hazardous materials are required to be identiﬁed and cleaned up. These contaminated sites are mainly associated with leaking underground storage tanks and are located in several areas including south of Downtown, within the boundaries of Fresno Yosemite

4.9-3

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

International Airport, adjacent to the Palm Bluﬀs Corporate Center (located in northwest Fresno), as well as along the Union Paciﬁc Railroad Tracks. Releases, leaks, or disposal of chemical compounds, such as petroleum, on or below ground surface can cause contamination in underlying soil and groundwater.

Disturbance of previously contaminated areas may expose the public to hazards from physical or airborne contact. Due to these threats from hazardous materials, the City of Fresno coordinates with local, state and federal agencies to ensure potential threats are minimized. Below is a brief description of six of the databases that provide information about hazardous materials sites within the Planning Area.

1. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS): CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites, which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and sites, which are in the screening and assessment phased for possible inclusion on the NPL. The CERCLIS database lists three Federal Superfund sites within the Planning Area, outlined in Table 4.9.A below.

Table 4.9.A: Facilities Listed on the US EPA CERCLIS Database Site Facility Name Site/Facility Type
National
Priorities List
(NPL) Status
Address Description
T.H. Agriculture & Nutrition Co. Federal Superfund Deleted NPL 7183 East Mckinley Avenue Fresno Municipal Sanitary Landfill Federal Superfund Final NPL Southwest Corner of Jensen & West Avenues
Industrial Waste Processing Federal Superfund Final NPL 7140 North Harrison Avenue Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency (2024).

2. Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor Database: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownﬁelds Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identiﬁes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. This is one of a number of lists that comprise the “Cortese List” (a list of all hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5).

The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, a formerly used database of known and potential hazardous substance release sites.

DTSC replaced CalSites with EnviroStor, which also provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identiﬁcation of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-4
A review of the EnviroStor database in May 2024 identiﬁed a total of 196 sites in the Planning Area. Table 4.9.B lists current Active sites from that list within the Planning Area.

Table 4.9.B: Facilities Listed on the DTSC EnviroStor Database Site Facility Name Site/Facility Type Cleanup Status Address Description 1457 H Street Voluntary Cleanup Active 1457 H Street
6346 North Blackstone Avenue Voluntary Cleanup Active 6346 North Blackstone Avenue 70SBCFresno Voluntary Cleanup Active 908 East Garrett Avenue Agricultural Education Facilities for
Sunnyside High School (Proposed)
School Evaluation Active 718/748/810 and 1010 South
Minnewawa Avenue
Bruno's Metal Recycling Corrective Action Active 3211 South Golden State Boulevard California and Elm Groundwater Plume Evaluation Active 1802 East California Avenue Commercial Electroplaters State Response Active 2940 South Elm Avenue Dakota/Hayes - Proposed School Evaluation Active 5710 & 5796 West Dakota Avenue Diamond Cleaners Evaluation Active 3782 West Shields Avenue Downgradient Portion of South Fresno
Regional Groundwater Plume
State Response Active North of East Woodward Avenue at
South East Avenue
FMC Corporation - Fresno Corrective
Action/Voluntary
Cleanup/State
Response
Active 2501 South Sunland Avenue
Former Fresno 2 Manufactured Gas
Plant Site
Voluntary Cleanup Active Mariposa Street Between F and G Streets
Former Lamoure's Cleaners and
Laundry, 7355 North Blackstone
State Response Active 7355 North Blackstone Avenue
Former Nees One Hour Martinizing State Response Active 7763 North First Street Fourth Educational Center Site School Cleanup Active 2660 Leonard Avenue Fresno Air Terminal/Old Hammer Field
(J09ca0823)
State Response Active Mckinley and Clovis Avenues
Fresno Sanitary Landfill Federal Superfund
- Listed
Active - Land
Use Restrictions
Southwest Corner of Jensen and
West Avenues
International Recycling and Towing Corrective Action Active 3270 South Golden State Boulevard North Fresno PCE Plume Evaluation Active Blackstone and Bullard Avenues Potential Release Southeast of Golden
State Boulevard and East Avenue

State Response Active Southeast of Golden State
Boulevard & South East Avenue
Radius Recycling (Formerly Schnitzer -
Fresno)
Corrective Action Active 2727 South Chestnut Avenue
Safety-Kleen of California Inc - Fresno Haz Waste -
Standardized
Operating
Permit
4139 North Valentine Avenue
Scotts Cleaners Evaluation Active 920 East Belgravia Avenue Skees Recycling Corrective Action Active 4628 East Thomas Avenue South Fresno PCE Groundwater Plume State Response Active 2376 South Railroad Avenue South Fresno Regional Groundwater
Plume
State Response Active North of Church Avenue at South
East Avenue
TSG Recycling Disposal, Incorporated,
DBA Western Metal Company
Corrective Action Active 2910 South Cherry Avenue
Valley Foundry and Machine Works State Response Active 2510 South East Avenue Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control‐ Envirostor Database (2024).

4.9-5

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

3. GeoTracker Database: The Geotracker database is the California Water Resources Control Boards’ (Water Board) data management system for managing sites that impact groundwater, especially those that require groundwater cleanup (such as Underground Storage Tanks, Department of Defense, Site Cleanup Program) as well as permitted facilities such as operating underground storage tanks (USTs) and land disposal sites. Per the Geotracker database, the Planning Area contains 73 sites, in which the cleanup status is open.2

4. Water Board Sites: The Water Board has identiﬁed a list of solid waste disposal sites with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit. The following two sites, shown in Table 4.9.C, are located in the Planning Area. 3 Table 4.9.C: Waste Management Units
Discharger System Number Waste Management
Unit Number Facility Name Agency Name
5D100300001-01 McKinley Avenue Yard T.H. Agriculture and Nutrition
North American Phillips
5D100319001-01
(Solid Waste Id Number: 10-AA-0013)
Orange Avenue Disposal
Company
Orange Avenue Landfill Orange Avenue Disposal
Company, Inc.

Source: California Environmental Protection Agency (n.d.).

5. List of “active” Cease and Desist Orders (CDOs) and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAOs) from the Water Board: This list contains many Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders that do not concern the discharge of wastes that are hazardous materials.

Many of the listed orders concern, as examples, discharges of domestic sewage, food processing wastes, or sediment that do not contain hazardous materials, but the Water Boards’ database does not distinguish between these types of orders. As shown in Table 4.9.D below, there are three listed facilities in the Planning Area, with only one being active.

Table 4.9.D: Facilities Listed on the Water Board List of “Active” CDO and CAOs Facility ID Facility Name Agency Name Description Address Facility Waste Type Status 269508 USA SS #96

USA Petroleum
Corporation Santa
Monica
Gasoline Service
Stations
5698 Kings
Canyon
Never
Active
273180 Malaga CWD
WWTF
Malaga CWD Sewerage Systems 3749 South
Maple Avenue
Domestic wastewater Historical
797417 G Street
Lamoure's
Fresno
Lamoure's
Incorporated
1304 G Street Contaminated soil Active
Source: Cortese List Data Resources (2024).

2 California Water Resources Control Board. 2024. GeoTracker Database. Website:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?myaddress=California&from=header&cqid=6920362174 (accessed May 2024).
3 California Environmental Protection Agency. n.d. Sites Identiﬁed with Waste Constituents above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit. Website: https://calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/ sites/6/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList-CurrentList.pdf (accessed May 2024).

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-6

6. Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC): Section 65962.5(a)(1) requires that DTSC “shall compile and update as appropriate, but at least annually, and shall submit to the Secretary for Environmental Protection, a list of all the following: (1) [a]ll hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code.

The hazardous waste facilities identiﬁed in HSC § 25187.5 are those where DTSC has taken or contracted for corrective action because a facility owner/operator has failed to comply with a date for taking corrective action in an order issued under HSC § 25187, or because DTSC determined that immediate corrective action was necessary to abate an imminent or substantial endangerment. This is a very small and speciﬁc subgroup of facilities, and they are not separately posted on the DTSC or Cal/EPA’s website. There are no facilities currently listed in the Planning Area.
4 4.9.1.3 Hazardous Materials Emergency Response
Hazardous Materials Incidents Emergency Response. The unauthorized releases of hazardous materials into the environment could create many environmental impacts including impacts to properties, natural environment and human health. The signiﬁcance of these impacts could vary according to the location and quantity of the substance released. Hazardous releases can occur in areas that treat, store, transport and use hazardous materials; however, certain areas within the State and Planning Area are at higher risk for releases. In the event of an unauthorized release of hazardous materials/substances, emergency response measures must be implemented to ensure the protection of human and natural environmental health from risk.

The Planning Area includes a developed urban area with industrial uses concentrated in the southern portion of the Planning Area. Agriculture is one of the city’s major industries. The potential for hazardous materials incidents are heightened. Accidental releases of pesticides, fertilizers, and other agricultural chemicals may be harmful to the public’s health, safety, and the environment. In addition, the Planning Area contains major transportation routes, such as State Highways 99, 180, 41, and 168. Varieties of chemicals are also transported utilizing one of the two railroad lines that intersect the city. As discussed below, the Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FYI), Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, and the Sierra Sky Park are located within the Planning Area. These facilities, along with the transportation routes and industrial uses listed above, transport hundreds of thousands of tons of hazardous materials through and into the Planning Area each year. Due to the urban nature of the Planning Area and its location among several routes that regularly transport hazardous materials through and around the Planning Area, the area faces risks associated with the potential for hazardous materials emergencies (accidental releases). The City of Fresno Fire Department recognizes the potential for a large chemical release to occur which could expose thousands of people to hazardous or toxic vapors.

4 California Environmental Protection Agency. n.d. Cortese List Section 65962.5(a). Website:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5a/ (accessed May 2024).

4.9-7

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

The City of Fresno Fire Department Hazardous Materials Response Team (HMRT) has embraced an all‐hazards approach to emergency response to ensure that the Planning Area receives eﬀective protection from the risk of hazardous materials releases.

The Fresno Fire Department HMRT is comprised of approximately sixty (60) personnel trained to the Hazardous Materials Technician and/or Specialist requirements set by the State of California. There are fourteen personnel on duty each day with a minimum staﬃng of nine Technician/Specialist level trained members. The HMRT responds from two strategically located ﬁre stations within the city of Fresno. The station is staﬀed with two Type One HAZMAT vehicles and one Mass Decontamination Trailer which are equipped to handle any type of hazardous materials release. In addition, the closest First Responder Operation (FRO) response company will respond to a hazardous materials incident for support. All Fresno Fireﬁghters are trained to the Hazardous Materials First Responder Operations and Decontamination level.

Emergency Response. In addition to emergency response to hazardous materials incidents, both the City of Fresno and the County of Fresno implement programs to facilitate emergency preparedness for other types of incidents within the Planning Area. Speciﬁcally, the City of Fresno has an Emergency Operations Plan that describes what the City’s actions will be during a response to an emergency. This plan also describes the role of the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and the coordination that occurs between the EOC, City Departments, and other response agencies. The plan establishes a requirement for the emergency management organization to mitigate any signiﬁcant emergency disaster aﬀecting the city of Fresno. The plan also identiﬁes the policies, responsibilities, and procedures required to protect the health and safety of city communities, public and private property, and the environmental eﬀects of natural or technological disasters. In addition, the plan establishes the operation concepts and procedures associated within initial response operations (ﬁeld response) to emergencies, the extended response operations (City of Fresno Emergency Operations Center Activities), and the recovery process. Furthermore, the plan complies with the State of California Emergency Operations Plan “Cross Walk” checklist for determining whether an emergency plan has addressed critical elements of California’s Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and the National Incident Management System (NIMS).

The County of Fresno has a Multi‐Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, which is a plan that aims to reduce or eliminate long‐term risk to people or property from hazards. The plan, which covers all territory within Fresno County’s jurisdictional boundaries, was adopted by the County of Fresno in 2009, and an update was completed and adopted by the County of Fresno in 2018. The plan was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 so that Fresno County and the jurisdictions within it would be eligible for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants.

Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). In addition to the City Emergency Operations Plan and the County Multi‐Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, the SEMS is the system required by Government Code Section 8607 (a) for managing response to multi-agency and multi‐ jurisdiction emergencies in California. SEMS consists of ﬁve organizational levels, which are activated as necessary: ﬁeld response, local government, operational area, OES Mutual Aid Regions, and State OES.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-8
Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The primary City of Fresno EOC is located at the City owned waste water treatment facility located at 5607 W Jensen. During a disaster/emergency, the City of Fresno EOC will support ﬁeld response operations in mitigating incidents within the incorporated areas of the city of Fresno.

The primary emphasis will be placed on saving lives, protecting property, and preserving the environment. The City of Fresno EOC will operate using the SEMS/National Incident functions, principles, and components. It will implement the action planning process, identifying and implementing speciﬁc objectives for each operational period.

The City of Fresno EOC will serve as the coordination and communications between the City of Fresno and Fresno County Operational Area EOC. The Operational Area EOC will be activated whenever an emergency or disaster impacts the city, cities, or special district(s). The Fresno Operational Area EOC will utilize the discipline‐speciﬁc mutual aid coordinators to coordinate ﬁre, law enforcement, public works, and medical speciﬁc resources. Other resource requests that do not fall into these four disciplines will be coordinated by the requesting branch/section/unit within the Appropriate SEMS EOC Section.

Emergency Response Routes. The City does not maintain formal evacuation routes, as the most appropriate routes away from an area that may have been aﬀected by a major disaster would be determined by the location and type of incident. Plans for such incidents would also be heavily subject to change.

Airport Hazards. Three airports are located within the city of Fresno: Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FYI), Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, and Sierra Sky Park. Each of the three airports is described below.

Fresno Yosemite International Airport. Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FYI) is located in the eastern portion of the city along East Clinton Way. FYI is a joint use civilian/military airport. It is used by commercial air carriers, air cargo operators, charter operators, the State of California, general aviation, and the United States military. The California Air National Guard (CANG) occupies a 58-acre area adjacent to East McKinley Avenue in the southeast portion of FYI. A helicopter repair and maintenance unit of the Army National Guard, the California Division of Forestry, and a number of corporate aviation businesses occupy facilities north of the runways.

About 250 general aviation aircraft are based at FYI and two Fixed Base Operators (FBOs) oﬀer a wide range of aeronautical services. According to the FYI Safety Compatibility Zones Map, approximately six existing residential structures are located within Safety Zone 1-Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) at the north end of the runway. These residential structures were constructed before implementation of the RPZ, but due to their location relative to noise contours, the homeowners are eligible for no-cost noise mitigation measures such as the installation of noise-reducing windows, exterior doors, attic insulation and other acoustic treatments.

Fresno Chandler Executive Airport. Fresno Chandler Executive Airport is located in the southwestern portion of the city, northwest of the intersection of West Kearny Boulevard and South Thorne Avenue. The airport is designated as a general aviation reliever airport for FYI. One

4.9-9

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

small cargo carrier operates out of the facility, and nine general aviation businesses operate out of the airport. Approximately 180 general aviation aircraft are based at Fresno Chandler Executive Airport.

Sierra Sky Park. Sierra Sky Park airport is located in the northern portion of the city adjacent to the San Joaquin River north of Herndon Avenue. The facility is a privately owned public use general aviation airport. Sierra Sky Park functions as a reliever airport for small general aviation aircraft, and includes a hangar and oﬃce complex.

Fire Hazards. The Planning Area is located within the Central Valley, and is relatively ﬂat. The majority of the Planning Area is located within developed properties or agricultural lands. Similar uses surround the Planning Area with the City of Clovis to the east, and mostly agricultural properties to the north, west, and south. The Sierra Nevada foothills to the north and east of the Planning Area and the City of Clovis provide the nearest areas where large expanses of undeveloped properties occur. Because of the topography and the distance between the developed portions of the Planning Area and undeveloped areas, the primary ﬁre hazard concern within the Planning Area consists of the potential for structure ﬁres in developed areas.

4.9.2 Regulatory Setting

4.9.2.1 Federal Policies and Regulations
Toxic Substances Control Act. Established in 1976 and amended on December 31, 2002, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 United States Code [USC] Section 2601‐2692) grants the EPA power to require proper reporting, record‐keeping, and testing requirements related to chemical substances and/or mixtures. Speciﬁcally, the TSCA addresses the production, importation, use, and disposal of speciﬁc chemicals, including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), asbestos, radon, and lead‐ based paints (LBP). The TSCA establishes the EPA’s authority to require the notiﬁcation of the use of chemicals, require testing, maintain a TSCA inventory, and require those importing chemicals under Sections 12(b) and 13 to comply with certiﬁcation and/or other reporting requirements. This federal legislation also phased out the use of asbestos‐containing materials in new building materials and sets requirements for the use, handling, and disposal of asbestos‐containing materials. Disposal standards for lead‐based paint wastes are also detailed in the TSCA.

The Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act. The Emergency Planning and Community Right‐To‐Know Act (also known as Title III of the Federal Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, or “SARA III”) (42 United States Code 11001 et seq.), was established by the EPA to allow for emergency planning at the State and local level regarding chemical emergencies, to provide notiﬁcation of emergency release of chemicals, and to address community right‐to‐know regarding hazardous and toxic chemicals. SARA III was designed to increase community access and knowledge about chemical hazards as well as facilitate the creation and implementation of State/Native American tribe emergency response commissions, responsible for coordinating certain emergency response activities and for appointing local emergency planning committees (LEPCs).

Section 1910.1200(c) Title 29 of the CFR deﬁnes “chemicals or hazardous materials” for the purposes of SARA III.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-10
Federal Air Regulations, Part 77. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is charged with the review of construction activities that occur in the vicinity of airports. Its role in reviewing these activities is to ensure that new structures do not result in a hazard to navigation. The regulations in the Federal Air Regulations (14 CFR, Part 77) are designed to ensure that no obstructions in navigable air space are allowed to exist that would endanger the public. Proposed structures are also evaluated against Terminal En Route Procedures, which ensure that a structure does not adversely impact ﬂight procedures. Tall structures, including buildings, construction cranes, and cell towers in the vicinity of an airport can be hazardous to the navigation of airplanes. Federal Air Regulations Part 77 identiﬁes the maximum height at which a structure would be considered an obstacle at any given point around an airport. The extent of the oﬀ‐airport coverage that needs to be evaluated for tall structure impacts can extend miles from an airport facility. In addition, Federal Air Regulations Part 77 establishes standards for determining whether objects constructed near airports will be considered obstructions in navigable airspace, sets forth notice requirements of certain types of proposed construction or alterations, and provides for aeronautical studies to determine the potential impacts of a structure on the ﬂight of aircraft through navigable airspace.

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (seven United States Code 136 et seq.) was originally passed in 1947. It has been amended several times, most extensively in 1972 and in 1996 by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, and in 2012 by the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act. The purpose of FIFRA is to establish federal jurisdiction over the distribution, sale, and use of pesticides. It also gives EPA the authority to study the eﬀects of pesticide use. Other key provisions of FIFRA require pesticide applicators to pass a licensing examination for status as “qualiﬁed applicators,” create a review and registration process for new pesticide products, and ensure thorough and understandable labeling that includes instructions for use.

Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA) – Safe Transport of Hazardous Materials. The U.S.

Department of Transportation regulates hazardous materials transportation between states under Title 49, Chapter 1, Part 100‐185 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Within California, Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol enforce federal law. Together, these agencies determine driver training requirements, load labeling procedures, and speciﬁcations for container types to be used.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). With respect to emergency planning, FEMA is responsible for ensuring the establishment and development of policies and programs for emergency management at the federal, State, and local levels. Enforcement of these laws and regulations is delegated to State and local environmental regulatory agencies.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The 1976 Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the 1984 RCRA Amendments regulate the treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous and non‐hazardous wastes. The legislation mandated that hazardous wastes be tracked from the point of generation to their ultimate fate in the environment. This includes detailed tracking of hazardous materials during transport and permitting of hazardous material handling facilities.

The 1984 RCRA amendments provide the framework for a regulatory program designed to prevent releases from Underground Storage Tanks (USTs). The program establishes tank and leak detection

4.9-11

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

standards, including spill and overﬂow protection devices for new tanks. The tanks must also meet performance standards to ensure that the stored material will not corrode the tanks. Owners and operators of USTs had until December 1998 to meet the new tank standards.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 introduced active federal involvement to emergency response, site remediation, and spill prevention, most notably the Superfund program. The act was intended to be comprehensive in encompassing both the prevention of, and response to uncontrolled hazardous substances releases. The act deals with environmental response, providing mechanisms for reacting to emergencies and chronic hazardous material releases. In addition to establishing procedures to prevent and remedy problems, it establishes a system for compensating appropriate individuals and assigning appropriate liability. It is designed to plan for, and respond to, failure in other regulatory programs and to remedy problems resulting from action taken before the era of comprehensive regulatory protection.

4.9.2.2 State Policies and Regulations
California Environmental Protection Agency. The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) is authorized by the USEPA to enforce and implement certain laws and regulations regarding hazardous materials. Under CalEPA, the California DTSC protects the State and people from hazardous waste exposure under RCRA and the California Health and Safety Code. The DTSC requirements include written programs and response plans such as preparation of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP). Programs under the DTSC includes aftermath clean-up of improper hazardous waste management, evaluation of samples taken from sites, regulation enforcement regarding use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials, and encouragement of pollution prevention.

California Division of Occupational Safety and Health. Cal-OSHA is the state-level agency responsible for ensuring workplace safety and is responsible for adoption and enforcement of workplace safety standards and safety practices. If a site is contaminated, a Site Safety Plan must be created and implemented for the safety of workers. A Site Safety Plan establishes policies, practices, and procedures for workers and the public to follow to prevent exposure from hazardous materials originating from a contaminated site or building.

California Building Code. The California Building Code (CBC), contained in Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) identiﬁes building design standards, and includes standards for ﬁre safety. The CBC is updated every three years, with the most recent version of the code eﬀective January 1, 2023. The CBC is eﬀective statewide; however, local jurisdictions may adopt more restrictive standards based on locality’s conditions. A local city and country building oﬃcial must check plans for commercial and residential buildings to ensure compliance with the CBC. Fire safety compliance with the CBC include ﬁre sprinkler installation in all new residential, high rise, and hazardous materials buildings; establishment of ﬁre-resistant standards for ﬁre doors, building materials, and certain types of construction; debris and vegetation clearance within a prescribed distance from occupied structures in wildﬁre hazard areas.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-12
California Emergency Management Agency. The California Emergency Management Agency, established as part of the Governor’s Oﬃce on January 1, 2009 [Assembly Bill (AB) 38 (Nava)], is responsible for overseeing and coordinating emergency preparedness, response, recovery, and homeland security activities within the State and is supported by local government.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Public Resources Code 4201-4204 and Government Code 51175-89 requires the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL Fire) to evaluate ﬁre threat potential and hazard severity according to areas of responsibility (i.e., state, and local). Evaluations are based on topography, ﬁre history, and climate and include ﬁre threat rankings. In 2012, CAL Fire produced the Strategic Plan for California that contains goals, objectives, and policies to prepare and mitigate for the eﬀects of ﬁre on California’s natural and built environments. The Strategic Plan was updated in 2019 to reaﬃrm, with minor adjustments, the Mission, Vision, and Values of the 2012 Strategic Plan. CAL Fire� is in the process of developing a new 2024 Strategic Plan, building on the goals and objectives of the 2019 Strategic Plan.

California Fire Code. The California Fire Code (CFC) is updated every three years with the most current update eﬀective January 1, 2023. The CFC contained in Part 9 of CCR Title 24 incorporates by adoption the International Fire Code of the International Code Council with California amendments.

Local jurisdictions can also adopt more restrictive standards based on local conditions, as previously mentioned with the CBC. The CFC regulates building standards, ﬁre department access, ﬁre protection systems and devices, ﬁre and explosion hazard safety, hazardous material storage and use, and building inspection standards.

California Department of Transportation and California Highway Patrol. Caltrans and the CHP are responsible for enforcing federal and State regulations, as well as responding to hazardous material transportation emergencies. Caltrans is the ﬁrst responder for hazardous material spills and releases on highway and freeway lanes, as well as intercity rail services. The CHP enforces proper labeling and packing regulations of hazardous materials in transit by performing regular vehicle and equipment inspections.

The following are descriptions of provisions included in the California Vehicle Code (CVC) and pertain to the transportation of hazardous-related materials.
• The CHP designates routes in California which are to be used for the transportation of explosives. (CVC Section 31616)
• The CVC applies when explosives are transported as a delivery service for hire or in quantities in excess of 1,000 pounds. The transportation of explosives in quantities of 1,000 pounds or less, or other than on a public highway, is subject to the California Health and Safety Code. (CVC Section 31601(a))
• It is illegal to transport explosives or inhalation hazards on any public highway not designated for that purpose, unless the use of the highway is required to permit delivery of, or the loading of, such materials. (CVC Section 31602(b) and Section 32104(a))

4.9-13

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

• When transporting explosives through or into a city for which a route has not been designated by the Highway Patrol, drivers must follow routes as may be prescribed or established by local authorities. (CVC Section 31614(a))
• Inhalation hazards and poison gases are subject to additional safeguards. These materials are highly toxic, spread rapidly, and require rapid and widespread evacuation if there is loss of containment or a ﬁre. The CHP designates through routes to be used for the transportation of inhalation hazards. It may also designate separate through routes for the transportation of inhalation hazards composed of any chemical rocket propellant. (CVC Section 32100 and Section 32102(b))

4.9.2.3 Regional Policies and Regulations
County of Fresno Hazard Mitigation Plan. In 2024, Fresno County, with participation from 17 jurisdictions prepared a local multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan to better protect the people and property throughout Fresno County from the eﬀects of hazard events. A local hazard mitigation plan recognizes risks before they occur, as well as identiﬁes resources, information, and strategies for emergency response.

Fresno County Environmental Health Department - Hazardous Materials Business Plans. Facilities that store, use or handle hazardous materials above reportable amounts are required to prepare and ﬁle a Hazardous Materials Business Plan for the safe storage and use of chemicals. In the event of an emergency, ﬁreﬁghters, health oﬃcials, planners, public safety oﬃcers, health care providers and others rely on the Business Plan. Implementation of the Business Plan should prevent or reduce damage to the health and safety of people and the environment when a hazardous material is released.
5 A Business Plan must be submitted by businesses that handle a hazardous material, or a mixture containing a hazardous material, in quantities equal to or greater than:

1. 55 gallons of a liquid.

2. 500 pounds of a solid.

3. 200 cubic feet (at standard temperature and pressure) of a compressed gas.

4. The federal Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) for Extremely Hazardous Substances.

5. Radioactive materials in quantities for which an Emergency Plan is required as per Parts 30, 40, or 70, Chapter 1 of Title 10 of Code of Federal Regulations.

5 Fresno County Department of Environmental Health. Hazardous Materials Business Plans. Website:
https://www.fresnocountyca.gov/Departments/Public-Health/Environmental-Health/Hazardous- Materials-Business-Plans (accessed January 2025).

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-14
The Business Plan must include: 1) the type and quantity of hazardous materials; 2) site map; 3) risks of using these materials; 4) spill prevention; 5) emergency response; 6) employee training; and 7) emergency contacts.

Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) was prepared by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) and adopted in December 2018. The ALUCP provides an update of the State‐mandated airport land use compatibility plan for the environs of the nine public use airports in Fresno County, including three public use airports within the City of Fresno: Fresno Chandler Executive Airport; Fresno Yosemite International Airport; and Sierra Sky Park Airport. The Fresno County ALUCP implements land use compatibility policies and criteria related to proposed development in the vicinity of public use airports in the City (and throughout Fresno County). The Fresno County ALUCP also establishes the planning boundaries around each of these airport facilities that deﬁne safety areas, noise contours, and height/airspace protection for policy implementation and areas within which notiﬁcation is required as part of real estate transactions.This Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan replaced the following compatibility plans for the Fresno County ALUC:
• Coalinga Airport Land Use Policy Plan, November 1994
• Fresno County Airports Land Use Policy Plan (Firebaugh, William Robert Johnston Municipal, Reedley Municipal, and Selma), January 1983
• Fresno Chandler Downtown Airport Land Use Policy Plan, Revised October 2014 • Fresno Yosemite International Airport Compatibility Land Use Plan, Revised June 2012 • Harris Ranch Airport Land Use Policy Plan, October 1995 • Reedley Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, November 2007 • Sierra Sky Park Land Use Policy Plan, Revised October 1995 Similar to the previously listed airport compatibility plans, this ALUCP is intended to protect and promote the safety and welfare of residents, businesses, and airport users near the public use airports and Naval Air Station Lemoore in Fresno County, while supporting the continued operation of these facilities. Speciﬁcally, the plan seeks to: ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents; protect the public from the adverse eﬀects of airport noise; and ensure that no structures or activities encroach upon, or adversely aﬀect, the use of navigable airspace. The City of Fresno Development Code Priority of Plans section mentioned above (Section 15-104-B.4) clearly establishes the adopted Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan as the plan that takes precedence over all of the City’s other land use plans within the Airport Inﬂuence Areas deﬁned in the Plan. The Fresno ALUCP was updated in October 2023 to reﬂect current conditions shown on the 2023 Airport Layout Plan for the Fresno Chandler Airport, which no longer includes a runway extension.

4.9-15

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.9.2.4 Local Policies and Regulations
City of Fresno Emergency Operation Plan. The California Emergency Services Act requires cities to prepare and maintain an emergency plan for emergencies that are natural or caused by man. The City’s adopted Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) plans for emergencies including natural hazards.

The EOP does not designate any evacuation routes within the City of Fresno.

City of Fresno General Plan. The City of Fresno’s General Plan Noise and Safety Element includes objectives and policies that work to minimize the risk of loss of life, injury, serious illness, and damage to property resulting from the use, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. The following policies related to hazards and hazardous materials are applicable to the proposed project:

Policy NS-4-a: Processing and Storage. Require safe processing and storage of hazardous materials, consistent with the California Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City.

Policy NS-4-c: Soil and Groundwater Contamination Reports. Require an investigation of potential soil or groundwater contamination whenever justiﬁed by past site uses. Require appropriate mitigation as a condition of project approval in the event soil or groundwater contamination is identiﬁed or could be encountered during site development.

Policy NS-4-e: Compliance with County Program. Require that the production, use, storage, disposal, and transport of hazardous materials conform to the standards and procedures established by the County Division of Environmental Health. Require compliance with the County’s Hazardous Waste Generator Program, including the submittal and implementation of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, when applicable.

Policy NS-4-f: Hazardous Materials Facilities. Require facilities that handle hazardous materials or hazardous wastes to be designed, constructed, and operated in accordance with applicable hazardous materials and waste management laws and regulations.

Policy NS-4-g: Hazmat Response. Include policies and procedures appropriate to hazardous materials in the City’s disaster and emergency response preparedness and planning, coordinating with implementation of Fresno County’s Hazardous Materials Incident Response Plan.

Policy NS-4-h: Household Collection. Continue to support and assist with Fresno County’s special household hazardous waste collection activities, to reduce the amount of this material being improperly discarded.

Policy NS-5-a: Land Use and Height. Incorporate and enforce all applicable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans (ALUCPs) through land use designations, zoning, and development standards to support the continued viability and ﬂight operations of Fresno’s airports and to protect public safety, health, and general welfare.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-16
• Limit land uses in airport safety zones to those uses listed in the applicable ALUCPs as compatible uses, and regulate compatibility in terms of location, height, and noise. • Ensure that development, including public infrastructure projects, within the airport approach and departure zones complies with Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Administration Regulations (Objects Aﬀecting Navigable Airspace), particularly in terms of height.

Policy NS-5-b: Airport Safety Hazards. Ensure that new development, including public infrastructure projects, does not create safety hazards such as glare from direct or reﬂective sources, smoke, electrical interference, hazardous chemicals, fuel storage, or from wildlife, in violation of adopted safety standards.

Policy NS-6-a: County Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan. Adopt and implement the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex.

Policy NS-6-f: Emergency Vehicle Access. Require adequate access for emergency vehicles in all new development, including adequate widths, turning radii, hard standing areas, and vertical clearance.

City of Fresno Municipal Code. Chapter 10, Article 14 of the City of Fresno Municipal Code pertains to the recovery of expenses associated with hazardous spills. Speciﬁcally, this section states that “Any person causing a release or threatened release which results in an emergency action shall be liable to the City of Fresno for the recoverable costs resulting from the emergency action.”

4.9.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of signiﬁcance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is signiﬁcant.

The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for signiﬁcant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less than signiﬁcant level. Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.9.3.1 Signiﬁcance Criteria
Based on State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, the proposed project would have a signiﬁcant impact on hazards and hazardous materials if it would:
a. Create a signiﬁcant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;
b. Create a signiﬁcant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment;

4.9-17

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school; d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled by Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a signiﬁcant hazard to the public or the environment;
e. 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, result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area;
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a signiﬁcant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland ﬁres.

4.9.3.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts and impact signiﬁcance related to hazard and hazardous materials that could result from implementation of the proposed project. Mitigation measures are provided as necessary to reduce potential impacts.

HAZ-1 The proposed project would not create a signiﬁcant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

The proposed project consists of the adoption of the Fresno VMT Reduction Program which aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank. The program would identify, quantify, and prioritize applicable mitigation measures and relevant VMT-reducing projects within the City to be funded by the proposed mitigation bank.

The proposed project would not result in any physical improvements or change the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area. As such, the proposed project would not create signiﬁcant hazards to the public through he routine transport of use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

However, the adoption of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program would support future multi- modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program could result in the transport, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials in the project area, including common cleaning products, building maintenance products, paints and solvents, and other similar items. Such hazardous materials would not be used in suﬃcient quantities to pose a signiﬁcant hazard to public health and safety or to the environment. It is not anticipated that future VMT-reducing projects would involve the use of acutely hazardous materials.

As applicable, future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would need to comply with various regulations and guidelines to ensure proper management of hazardous substances during project construction, including San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-18
requirements for demolitions and renovations; Construction Safety Orders 1529 (pertaining to asbestos) and 1532.1 (pertaining to lead) from Title 8 of the CCR, Part 61, Subpart M of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (pertaining to asbestos); California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) requirements for safety training, availability of safety equipment, hazardous materials exposure warnings, and emergency action and ﬁre prevention plan preparation; and requirements from the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), Fresno County Division of Environmental Health, and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for new development that may expose construction workers and the public to known or potentially unknown hazardous substances present in the soil or groundwater.

Additionally, future projects would be required to comply with General Plan policies regarding routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, which include Policies NS‐4‐a through NS‐ 4‐i within the Noise and Safety Element as identiﬁed in Section 4.9.2.3, Local Policies and Regulations, above.

Compliance with federal, State, and local regulations and programs described above pertaining to the transportation, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, potential impacts related to the transportation, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

HAZ-2 The proposed project 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.

Refer to impact discussion HAZ-1 above. The proposed project would not result in any physical improvements or change the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area.

Implementation of requirements from the policies listed above would reduce potential impacts related to the release of hazardous materials to the environment to less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

HAZ-3 The proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

4.9-19

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

As described above, the proposed project would not result in development within the Planning Area.

Future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be subject to existing federal, State, and local regulations for the transport, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials and would be required to perform project-speciﬁc analysis to determine potential impacts related to hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school.

Therefore, the proposed project would have a less-than-signiﬁcant impact.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

HAZ-4 The proposed project would not be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled by Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a signiﬁcant hazard to the public or the environment.

Under Government Code Section 65962.6, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is required to compile and update the Cortese List, which provides information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. As shown in Table 4.9.B above, review of the DTSC EnviroStor database in May 2024 identiﬁed a total of 196 active hazardous sites in the Planning Area.

Additionally, per the Geotracker database, the Planning Area contains 73 hazardous sites in which the cleanup status is open.

As discussed above, the proposed project would not result in development within the Planning Area.

Future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be required to assess whether potential project sites are located within an active hazardous site listed in the Cortese List, and if applicable, would be required to remediate any potential eﬀects related to on- site hazardous materials consistent with the requirements of the DTSC, Fresno County Division of Environmental Health, and/or RWQCB. Further, future projects would be subject to existing federal, State, and local regulations for the transport, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials. As a result, a less-than-signiﬁcant impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

HAZ-5 The proposed project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area.

Airport-related hazards are generally associated with aircraft accidents, particularly during takeoﬀs and landings. Operation hazards include incompatible land uses, power transmission lines, wildlife hazards (e.g., bird strikes), and tall structures that penetrate the imaginary surfaces surrounding an airport. There are three public or public use airports located within in the Planning Area: Fresno‐ Yosemite International Airport; Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, and Sierra Sky Park.

The City of Fresno implements land use compatibility policies and criteria related to proposed development in the vicinity of public use airports in the Planning Area. The Fresno County ALUCP

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-20
also establishes the planning boundaries around each of these airport facilities that deﬁne safety areas, noise contours, and height/airspace protection for policy implementation and areas within which notiﬁcation is required as part of real estate transactions.

The ALUCP is intended to protect and promote the safety and welfare of residents, businesses, and airport users near the public use airports and Naval Air Station Lemoore in Fresno county, while supporting the continued operation of these facilities. Speciﬁcally, the plan seeks to: ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents; protect the public from the adverse eﬀects of airport noise; and ensure that no structures or activities encroach upon, or adversely aﬀect, the use of navigable airspace.

The ALUCP identiﬁes seven safety zones that reﬂect speciﬁc operating characteristics of the airports (i.e. type of aircraft activity, runway length, traﬃc pattern, etc.). Table 3A of the ALUCP includes safety zone land use compatibility standards that restrict the development of land uses that could pose particular hazards to the public or to vulnerable populations in case of an aircraft accident.

Further, Table 3A also provides a breakdown of the intensity criteria for the compatibility zones. 6 As described above, the proposed project would not include the construction of any physical improvements and as such, would not expose people to airport-related hazards. However, the adoption of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program would support future multi-modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be required to conduct project-speciﬁc environmental analyses to assess potential impacts related to airport hazards. Future projects would be required to be consistent with the airport safety zone land use and intensity criteria applicable to individual project sites.

Therefore, implementation of the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would not expose people to excessive airport-related hazards or noise, and the impact would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

HAZ-6 The proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

The California Emergency Services Act requires cities to prepare and maintain an Emergency Plan for natural, manmade, or war-caused emergencies that result in conditions of disaster or in extreme peril to life. The City’s full‐time Emergency Preparedness Oﬃcer (EPO) is responsible for ensuring that Fresno’s emergency response plans are up‐to‐date and implemented properly. The EPO also facilitates cooperation between City departments and other local, State and federal agencies that would be involved in emergency response operations. The City of Fresno Emergency Operations

6 Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG). 2023. Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

October. Website: https://www.fresnocog.org/project/airport-land-use-commission-of-fresno-county/ (accessed June 2024).

4.9-21

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Center (EOC) serves as the coordination and communication between the City of Fresno and Fresno County Operational Area EOC.

The proposed project would not result in any physical improvements or change the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any alterations of existing roadways that could be used as emergency evacuation routes, and would not interfere with the implementation of or physically interfere with any adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plan. This impact would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

HAZ-7 The proposed project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a signiﬁcant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland ﬁres.

Although the city of Fresno is located near high and very high ﬁre hazard designated areas, the city is largely categorized as little or no threat or moderate ﬁre hazard, which is largely attributed to paved areas. Some small areas along the San Joaquin River Bluﬀ area in northern Fresno are classiﬁed as Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zones within the City’s Local Responsibility Area (LRA).

As previously discussed, the proposed project would not include the construction of any physical improvements and as such, would not expose people to airport-related hazards. However, the adoption of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program would support future multi-modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be required to prepare project-speciﬁc analysis to assess potential impacts related to wildland ﬁres, as well as comply with all of the City’s requirements for ﬁre safety, including compliance with the Fresno Fire Department’s project application review process and the City’s General Plan Policies PU‐3‐a, Policy PU‐3‐b, Policy PU‐3‐d, Policy PU‐3‐e, Policy PU‐3‐f and Policy PU-3-g, as applicable.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a signiﬁcant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland ﬁres, and the impact would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

4.9.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
Implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts in impacts related to hazardous materials. However, future projects identiﬁed within the Fresno VMT Reduction Plan would potentially increase hazard-related impacts (i.e., potential release of hazardous waste/material,

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.9-22
interference with emergency plan, wildland ﬁres, etc.) in the City. However, compliance with federal, State, and local policies and actions identiﬁed in this section would reduce potential impacts to a less-than-signiﬁcant level.

Although future projects would have potential impacts associated with hazardous materials, the environmental concerns associated with hazardous materials are site speciﬁc. Each project would be required to address any issues related to hazardous material or wastes. Federal, state, and local regulations also require mitigation to protect against site contamination by hazardous materials.

Therefore, there would be no cumulative hazardous materials impacts.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-1

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to hydrology and water quality associated with the proposed project. This section also addresses local, State, and federal regulations as they pertain to project impacts on hydrology and water quality.

4.10.1 Existing Environment Setting
The following discussion outlines the hydrological conditions of the City of Fresno.

4.10.1.1 Precipitation
Precipitation in Fresno occurs mostly as rain during the months of November through April. Climate data collected from 1948 to 2016 shows that annual rainfall averaged 10.89 inches, but is variable.

Recorded annual rainfall has ranged from a low of 3.01 inches in 2013 to a high of 21.61 inches in 1983.1

4.10.1.2 Hydrologic Setting
The City of Fresno is located in the Kings Subbasin and lies within the larger San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin in the Central Valley of California. The Kings Subbasin covers approximately 1,530 square miles. The San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin is bounded to the north by the Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta and Sacramento Valley, to the east by the Sierra Nevada, to the south by the San Emigdio and Tehachapi mountains, and to the west by the Coast Ranges. The Kings Subbasin, located within the southern half of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, is bounded to the north by the San Joaquin River, to the east by the alluvium-granite rock interface of the Sierra Nevada foothills, to the south by the southern fork of the Kings River, and to the west by the Delta-Mendota and Westside subbasins. The Kings Subbasin is split into seven Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) management areas, with Fresno located in the North Kings GSA.

4.10.1.3 Groundwater
The City of Fresno is underlain by the Kings River Subbasin, which, along with six other subbasins, comprises the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. In turn, the San Joaquin Basin is located within the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region. The Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region spans approximately 10.9 million acres (17,000 square miles) and includes most of Fresno County. The Region encompasses the southern one-third of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdiction.

Groundwater Management. The seven GSAs of the Kings Subbasin operate cooperatively across the basin via a coordination agreement that ensures common approaches to sustainability items such as similarity of data usage and methodologies, consistent interpretations of the basin setting, and common assumptions and development of water budgets, monitoring networks, sustainable management criteria, and data management systems.

1 Western Regional Climate Center. Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary, Fresno Yosemite Intl AP , California (043257). Average Total Precipitation (inches). Website: wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca3257 (accessed March 27, 2025).

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-2
As required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), the North Kings GSA considers six sustainability indicators:
• Chronic lowering of groundwater levels, indicating significant and unreasonable depletion of supply;
• Significant and unreasonable reduction of groundwater storage; • Significant and unreasonable seawater intrusion;
• Significant and unreasonable degraded water quality;
• Significant and unreasonable land subsidence; and
• Depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water.

Each indicator has an identified undesirable result, measurable objective, and minimum threshold.

The measurable objective and minimum threshold allow the North Kings GSA to evaluate their progress for the subject indicator and determine if conditions are improving, remaining stable or degrading. The sustainability indicators of primary concern within the City are groundwater levels, groundwater storage, and groundwater quality. The methodology for the water quality indicators has been developed and the methodology is still being developed for the groundwater levels and groundwater storage indicators.

Groundwater Quality.Groundwater within the North Kings Subbasin generally meets primary and secondary drinking water standards for municipal water use and is described as being bicarbonate- type water, including calcium, magnesium, and sodium as the dominant ions. Total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations rarely exceed 600 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and range from 200 to 700 mg/L.

However, the groundwater basin has been impacted by multiple chemical contaminants that affect the City’s ability to fully utilize the groundwater basin resources without some type of wellhead treatment in certain areas.2
The primary contaminants are nitrate, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP), 1,2,3-trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP), and other volatile organic compounds like trichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (PCE). The City has received settlements in a number of lawsuits related to these contaminants and has constructed wellhead treatment systems and implemented blending plans for a number of wells.

Approximately 40 City wells are being treated for contaminants such as PCE, DBCP , TCE, 1,2,3-TCP , perfluorooctanoic acid, perfluorooctanesulfonic acid, ethylene dibromide, and nitrate, and an additional 20 wells include treatment for iron, manganese, and hydrogen sulfide removal or corrosion control.3

2 City of Fresno. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2023/03/Fresno-2020-UWMP_Final_2021-07-21.pdf (accessed June 2025). 3 Ibid

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-3
Extensive groundwater contamination nearly covers the City’s entire water service area; only areas located in the northwest appear to be relatively unaffected by regional groundwater contamination.

Also, many of the City’s wells are impacted by one or more of the contaminant plumes.

4.10.1.4 Surface Water
With the completion and operation of the Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (SESWTF), surface water has become the primary source used to meet potable water demands within the City.

The City contracts with the Fresno Irrigation District (FID) for Kings River water and with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) for Central Valley Project (CVP) water from the Friant-Kern Canal. Surface water is either treated and distributed for potable use or delivered to recharge basins for groundwater recharge.

Potential hazards to surface water quality include the following nonpoint pollution problems: high turbidity from sediment resulting from erosion of improperly graded construction projects, concentration of nitrates and dissolved solids from agriculture or surfacing septic tank failures, contaminated street and lawn run-off from urban areas, and warm water drainage discharges into cold water streams.

The most critical period for surface water quality is typically after a rainstorm which can produce significant amounts of drainage runoff into streams at low flow, resulting in poor dilution of contaminates in the low flowing stream. Such conditions are most frequent during the fall at the beginning of the rainy season when stream flows are near their lowest annual levels. Besides the greases, oils, pesticides, litter, and organic matter associated with such runoff, heavy metals such as copper, zinc, and cadmium can cause considerable harm to aquatic organisms when introduced to streams in low flow conditions.

Historically, urban stormwater runoff was considered as a non-point discharge under the Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972 until the mid-1980s. However, since then, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has developed regulations that classify certain urban runoff as a point source (an identifiable source) subject to National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. These rules currently apply to medium and large urban areas, with further rulemaking anticipated as additional programs are developed to meet requirements of federal water pollution control laws.

Erosion also contributes significantly to surface water pollution. Excessive and improperly managed grading, vegetation removal, quarrying, logging, and agricultural practices all lead to increased erosion of exposed earth and sedimentation of watercourses during rainy periods. In slower moving water bodies these same factors often cause a buildup of siltation, which ultimately reduces the capacity of the water system to percolate and recharge groundwater basins, as well as adversely affecting both aquatic resources and flood control efforts.

4.10.1.5 Stormwater Drainage
The Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area and surrounding rural vicinities are within the service area boundaries of the FMFCD, which has primary responsibility for managing the local stormwater flows.

Most stormwater in Fresno drains to urban stormwater basins, where the water is retained to

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-4
attenuate peak-flow runoff and recharge stormwater, or is pumped to local irrigation canals for conveyance away from the municipal areas.

The storm drainage facilities are documented in the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan (SDFCMP), which is developed and updated by FMFCD. The master plan drainage system for the City consists of over 170 individual drainage areas or urban watersheds. Drainage area boundaries are determined by geographic and topographic features and the economics of providing storm drainage service to the watershed. The storm drainage facilities within a drainage area consist of storm drain inlets, pipeline, retention basins, urban detention (water quality) basins, and stormwater pump stations. Surface grading improvements such as streets, curbs, gutters, and valley gutters are part of the City of Fresno infrastructure, but the general grading of these features is governed by the SDFCMP to provide a coherent implementation of drainage within the City.

Storm drain inlets are located at low points in the topography as determined by the SDFCMP .

Pipeline alignments and sizes are also shown on the SDFCMP . Pipeline alignments are subject to change as development proposals are put forward by development projects. Retention basins and urban detention basins’ locations and geometry are part of the SDFCMP as well. Basins are sited in the topographic low point of the drainage area. All of the storm drainage pipelines are directed to the retention and urban detention basins. Retention basins store and percolate stormwater from the drainage area if time between storms permits, or is otherwise pumped to designated irrigation canals. Urban detention basins provide quiescent (still) conditions for the removal or settling out of suspended solids prior to discharge of the stormwater to the San Joaquin River.

The Fresno‐Clovis Metropolitan area consists of drainage areas that are completed, e.g., all of the master planned facilities are constructed and functional; or in the process of being completed, e.g. portions of the retention basins, pipelines, and inlets are constructed and portions are not. For the drainage areas that are in the planning stage, e.g., the drainage area is planned and documented, the retention basin land may have been purchased, but no construction has occurred.

Implementation of the SDFCMP occurs in response to development activity in newly developing areas and through Capital Improvement Project (CIP) planning in previously developed areas.

Funding for storm drainage facilities occurs through the collection of drainage fees assessed on parcels as they develop through grant funding from the State of California and the Federal Government, through low interest infrastructure improvement bonds, and in the past, through assessment districts. Drainage fees fund most of the construction of master plan facilities in newly developing areas. Grants, infrastructure loans, and assessment districts fund most of the construction in previously developed drainage areas.

4.10.1.6 Inundation Hazards
Floodplain. The City of Fresno is in the alluvial fans of numerous foothill streams and creeks that drain the western slope of the Sierra Nevada foothills. These streams include Big Dry Creek, Alluvial Drain, Pup Creek, Dog Creek, Redbank Creek, Mud Creek, and Fancher Creek. Numerous smaller, unnamed drainage courses also drain into the Fresno from the rural areas east of the Fresno.

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-5
Based on a review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for Fresno,4 there are areas that are subject to the 100-year frequency flood zone. The primary area that is subject to the 100-year flood zone is along the San Joaquin River below the bluffs. There are additional areas in the vicinity of the Fresno International Airport, the Southeast Development Area in the vicinity of the Redbank Creek Dam, adjacent to Highway 180 east of Clovis Avenue, and within an industrial area east of SR-99, south of California Avenue and north of Jensen Avenue. In addition, various detention basins are subject to the 100-year flood zone.

4.10.2 Regulatory Setting

4.10.2.1 Federal Policies and Regulations
Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act (CWA) established a basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into Waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters.

The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. The “Clean Water Act” became the Act’s common name with amendments in 1977.

Under the CWA, the USEPA has implemented pollution control programs and established water quality standards for all contaminants in surface waters. The CWA made it unlawful to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a NPDES permit was obtained. Point sources are discrete conveyances such as pipes or manmade ditches. While residential structures that are either connected to a municipal system or otherwise do not discharge into surface waters are not required to obtain a NPDES permit, industrial, municipal, and similar facilities must obtain permits to discharge directly into surface waters. In California, the NPDES program is administered through the nine RWQCBs.

Non-point sources are similarly regulated through a General Construction Activity Stormwater NPDES permit. Construction activities subject to this permit include clearing, grading, excavating, and general disturbances to the ground. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) are required for the issuance of a General Construction Activity Stormwater NPDES permit and typically include the implementation of structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce impacts related to surface water quality.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. Section 402 of the CWA established the NPDES to control water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into Waters of the United States. In the State of California, the USEPA has authorized the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) as the permitting authority to implement the NPDES program. The SWRCB issues two-baseline general permits; one for industrial operations, the other for construction activities (General Construction Permit). Additionally, the NPDES program includes the regulation of stormwater discharges from cities, counties, and other municipalities under Order No. R8-2009-0030 (waste discharge requirements for stormwater) and updated under Order No. 5- 01-048 for the Central Valley Region.

4 Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Website: msc.fema.gov/ portal/home (accessed February 19, 2025).

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-6
Under the General Construction Permit, stormwater discharges from construction sites with a disturbed area of one or more acres are required to obtain either individual NPDES permits for stormwater discharges or be covered by the Construction General Permit. Coverage under the Construction General Permit is accomplished by completing and filing a Notice of Intent with the SWRCB. Each applicant under the Construction General Permit is required to both prepare a SWPPP prior to the commencement of grading activities and to ensure implementation of the SWPPP during construction activities. The primary objective of the SWPPP is to identify, construct, implement, and maintain BMPs to reduce or eliminate pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized non- stormwater discharges from the construction site during construction activities. BMPs may include programs, technologies, processes, practices, and devices that control, prevent, remove, or reduce pollution. The SWPPP would also address BMPs developed specifically to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges following the completion of construction activities.

The NPDES program also includes regulations for discharging limited threat wastewater to waters of the United States under Order No. R5-2022-0006. “Limited threat” wastewater refers to clean or relatively pollutant-free wastewaters that pose little or no threat to water quality. Limited threat wastewater includes water from the following sources:
• Well Development Water
• Construction Dewatering
• Pump/Well Testing
• Pipeline/Tank Pressure Testing
• Pipeline/Tank Flushing or Dewatering
• Condensate
• Water Supply System
• Aggregate Mine
• Filter Backwash Water

Safe Drinking Water Act (Federal). The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was established to protect the quality of drinking water in the United States. This SDWA focuses on all waters either designed or potentially designed for drinking water use, whether from surface water or groundwater sources.

The SDWA and subsequent amendments authorized the USEPA to establish health‐based standards, or maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), for drinking water to protect public health against both natural and anthropogenic contaminants. All owners or operators of public water systems are required to comply with these primary (health‐related) standards. State governments, which can be approved to implement these primary standards for the USEPA, also encourage attainment of secondary (nuisance‐related) standards. At the federal level, the USEPA administers the SDWA and establishes MCLs for bacteriological, organic, inorganic, and radiological constituents (United States Code Title 42, and Code of Federal Regulations Title 40). At the state level, California has adopted its own SDWA, which incorporates the federal SDWA standards with some other requirements specific only to California (California Health and Safety Code, Section 116350 et seq.).

The 1996 SDWA amendments established source water assessment programs pertaining to untreated water from rivers, lakes, streams, and groundwater aquifers used for drinking water supply. According to these amendments, the USEPA must consider a detailed risk and cost assessment, as well as best available peer‐reviewed science, when developing standards for drinking water. These programs are the foundation of protecting drinking water resources from contamination and avoiding costly treatment to remove pollutants. In California, the Drinking Water Source Assessment and Protection (DWSAP) program fulfills these federal mandates. The Division of

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-7
Drinking Water of the State Water Resources Control Board is the primary agency for developing and implementing the DWSAP program, and is responsible for performing the assessments of existing groundwater sources.

4.10.2.2 State Policies and Regulations
Porter‐Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The Porter‐Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969, which became Division 7 of the California Water Code, authorized the SWRCB to provide comprehensive protection for California’s waters through water allocation and water quality protection. The SWRCB implements the requirement of the CWA Section 303, which states that water quality standards must be established for certain waters through the adoption of water quality control plans under the Porter‐Cologne Act. The Porter‐Cologne Act established the responsibilities and authorities of the nine RWQCBs, which include preparing water quality plans within the regions, identifying water quality objectives, and instituting waste discharge requirements. Water quality objectives are defined as limits or levels of water quality constituents and characteristics established for reasonable protection of beneficial uses or prevention of nuisance. Beneficial uses consist of all the various ways that water can be used for the benefit of people and wildlife. The Porter‐Cologne Act was later amended to provide the authority delegated from the USEPA to issue NPDES permits regulating discharges to Waters of the United States.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014. On September 16, 2014, a three-bill legislative package was signed into law, composed of AB 1739, SB 1168, and SB 1319, collectively known as the SGMA. The Governor’s signing message states "a central feature of these bills is the recognition that groundwater management in California is best accomplished locally".

The SGMA provides a framework for sustainable management of groundwater supplies by local authorities, with the potential for state intervention if necessary to protect the resource.

The act requires the formation of local GSAs that must assess conditions in their local water basins and adopt locally-based management plans. The groundwater basin that serves Fresno has been designated by the Department of Water Resources as high-priority and subject to a condition of critical overdraft.

Urban Water Management Planning Act. The Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983, California Water Code Sections 10610 et seq., requires publicly or privately owned water suppliers that provide more than 3,000 acre-feet (AF) of water annually or supply more than 3,000 customers to prepare a plan that:
• Plans for water supply and assesses reliability of each source of water over a 20-year period in 5- year increments.
• Identifies and quantifies adequate water supplies, including recycled water, for existing and future demands, in normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry years. • Implements conservation and the efficient use of urban water supplies. Significant new requirements for quantified demand reductions have been added by the Water Conservation Act

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-8
of 2009 (Senate Bill 7 of Special Extended Session 7 [SBX7-7]), which amends the act and adds new water conservation provisions to the Water Code.

Senate Bills 610 and 221, Water Supply Planning. To assist water suppliers, cities, and counties in integrated water and land use planning, the state passed Senate Bill (SB) 610 (Chapter 643, Statutes of 2001) and SB 221 (Chapter 642, Statutes of 2001), effective January 1, 2002. SB 610 and SB 221 improve the link between information of water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610 and SB 221 are companion measures that promote more collaborative planning between local water suppliers and cities and counties. Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to city and county decision makers prior to approval of specified large development projects. This detailed information must be included in the administrative record as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the city or county on such projects. The statutes recognize local control and decision making regarding the availability of water for projects and the approval of projects. Under SB 610, water supply assessments (WSA) must be furnished to local governments for inclusion in any environmental documentation for certain projects subject to CEQA, as defined in Water Code Section 10912[a].Under SB 221, approval by a city or county of certain residential subdivisions requires an affirmative verification of sufficient water supply. SB 221 is intended as a fail-safe mechanism to ensure that collaboration on finding the needed water supplies to serve a new large subdivision occurs before construction begins.

The Urban Water Management Planning Act states that every urban water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers or provides over 3,000 af of water annually should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Both SB 610 and SB 221 identify the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) as a planning document that can be used by a water supplier to meet the standards in both statutes. Thorough and complete UWMPs are foundations for water suppliers to fulfill the specific requirements of these two statutes, and they are important source documents for cities and counties as they update their general plans.

Conversely, general plans are source documents as water suppliers update the UWMPs. These planning documents are linked, and their accuracy and usefulness are interdependent.

Additionally, pursuant to the California Water Code Section 10632, urban water suppliers that serve more than 3,000 acre-feet per year or have more than 3,000 connections are required to prepare and adopt a standalone Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) as part of its Urban Water Management Plan. A WSCP is a detailed plan on how an urban water supplier intends to respond to foreseeable and unforeseeable water shortages. A water shortage occurs when the water supply is reduced to a level that cannot support typical demand at any given time. The WSCP is used to provide guidance by identifying response actions to allow for responsible management of any water shortage with predictability and accountability. Preparation provides the tools to maintain reliable supplies and reduce the impacts of supply interruptions due to extended drought and catastrophic supply interruptions.

AB 3030, California Groundwater Management Act. The Groundwater Management Act of the California Water Code (AB 3030) provides guidance for applicable local agencies to develop a

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-9
voluntary Groundwater Management Plan in state-designated groundwater basins.Local Policies and Regulations
City of Fresno General Plan. The City of Fresno’s General Plan Public Utilities and Services Element and Resource Conservation and Resilience Element include objectives and policies that work to manage and develop the City’s water facilities and ensure that Fresno has a reliable, long-range source of drinkable water. The following policies related to hydrology and water quality are applicable to the proposed project:

Policy PU‐5‐c: Satellite Facilities. Work with the Regional Water Quality Control Board to ensure that approval of any satellite treatment and reclamation facility proposal is consistent with governing statutes and regulations.

Policy PU‐7‐b: Reduce Stormwater Leakage. Reduce storm water infiltration into the sewer collection system, where feasible, through a program of replacing old and deteriorated sewer collection pipeline; eliminating existing stormwater sewer cut-ins to the sanitary sewer system; and avoiding any new sewer cut-ins except when required to protect health and safety.

Policy PU‐7‐e: Infiltration Basins. Continue to rehabilitate existing infiltration basins, and if determined appropriate, pursue acquiring additional sites for infiltration basins, as needed.

Policy PU‐8‐b: Potable Water Supply and Cost Recovery. Prepare for provision of increased potable water capacity (including surface water treatment capacity) in a timely manner to facilitate planned urban development consistent with the General Plan. Accommodate increase in water demand from the existing community with the capital costs and benefits allocated equitably and fairly between existing users and new users, as authorized by law, and recognizing the differences in terms of quantity, quality and reliability of the various types of water in the City’s portfolio.

Policy PU‐8‐c: Conditions of Approval. Set appropriate conditions of approval for each new development proposal to ensure that the necessary potable water production and supply facilities and water resources are in place prior to occupancy.

Policy PU‐8‐f: Water Quality. Continue to evaluate and implement measures determined to be appropriate and consistent with water system policies, including prioritizing the use of groundwater, installing wellhead treatment facilities, constructing above-ground storage and surface water treatment facilities, and enhancing transmission grid mains to promote adequate water quality and quantity.

Policy PU‐8‐g: Review Project Impact on Supply. Mitigate the effects of development and capital improvement projects on the long-range water budget to ensure an adequate water supply for current and future uses.

Policy RC‐6‐b: Water Plans. Adopt and implement ordinances, standards, and policies to achieve the intent of the City of Fresno Urban Water Management Plan, Fresno-Area Regional

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-10
Groundwater Management Plan, and City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan to ensure a dependable supply of water.

Policy RC‐6‐c: Land Use and Development Compliance. Ensure that land use and development projects adhere to the objective of the Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan to provide sustainable and reliable water supplies to meet the demand of existing and future customers through 2025.

Policy RC‐6‐g: Protect Recharge Areas. Continue to protect areas of beneficial natural groundwater recharge by preventing uses that can contaminate soil or groundwater.

Policy RC‐7‐a: Water Conservation Program Target. Maintain a comprehensive conservation program to help reduce per capita water usage in the city’s water service area to 243 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) by 2020 and 190 gpcd by 2035, by adopting conservation standards and implementing a program of incentives, design and operation standards, and user fees. • Support programs that result in decreased water demand, such as landscaping standards that require drought-tolerant plants, rebates for water conserving devices and systems, turf replacement, xeriscape landscape for new homes, irrigation controllers, commercial/industrial/institutional water conserving programs, prioritized leak detection program, complete water system audit, landscape water audit and budget program, and retrofit upon resale ordinance.
• Implement the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Best Management Practices for water conservation as necessary to maintain the City’s surface water entitlements. • Adopt and implement policies in the event that an artificial lake is proposed for development.
• Work cooperatively toward effective uniform water conservation measures that would apply throughout the Planning Area.
• Expand efforts to educate the public about water supply issues and water conservation techniques.

Policy RC‐7‐c: Best Practices for Conservation. Require all City facilities and all new private development to follow U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Best Management Practices for water conservation, as warranted and appropriate.

Policy RC‐7‐d: Update Standards for New Development. Continue to refine water saving and conservation standards for new development.

City of Fresno Municipal Code. Chapter 6, Municipal Services and Utilities, Article 7, Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control, of the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) establishes provisions regarding stormwater discharges. The purpose of the City’s Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control Ordinance is to ensure the health, safety, and general welfare of

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-11
citizens and protect the water quality of watercourses and water bodies in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the CWA (33 U.S.C. Section 1251, et seq.) by reducing pollutants in urban stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable and by effectively prohibiting non-stormwater discharges to the storm drain system.

Chapter 11, Building Permits and Regulations, Article 6 Fresno Flood Plain Ordinance establish methods of reducing flood losses by: restricting or prohibiting uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water or erosion hazards or flood heights or velocities; requiring that uses vulnerable to floods be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; controlling filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage; preventing or regulating the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert flood water or which may increase flood hazards in other areas; and controlling the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel flood waters.

4.10.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to hydrology and water quality that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of significance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is significant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for significant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less-than-significant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.10.3.1 Significance Criteria
Based on State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, the proposed project would have a significant impact on hydrology and water quality if it would:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality;
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin;
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
• Result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; • Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-12
• Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
• Impede or redirect flood flows.
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation; or
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

4.10.3.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

HYD‐1 The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.

The proposed VMT Reduction Program would fund future transportation improvement projects that contribute towards reducing VMT throughout Fresno. Future transportation improvements could contribute to water quality degradation in Fresno. Although minimal, transportation improvement projects, such as pedestrian improvements and bikeways could increase impervious areas in the City, thus increasing urban runoff. There is also the possibility for water quality degradation during construction. Substances such as oils, fuels, paints, and solvents may be transported to nearby drainages, watersheds, and groundwater in stormwater runoff, wash water, and dust control water.

The significance of these water quality impacts would vary depending upon the level of construction activity, weather conditions, soil conditions, increased sedimentation of drainage systems within the area, compliance with NPDES permit requirements, and proper installation of BMPs.

Short‐Term Construction Impacts. Future VMT-reducing transportation infrastructure improvements are unlikely to disturb more than one acre of land. In this case, the improvements would be required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code, which includes measures that minimize stormwater runoff during construction and operation.

Any development project disturbing one or more acres of soil must obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009‐0009‐DWQ). Construction activities subject to the Construction General Permit includes clearing, grading, and other ground‐disturbing activities such as stockpiling or excavation. The Construction General Permit requires development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Among other mandated items that are included in a SWPPP are features designed to eliminate contact of rainfall and stormwater runoff with sources of pollution that occur on construction sites, of which a primary source is soil erosion as a result of unstabilized soils coming in contact with water and wind. These features are known as Best Management Practices (BMPs). Future development would be required to prepare, implement, and

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-13
be consistent with the Construction General Permit, including the SWPPP and BMPs, which would reduce project construction impacts on water quality to less than significant levels. Therefore, short‐ term construction impacts associated with water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would be less than significant.

Long‐Term Project Impacts. As discussed above, future transportation improvements associated with the proposed project would likely increase impervious areas and could result in increased runoff. However, it is noted that many of the potential VMT-reducing improvements, such as pedestrian improvements and bikeways would add minimal new impervious surfaces and would not substantially increase runoff in a manner that would adversely impact water quality.

The Municipal Storm Water Permitting Program regulates storm water discharges from municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s). In 2016 the RWQCB adopted a region-wide MS4 Permit. The Fresno MS4 Permit regulates discharge requirements for Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD), City of Fresno, City of Clovis, County of Fresno, and California State University of Fresno.

Regardless, to reduce long-term operational impacts in accordance with the requirements of the City and the regional MS4 permit, future transportation improvement projects would be required to comply with the NPDES permit and any BMP conditions and requirements established by the City.

As stated, future transportation improvements would be City-initiated projects or implemented as part of future development projects and would require environmental review under CEQA (e.g., preparation of a Categorical Exemption, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report). Thus, project- and site-specific operational impacts would be analyzed.

Additionally, applicable future transportation improvement projects would be required to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) in compliance with the NPDES permit requirements.

Project-specific WQMPs are intended to reduce pollutants and post-development runoff and can include low impact development (LID) features, site design BMPs, and structural/nonstructural treatment BMPs to address post-construction stormwater runoff management. LID features may include techniques to infiltrate, filter, store, evaporate, or retain runoff close to the source of runoff, and are consistent with the prescribed hierarchy of treatment provided in the regional MS4 permit.

Selection of LID and additional treatment control BMPs would be based on the pollutants of concern for the specific project site and the BMP’s ability to effectively treat those pollutants, in consideration of site conditions and constraints. Additionally, future applicable transportation improvement projects would be required to comply with the City’s municipal code and Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, which includes additional minimum control measures that reduce stormwater runoff during construction and operation.

Overall, future transportation improvement projects associated with the proposed program would be required to comply with a number of local, State, and Federal regulations that ensure pollutant runoff generated by future projects does not exceed water quality standards and the City continues to comply with MS4 permit requirements related to water quality. Future improvements would be required to undergo separate environmental review to evaluate project- and site-specific impacts with regards to water quality. Applicable projects would also be required to prepare and implement SWPPPs and WQMPs to minimize off-site discharge of potential pollutant runoff during the

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-14
construction and postconstruction phases of the project. As a result, the project would not result in violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water quality, and less-than-significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

HYD‐2 The project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

The proposed VMT Reduction Program would fund future transportation improvement projects, primarily within existing rights-of-way in urban areas of Fresno that contribute towards reducing VMT throughout Fresno. Potential VMT-Reducing Improvements, as listed in Table 3.A, include, but are not limited to, new bus routes, pedestrian safe enhancement corridors, bikeway network and other pedestrian safety improvements. As such, because the VMT Reduction Program would not directly increase the population and demand for groundwater, the VMT-reducing projects would not have the potential to substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. Further, all future transportation improvement projects associated with the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project- and site-specific hydrologic impacts. Future improvements would also be required to comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations and requirements related to groundwater. As such, implementation of the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge in a manner that would impede sustainable groundwater management of the Kings Subbasin, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

HYD‐3 The project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
• Result in a substantial erosion or siltation on‐ or off‐site; • Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on‐ or off‐site;
• Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; nor
• Impede or redirect flood flows.

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-15
Future transportation improvement projects associated with the proposed VMT Reduction Program could alter existing drainage patterns and increase runoff volumes in Fresno. For example, implementing pedestrian improvements and bikeways could increase impervious surfaces if constructed on undeveloped or pervious areas, and thus, increase runoff volumes. However, other transportation improvements, new bus routes, and adaptive signal controls would not substantively increase impervious area and would have minimal impacts with regards to altering existing drainage patterns or runoff volumes.

Regardless of the type of improvements to be implemented as part of the proposed VMT Reduction Program, all future transportation improvement projects would be required to undergo separate environmental review to evaluate project- and site-specific impacts in this regard. In addition, all improvements would be required to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local stormwater regulations and requirements as detailed above. Depending on the level of development, hydrology and drainage studies may also be required, which would require analyses of pre- and post- development hydrology conditions. Any changes in drainage flow paths, impervious areas, and runoff volumes associated with the transportation improvement projects would be identified in these studies and mitigation would be recommended to ensure the improvement (or larger development project) do not substantially alter a site’s existing drainage pattern in a manner that could result in substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding. These studies may identify site-specific LID features, BMPs, and other on-site retention features to be implemented to reduce peak flow rates and/or runoff volumes.

Erosion/Siltation. In addition to complying with existing City regulations, applicable future transportation improvements would be required to prepare a SWPPP under the NPDES program.

Implementation of a project-specific SWPPP and associated BMPs would minimize construction- related water quality impacts (including erosion and siltation) to less-than-significant levels.

Additionally, future improvements may also be required to implement a project-specific WQMP and associated BMPs to reduce operational impacts in this regard.

Flooding. Regulatory mechanisms in place that would reduce the effects of construction activities on drainage patterns that would result in flooding on or off of a construction site include compliance with the City’s grading plan check process, the SDFCMP , and the NPDES Construction General Permit.

Compliance with these required regulations would reduce project construction impacts on grading patterns and flooding on and off of the construction site to less-than-significant levels.

Stormwater Drainage System. As stated above, existing Federal, State, and local regulations would ensure future transportation improvements prepare and implement the appropriate studies and BMPs to reduce project-related runoff and pollutants during construction and operations. Given the nature of the transportation improvements, the improvements are not anticipated to increase runoff volumes in a manner that would exceed existing and planned stormwater drainage system capacities. In addition to requiring separate environmental review under CEQA, continued implementation of the approved General Plan polices, along with preparation, implementation, and participation of the NPDES Permit would reduce project-specific impacts on water quality associated with the significant increase in stormwater runoff.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-16
Implementation of the proposed VMT Reduction Program would require compliance with existing regulations. In addition, future transportation improvement projects would not significantly alter existing drainage patterns or substantially increase runoff volumes or rates in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation, cause flooding on- or off-site, or exceed stormwater drainage system capacities. As a result, less-than-significant impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

HYD‐4 The project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones.

Official Statewide Tsunami Inundation Maps, coordinated by the California Geological Survey (CGS) and the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES, are developed for all populated areas at risk to tsunamis in California. According to the Cal OES MyHazards website,5 the city of Fresno is located outside of a Tsunami Emergency Response Planning Zone.

A seiche is a “standing” wave oscillating in a body of water. This phenomenon occurs in large bodies of water such as bays and lakes. A seiche may occur in any semi‐ or fully‐enclosed body of water.

They can be caused by strong winds and earthquakes. The nearest body of water capable of producing a seiche is Big Creek Dry Dam and Reservoir located northeast of Fresno. Further, all future transportation improvement projects associated with the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project- and site- specific hydrologic impacts related to tsunamis, seiches, or flooding hazards. As a result, a less-than- significant impact related to tsunamis, seiches, or flooding hazards would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

HYD‐5 The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

The 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act requires local public agencies and groundwater sustainability agencies in high- and medium-priority basins to develop and implement groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs) or prepare an alternative to a GSP . The proposed VMT Reduction Program would fund projects located within the Kings Subbasin, which is split into seven Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) management areas, with Fresno located in the North Kings GSA. The seven GSAs of the Kings Subbasin operate cooperatively across the basin via a coordination agreement that ensures common approaches to sustainability items such as similarity of data usage and methodologies, consistent interpretations of the basin setting, and common assumptions and development of water budgets, monitoring networks, sustainable management criteria, and data

5 State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. 2015. MyHazards. Website:
myhazards.caloes.ca.gov (accessed February 20, 2025).

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.10-17
management systems. As discussed above, implementation of the proposed program and associated future transportation improvements would not conflict with water quality standards, and the North Kings GSA continues to monitor groundwater supplies. All future transportation improvement projects associated with the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review and mitigate project- and site-specific hydrologic impacts, as needed. Further, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. As such, upon compliance with all applicable regulations, the proposed project is not anticipated to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan.

Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.10.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
HYD‐6 The project, in combination with other projects, would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to hydrology and water quality.

Cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan buildout could affect water quality degradation, groundwater recharge, existing drainage patterns, flood hazards, and water quality in Fresno. However, all cumulative projects would be required to mitigate site-specific hydrologic impacts on a project-by-project basis pursuant to all applicable Federal, State, and local stormwater regulations and requirements, including NPDES permit requirements (i.e., preparation of project-specific SWPPPs and associated BMP/LID features). Similarly, cumulative projects would also be required to undergo project-level environmental review under CEQA on a case-by-case basis.

The proposed VMT Reduction Program does not propose site-specific development and would not significantly impact drainage courses and hydrologic flows throughout the City. As discussed above, compliance with NPDES permit requirements, applicable transportation improvement projects would be required to implement project-specific SWPPPs to minimize off-site discharge of anticipated and potential pollutant runoff during the construction and post-construction phase. As a result, future transportation improvement projects would not result in the violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water quality.

Implementation of the proposed program would not result in a substantial cumulative contribution to water quality impacts and impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Additionally, cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan could alter local drainage patterns and result in substantial erosion and siltation or flooding. However, as stated above, cumulative projects would be required to evaluate site-specific hydrologic impacts on a project-by-project basis pursuant to all applicable Federal, State, and local stormwater regulations and requirements (e.g., NPDES and FEMA requirements). These regulations would require project- specific BMPs, LID features, and/or on-site retention techniques, which would reduce peak flow rate or runoff volumes. Future cumulative projects would also be required to undergo project-level environmental review under CEQA on a case-by-case basis. As such, implementation of the proposed

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.10-18
program would not result in a substantial cumulative contribution to erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off-site and impacts, and less-than-significant impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.11-1

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
This section provides a discussion of the existing environmental setting of the use of land for various activities such as residential, commercial, office, public facilities, mixed use, industrial, open space, agriculture, and other uses. In addition, this section discusses the applicable plans and policies related to land use within the Planning Area of the City of Fresno. The potential impacts from the implementation of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program (project) are described, and mitigation measures are provided, if required.

4.11.1 Environmental Setting
The study area for project impacts regarding land use and planning is the Planning Area because potential development under the proposed project would be limited to within the Planning Area.

The Planning Area is the geographic area for which the approved General Plan establishes policies about future growth. The Planning Area established by the City includes all areas within the City’s current city limits, including the Fresno‐Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), the areas within the current Sphere of Influence (SOI), and an area north of the city’s most northeasterly portion of the city (referred to as the North Area).

In its existing setting, residential land uses are the predominant land use in the city. The remaining land uses characterizing the city are commercial and office, mixed use, public, industrial, and open space. Existing development patterns associated with these uses are summarized and further discussed below.

4.11.1.1 Residential
Single‐family and multi‐family residential land uses are the predominant land uses currently characterizing the city. Single‐family residential uses are distributed fairly evenly throughout the incorporated area of the city. Multi‐family units are located throughout the city and are prevalent in certain areas throughout the city, including around California State University Fresno, Fresno Pacific University, and north of Shaw Avenue, River Park Shopping Center, the Freeway 41 Corridor, and the Fig Garden Loop Area.

4.11.1.2 Commercial
Commercial land uses within the Planning Area include a wide range of retail and service establishments intended to serve local and regional needs. Office land uses include administrative, financial, business, professional, medical, and public offices. Commercial and office retail uses include business services, food services and convenience goods for those who work in the area.

Commercial and Office land uses are concentrated in various areas of the city but primarily located along transportation corridors such as Blackstone Avenue, Herndon Avenue, Shaw Avenue, and in the Downtown area.

4.11.1.3 Industrial
Industrial land uses include light and heavy industrial and manufacturing uses. The majority of industrial land is located south of Downtown, between State Route 99 (SR‐99) and State Route 41

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.11-2
(SR‐41). Other areas of industrial land are located along State Route 99 and near the Fresno Yosemite International Airport.

4.11.1.4 Mixed Use
Mixed use land uses are commercial uses that require a residential component, and are typically designated as higher‐density or located along corridors. Mixed‐Use land use and zoning was established in 2014 along most commercial corridors, including Blackstone, Shaw and Cesar Chavez Blvd. to take advantage of planned Bus Rapid Transit service (now High Frequency Transit Corridors).

Several mixed‐use developments have now been constructed, most notably along Blackstone Avenue.

4.11.1.5 Public Facilities
Public facilities are lands owned by public entities, including City Hall and other City buildings, county buildings, schools, colleges, the municipal airport and hospitals. They also include public facilities such as fire and police stations, City‐operated recycling centers and sewage treatment facilities.

Public facilities are distributed fairly evenly across the planning area, with large expanses at the Chandler Executive and Fresno Yosemite International Airports, as well as Fresno State University, Fresno City College and the Fairgrounds.

4.11.1.6 Open Space
Open space and agricultural land uses dominate much of the regional landscape. Open space land use within the City’s Planning Area is distributed citywide in over 80 neighborhood, community and regional parks. The City does not have a land use designation dedicated only to agricultural land uses. Larger expanses of open space are located along the San Joaquin River in the north, and southeast of the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, in the Clear Zone in the southeast.

4.11.2 Regulatory Setting

4.11.2.1 Regional Policies and Regulations
Fresno Council of Governments 2022 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy. Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) adopted the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) in 2022. The 2022 RTP/SCS comprehensively assesses all forms of transportation available in Fresno County as well as travel and goods movement needs through 2046. The RTP establishes Fresno COG’s transportation goals, objectives, and policies for each transportation mode. Each existing multimodal system is described in the RTP , and is followed by a needs assessment as well as proposed short‐term and long‐term actions for both planning and actual project improvements. Fresno COG is currently in the process of preparing the 2026 RTP/SCS, with adoption anticipated for in the summer of 2026.

Fresno County Regional Trails Plan. The Fresno Regional Trails Master Plan was developed to increase access, convenience, and safety of recreational trails across Fresno County. The Fresno Regional Trails Master Plan focuses on unpaved recreational trails and paved shared‐use paths in the unincorporated portions of Fresno County (outside of city boundaries), including county islands within incorporated cities. The Fresno Regional Trails Master Plan allows Fresno County to leverage

4.11-3

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

its existing trail system to expand recreational trail opportunities for hiking, mountain biking, and horse‐back riding in all areas of the county.

4.11.2.2 Local Policies and Regulations
City of Fresno Municipal Code. The City’s Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 15 of the Municipal Code) is intended to provide a guide for the physical development of the city in order to achieve the arrangement of land uses depicted in the approved General Plan, as well as implement goals, objectives, and policies of the approved General Plan. The City’s Zoning Ordinance identifies land use categories, boundaries, and development standards.

City of Fresno General Plan. The City’s General Plan is a long‐range plan which establishes goals, objectives, policies, and strategies that combine to serve as a “blueprint” directing future growth in the city. The approved General Plan was adopted on December 18, 2014 and consists of the Economic Development and Fiscal Sustainability, Urban Form, Land Use, and Design, Mobility and Transportation, Parks, Open Space, and Schools, Public Utilities and Services, Resource Conservation and Resilience, Historic and Cultural Resources, Noise and Safety, Healthy Communities, and Housing Elements. Relevant objectives and policies in the City of Fresno’s General Plan are included below in Table 4.11.A.

Table 4.11.A: General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis 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.

UF‐12‐e Access to Activity Centers. Promote adoption and implementation of standards supporting pedestrian
activities and bicycle linkages from surrounding land uses and neighborhoods into Activity Centers and to transit
stops. Provide for priority transit routes and facilities to serve the Activity Centers.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
fund various transportation infrastructure improvements that facilitate the public transit and use of bicycles. These improvements would include new transit routes,
pedestrian enhancements, and new bikeways. As such, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would be consistent
with this policy.

Objective UF-14 Create an urban form that facilitates multi-modal connectivity.

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.

Consistent. No land use development would occur as part of the project. However, the proposed VMT Reduction
Program would fund various transportation infrastructure improvements that facilitate the public transit and use of bicycles.

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.

LU‐2‐a Infill Development and Redevelopment. Promote
development of vacant, underdeveloped, and re‐
developable land within the City Limits where urban
services are available by considering the establishment and implementation of supportive regulations and programs.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
fund VMT‐reducing projects throughout Fresno. Through
implementation of the proposed project, it is intended that infill development would be supported with improved
active transportation options.

Objective MT-1: Create and maintain a transportation system that is safe, efficient, provides access in an equitable manner, and optimizes travel by all modes.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.11-4
Table 4.11.A: General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis MT‐1‐a Transportation Planning Consistent with the
General Plan. Continue to review local, regional and inter‐ regional transportation plans and capital improvement
plans, and advocate for the approval and funding of State highway and rail projects, consistent with the General Plan and discourage projects inconsistent with the General Plan.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
fund various transportation infrastructure improvements that facilitate public transit and use of bicycles. These improvements may include new transit routes, pedestrian enhancements, and new bikeways. As such, the proposed
VMT Reduction Program would be consistent with this
policy.

MT‐1‐d Integrate Land Use and Transportation Planning.

Plan for and maintain a coordinated and well integrated land use pattern, local circulation network and
transportation system that accommodates planned growth, reduces impacts on adjacent land uses, and preserves the integrity of established neighborhoods.

Consistent. Future VMT‐reducing projects funded by the
proposed VMT Reduction Program would be implemented
to reduce VMT and provide alternative modes of
transportation. VMT‐reducing projects would include new bus routes, pedestrian enhancements, and bikeways, to
support the local circulation network and transportation network.

MT‐1‐k Multi‐Modal Level of Service Standards. Develop
and use a tiered system of flexible, multi‐modal Level of Service standards for streets designated by the Circulation Diagram (Figure MT‐1). Strive to accommodate a peak hour vehicle LOS of D or better on street segments and at
intersections, except where Policies MT‐1‐m through MT‐1‐ p provide greater specificity. Establish minimum acceptable service levels for other modes and use them in the
development review process.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program includes funding of VMT‐reducing projects and TDM strategies to
reduce vehicle use and provide connectivity.

MT‐1‐n Peak Hour Vehicle LOS. For planning purposes and implementation of Capital Improvement Projects, maintain a peak‐hour vehicle LOS standard of D or better for all roadway areas outside of identified Activity Center and Bus Rapid Transit Corridor districts, unless the City Traffic Engineer determines that maintaining this LOS would be
infeasible and/or conflict with the achievement of other General Plan policies.

Consistent. As part of the proposed VMT Reduction
Program, TDM strategies would be implemented to reduce
vehicle trips and therefore reduce potential LOS impacts.

Objective MT-2: Make efficient use of the City's existing and proposed transportation system and strive to ensure the planning and provision of adequate resources to operate and maintain it.

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.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
fund VMT‐reducing projects throughout Fresno. Through
implementation of the proposed project, it is intended that through reduced VMT, the existing transportation system would be better utilized.

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).

Consistent. The proposed project would not conflict with future development of infill sites. Instead, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would encourage the use of
additional transportation options throughout Fresno that would support infill sites.

4.11-5

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Table 4.11.A: General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis 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.

MT‐2‐i Transportation Impact Studies. Require a
Transportation Impact Study (currently named Traffic
Impact Study) to assess the impacts of new development
projects on existing and planned streets for projects
meeting one or more of the following criteria, unless it is determined by the City Traffic Engineer that the project site and surrounding area already has appropriate multi‐modal infrastructure improvements.
⚫ When a project includes a General Plan amendment
that changes the General Plan Land Use Designation.
⚫ When the project will substantially change the off‐site transportation system (auto, transit, bike or pedestrian) or connection to the system, as determined by the City
Traffic Engineer.
⚫ Transportation impact criteria are tiered based on a
project’s location within the City’s Sphere of Influence.

This is to assist with areas being incentivized for
development. The four zones, as defined on Figure MT‐
4, are listed below. The following criteria apply:
o Traffic Impact Zone I (TIZ‐I): TIZ‐I represents the
Downtown Planning Area. Maintain a peak hour LOS
standard of F or better for all intersections and
roadway segments. A TIS will be required for all
development projected to generate 200 or more
peak hour new vehicle trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone II (TIZ‐II): TIZ‐II generally
represents areas of the City currently built up and
wanting to encourage infill development. Maintain a
peak hour LOS standard of E or better for all
intersections and roadway segments. A TIS will be
required for all development projected to generate
200 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone III (TIZ‐III): TIZ‐III generally
represents areas near or outside the City Limits but
within the SOI as of December 31, 2012. Maintain a
peak hour LOS standard of D or better for all
intersections and roadway segments. A TIS will be
required for all development projected to generate
100 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone IV (TIZ‐IV): TIZ‐IV represents the southern employment areas within and planned by
the City. Maintain a peak hour LOS standard of E or
better for all intersections and roadway segments. A
TIS will be required for all development projected to
generate 200 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.

Consistent. No land use development would occur as part of the project, and no Transportation Impact Studies would be required as a part of the proposed VMT Reduction
Program. In addition, future VMT‐reducing projects funded by the proposed project would be required to prepare
project‐specific analysis to assess potential related
transportation impacts, if applicable.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.11-6
Table 4.11.A: General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis MT‐2‐j Funding for Multi‐Modal Transportation System.

Continue to seek and secure adequate financing to
construct and maintain a complete multi‐modal system
through such measures as development impact fees, local sales tax measures, special tax measures,
assessment/improvement districts, and regional, state and federal transportation funds and grants.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
provide funding to construct a multi‐modal transportation system through mitigation fees for new development.

MT‐2‐l Region‐Wide Transportation Impact Fees. Continue to support the implementation of metropolitan‐wide and
region‐wide transportation impact fees sufficient to cover the proportional share of a development's impacts and
need for a comprehensive multi‐modal transportation
system that is not funded by other sources. Work with the Council of Fresno County Governments, transportation
agencies (e.g. Caltrans, Federal Transportation Agency) and other jurisdictions in the region to develop a method for determining:
⚫ Regional transportation impacts of new development;
⚫ Regional highways, streets, rail, trails, public
transportation, and goods movement system
components, consistent with the General Plan,
necessary to mitigate those impacts and serve projected demands;
⚫ Projected full lifetime costs of the regional
transportation system components, including
construction, operation, and maintenance; and
⚫ Costs covered by established funding sources
Consistent. As discussed in response to Policy MT‐2‐j, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would provide funding
to construct a multi‐modal transportation system through mitigation fees for new development.

Objective MT-4: Establish and maintain a continuous, safe, and easily accessible bikeways system throughout the metropolitan area to reduce vehicle use, improve air quality and the quality of life, and provide public health benefits.

MT‐4‐c Bikeway Linkages. Provide linkages between
bikeways, trails and paths, and other regional networks such as the San Joaquin River Trail and adjacent jurisdiction bicycle systems wherever possible.

Consistent. The proposed program would fund bikeways
and pedestrian facilities to link existing facilities.

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.

Consistent. The proposed program would provide funding
that would prioritize multi‐modal transportation, including bikeway improvements.

Objective MT-5: Establish a well-integrated network of pedestrian facilities to accommodate safe, convenient, practical, and inviting travel by walking, including for those with physical mobility and vision impairments.

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.

Consistent. The proposed program would provide funding
that would prioritize multi‐modal transportation, including improvements to pedestrian facilities.

4.11-7

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Table 4.11.A: General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis Objective MT-6: Establish a network of multi-purpose pedestrian and bicycle paths, as well as limited access trails, to link residential areas to local and regional open spaces and recreation areas and urban Activity Centers in order to enhance Fresno's recreational amenities and alternative transportation options.

MT‐6‐c Link Paths and Trails and Recreational Facilities.

Strive to provide path or trail connections to recreational facilities, including parks and community centers where appropriate, and give priority to pathway improvements
within neighborhoods characterized by lower vehicle
ownership rates and lower per capita rates of parks and public open space.

Consistent. The proposed program would fund bikeways
and pedestrian facilities to link existing facilities. In addition, existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities would be enhanced to increase safety by providing improvements in underserved neighborhoods.

Objective MT-7: Pursue a variety of funding sources to maximize implementation and development of the City's path and trail system.

MT‐7‐a Urban Path and Trail Development Funds. Continue to seek grants and other funding sources for trail
construction and maintenance, and support the enactment of State and federal legislation that will expand urban path and trail development funds.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
result in the implementation of a mitigation fee that would fund construction of pedestrian connections and
enhancements.

MT‐7‐c Citywide Funding Program for Path and Trail
Network. Strive to establish an equitable citywide funding program for construction and maintenance of the path and trail network, in order to:
⚫ Acquire right‐of‐way needed for paths and trails in
already‐developed neighborhoods and other areas, as
identified in community plans, Specific Plans, and
neighborhood plans;
⚫ Reimburse developers for public path and trail
development costs that they may incur in excess of the
trail cost attributable to the impact of their
development project (this may require a citywide nexus
study); and
⚫ Seek funding sources to add to and adequately maintain the citywide path and trail network
Refer to response to Policy MT‐7‐a.

Objective MT-8: Provide public transit options that serve existing and future concentrations of residences, employment, recreation and civic uses and are feasible, efficient, safe, and minimize environmental impacts.

MT‐8‐b Transit Serving Residential and Employment Nodes.

Identify the location of current and future residential and employment concentrations and Activity Centers
throughout the transit service area in order to facilitate planning and implementation of optimal transit services for these uses. Work with California State University, Fresno to determine locations within the campus core for bus stops.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
support this goal by funding identified transit routes that would reduce VMT.

Objective MT-9: Provide public transit opportunities to the maximum number and diversity of people practicable in balance with providing service that is high in quality, convenient, frequent, reliable, cost- effective, and financially feasible.

MT‐9‐e Area Specific Transit Improvements. Continue to
evaluate and pursue the planning and implementation of
area specific transit improvements, such as street car
facilities.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
fund the implementation of area‐specific transit
improvements that would result in new bus routes.

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.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.11-8
Table 4.11.A: General Plan Consistency Analysis
Applicable General Plan Policies Project Consistency Analysis 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.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
fund projects that would reduce VMT in Fresno, thereby
reducing mobile sources of emissions.

Objective RC-5: In cooperation with other jurisdictions and agencies in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, take timely, necessary, and the most cost-effective actions to achieve and maintain reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and all strategies that reduce the causes of climate change in order to limit and prevent the related potential detrimental effects upon public health and welfare of present and future residents of the Fresno community.

RC‐5‐a Support State Goal to Reduce Statewide GHG
Emissions. As is consistent with State law, strive to meet AB 32 goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and strive to meet a reduction of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 as stated in Executive Order S‐03‐05.

As new statewide GHG reduction targets and dates are set by the State update the City’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan to include a comprehensive strategy to achieve
consistency with those targets by the dates established.

Consistent. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would
fund projects that would reduce VMT in Fresno, thereby
reducing mobile sources of emissions, including
greenhouse gas emissions.

Source: LSA (2025)

City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan. The Fresno Active Transportation Plan (ATP), adopted in March 2017, provides a comprehensive guide outlining the vision for active transportation in Fresno.

The Fresno ATP envisions a complete, safe, and comfortable network of trails, sidewalks, and bikeways that serve all residents of Fresno. This plan lays out specific goals to improve bicycle and pedestrian access and connectivity in Fresno. These goals include the following:
• Equitably improve the safety and perceived safety of walking and bicycling in Fresno; • Increase walking and bicycling trips in Fresno by creating user‐friendly facilities; • Improve the geographical equity of access to walking and bicycling facilities in Fresno; and • Fill key gaps in Fresno’s walking and bicycling networks.

Fresno Area Express (FAX) Short-Range and Long-Range Transit Plans. The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) is a biennial update to the operating plans and capital programs of Fresno Area Express (FAX) and Clovis Transit. The purpose of the SRTP is to promote a comprehensive, coordinated, and continuous planning process for transit service in Fresno and Clovis over a five‐year planning horizon. The SRTP proposes specific recommendations for implementing the long‐range objectives of Fresno County’s 2022‐2046 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy and will guide the provision of transit services over the next five years. Fresno County Regional Long‐Range Transit Plan (LRTP) provides a guide to transit and multimodal investments and services in the Fresno region through the year 2050. The LRTP builds upon the Fresno COG’s 2018 RTP and prior transit planning studies. More importantly, the LRTP will integrate appropriate and effective public

4.11-9

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

transportation planning and projects into the fabric of the region’s overall circulation networks and systems.

Fresno Safe Routes to School Action Plan. The Safe Routes to School Action Plan was developed to guide the Fresno community in developing a robust and sustainable Safe Routes to School program that addresses local needs. The Safe Routes to School Action Plan provides a summary of current conditions related to walking and biking to school, including existing policies, plans, programs, and infrastructure. The Safe Routes to School Action Plan also outlines recommended strategies and actions to be undertaken in Southeast Fresno during the first implementation year (2018‐2019) as well as additional longer‐term actions in years two through five.

Southern Blackstone Smart Mobility Strategy. The Southern Blackstone Smart Mobility Strategy was developed to provide recommendations for both near‐term and long‐term multi‐modal and streetscape improvements along the Blackstone Avenue Corridor. The Southern Blackstone Smart Mobility Strategy was prepared to address the following objectives:
• Increase access and safety along the Corridor for all travel modes and users, including the elderly, disabled, low‐income, students and youth.
• Address deficiencies in the existing street design that are incompatible with the planned land uses outlined in the General Plan and impact business opportunities and performance in the identified activity centers along the Corridor.
• Recommend multi‐modal access and safety improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists as well as transit riders.
• Recommend potential sidewalk and streetscape enhancements to support pedestrian comfort, access to transit, and access to businesses and services. • Identify potential treatments that support the management of traffic speeds within activity centers along the corridor.
• Consider on‐street and off‐street parking in the context of recommended multi‐modal improvements.
• Identify opportunities for gateway improvements and wayfinding signage. • Recommend locally feasible implementation and funding strategies for recommended multi‐ modal improvements.

4.11.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to land use and planning that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of significance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is significant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.11-10
recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for significant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less than significant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.11.3.1 Significance Criteria
Based on State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, the proposed project would have a significant impact on land use and planning if it would:
a. Physically divide an established community; or
b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

4.11.3.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to land use and planning that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

LU-1 The project would not physically divide an established community.

As described in Section 4.11.1, above, Fresno is generally characterized as a downtown core surrounded by suburban development, distinct neighborhoods, and growth areas. Fresno is located on the SR‐99 corridor and regional access is also provided by SR‐41, State Route 180 (SR‐180) and State Route 168 (SR‐168). The Planning Area for the City is the geographic area for which the City’s General Plan establishes policies regarding future growth. The boundary of the Planning Area was determined in response to State law (California Government Code Section 65300) requiring each city to include in its General Plan all territory within the boundaries of the incorporated area as well as “any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency’s judgment bears relation to its planning”. The Planning Area established by the City of Fresno includes all areas within the City’s current city limits, including the Fresno‐Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), the areas within the current Sphere of Influence (SOI), and an area north of the city’s most northeasterly portion (referred to as the North Area).

The proposed project is the adoption of the VMT Reduction Program, which aims to fund VMT‐ reducing projects within the City. The transportation improvements, which consist of bicycle, pedestrian and transit facilities and improvements, would primarily occur within existing rights‐of‐ way and would not physically divide any established communities. Given the nature of the project, potential transportation improvements would improve the City’s existing roadway, pedestrian, bicyclist, and transit network, and the proposed project would facilitate future VMT‐reducing projects. As such, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community, and less‐than‐significant impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.11-11

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

LU-2 The project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

City of Fresno General Plan. The proposed VMT Reduction Program aims to implement VMT‐ reducing projects within the City to address regional VMT impacts. Table 3.A, Potential VMT‐ Reducing Improvements, provides a summary of VMT‐reducing improvements that could occur with future funding provided by the proposed program. The VMT‐reducing projects included in Table 3.A were identified based on existing local planning documents for active transportation, transit‐related infrastructure, capital improvement projects, and other mobility related projects suggested by project stakeholders. These local planning documents from the Fresno area includes the following:
• Fresno Area Express (FAX) Short Range Transit Plan
• FAX Long Range Transit Plan
• Fresno Council of Governments (COG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) • Fresno Safe Routes to School Action Plan
• Fresno Active Transportation Plan
• Southern Blackstone Avenue Smart Mobility Strategy
The proposed VMT Reduction Program aims to establish mitigation for projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds under CEQA in the form of a mitigation fee and urban design calculator. The proposed program identifies relevant TDM strategies and VMT‐reducing projects in Fresno to be funded by the VMT Reduction Program. Contributed funds would fund active transportation infrastructure projects in the City that have the potential to help the City meet its VMT reduction goals. The overall intent of the program is to streamline the SB 743 compliance process for development projects while funding future VMT improvement projects to reduce Citywide VMT. As such, the project would be consistent with the City’s General Plan, specifically with Policy MT‐2‐b which calls for the reduction of VMT throughout Fresno. Additionally, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would be consistent with MT‐2‐g, which encourages implementation of Transportation Demand Management and Transportation System Management strategies to reduce peak hour vehicle traffic and supplement the capacity of the transportation system.

The proposed VMT Reduction Program would fund future transportation improvement projects that contribute to reducing VMT throughout Fresno. The proposed program would be implemented through collection of the mitigation fees. Future VMT‐reducing projects identified by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be required to prepare project‐specific analysis to assess potential impacts. As a result, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would be consistent with applicable General Plan policies and impacts would be less than significant.

City of Fresno Municipal Code. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would fund future transportation improvement projects that contribute to reducing Citywide VMT. Future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be subject to existing

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.11-12
Municipal Code standards and regulations. As a result, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would be consistent with the Fresno Municipal Code, and a less‐than‐significant impact would occur.

City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan. The proposed VMT Reduction Program would fund future transportation improvement projects that contribute to reducing Citywide VMT. Future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be consistent with the goals of the Fresno ATP by improving pedestrian and bicycle safety, enhancing existing facilities, and constructing new facilities. As a result, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would be consistent with the Fresno ATP , and a less‐than‐significant impact would occur.

Fresno Council of Governments 2022 RTP . The proposed VMT Reduction Program establishes mitigation for projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation fee and is not considered regionally significant based on criteria outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15206.

However, as a transportation‐related policy program, the proposed project is reviewed for consistency with the Fresno COG 2022 RTP goals as detailed in Table 4.11.B, below.

Table 4.11.B: Fresno COG 2022 RTP Consistency Analysis
Goal Consistency Statement
Goal 1: Improved mobility and accessibility for all Consistent. No land use development would occur as part of the project. However, the proposed project would fund VMT‐reducing transportation improvements that would
provide and expand multimodal transportation amenities
and opportunities in Fresno. As such, the project would improve mobility and accessibility.

Goal 2: Vibrant communities that are accessible by
sustainable transportation options
Consistent. No land use development would occur as part of the project. However, the proposed project would fund VMT‐reducing transportation improvements that would
provide expanded public transportation, and accessibility that would increase transportation options.

Goal 3: A safe, well‐maintained, efficient, and climate‐ resilient multimodal transportation network
Consistent. No land use development would occur as part of the project. However, the proposed project would fund VMT‐reducing transportation improvements that would
provide expanded public transportation and would
enhance the multimodal transportation network.

Goal 4: A transportation network that supports a
sustainable and vibrant economy
Not Applicable. This goal was not adopted for the
“purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect” per Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.

Goal 5: A region embracing clean transportation,
technology, and innovation
Consistent. No land use development would occur as part of the project. However, the proposed project would fund VMT‐reducing transportation improvements that would
provide increased accessibility to public transportation and would enhance the multimodal transportation network. By providing these options, personal vehicle use would
potentially decrease thereby increasing transportation, technology and innovation that reduces air quality impacts.

Source: LSA (2025)

4.11-13

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

As discussed in Table 4.11.A, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would be consistent with all applicable goals of the Fresno COG 2022 RTP , and a less‐than‐significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.11.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
LU-3 The project, in combination with other projects, would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to land use and planning.

Cumulative projects developed within the Planning Area of the City and in accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo project‐level environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process to determine potential land use planning impacts. Each cumulative project would be analyzed independent of other projects, within the context of their respective land use and regulatory setting. As part of the review process, each cumulative project would be required to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the project site’s land use designation(s) and zoning district(s). Each project would be analyzed to ensure consistency and compliance with the General Plan goals and policies, Municipal Code regulations, and other applicable land use plans or policies.

The proposed VMT Reduction Program would be consistent with applicable goals, policies, and standards from the General Plan, Municipal Code, Fresno ATP, and 2022 RTP/SCS. Furthermore, implementation of the proposed VMT Reduction Program would consist of transportation improvements, which would include improvements to bicycle, pedestrian and transit facilities, which would improve the City’s existing roadway, pedestrian, bicyclist, and transit network. These improvements would facilitate future VMT‐reducing projects while also improving connectivity in Fresno. As a result, the proposed project would not significantly contribute to a cumulative impact relative to land use and planning, and a less‐than‐significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.11-14
This page intentionally left blank

4.12-1

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
This section provides a discussion of the existing mineral resources in the vicinity of the project area and evaluates potential impacts that could result from implementation of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program (proposed project).

4.12.1 Existing Environmental Setting
The study area for project impacts regarding mineral resources is the city of Fresno because potential development under the proposed project is limited to areas within the city limits the City of Fresno.

Mineral resources, such as aggregate material, are necessary to support urban development, as all public and private projects utilize this material for roadway paving, structural elements, and hardscape, including sidewalks, curbing, and gutters. Within the city, mineral resources are concentrated along the San Joaquin River Corridor. The California Department of Mines and Geology classiﬁes lands along the San Joaquin River Corridor as Mineral Resources Zones (MRZ) MRZ--1, MRZ- 2, and MRZ-3; portions of the city classiﬁed as MRZ-2 indicate that mineral deposits are present or likely present.

The majority of the area within the existing city limits is urbanized, while areas located outside of the city limits are primarily rural. However, growth projections for the city’s population indicate that demand for these aggregate materials will continue to increase as development occurs. Protection of mineral resources in the city is intended to assure that cost-eﬀective locally available mineral resources (such as rock, gravel, and sand for concrete aggregate) are protected for future use by the construction industry.

Over time, the city’s urbanized area has extended closer to classiﬁed mineral resource areas. This urbanization has caused land uses which are generally incompatible with surface mining and associated mineral processing activities to threaten opportunities for mineral extraction and processing. As discussed in Section 4.12.2, Regulatory Setting, the City regulates mining operations through objectives and policies identiﬁed in the General Plan, as well as the Surface Mining and Reclamation Ordinance. Regulation of mining operations in the city is intended to ensure that extraction of these resources is undertaken in a responsible manner that provides for beneﬁcial end uses of surface mining sites.

4.12.2 Regulatory Setting

4.12.2.1 Federal Policies and Regulations
No federal policies or regulations pertaining to mineral resources are applicable to the proposed project.

4.12.2.2 State Policies and Regulations
Surface Mining and Reclamation Act. In 1975, the California Legislature enacted the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), which, among other things, provided guidelines for the classiﬁcation and designation of mineral lands. Areas are classiﬁed on the basis of geologic factors without regard

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.12-2
to existing land use and land ownership. The areas are categorized into four Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs):
• MRZ-1: An area where adequate information indicates that no signiﬁcant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-2: An area where adequate information indicates that signiﬁcant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-3: An area containing mineral deposits, the signiﬁcance of which cannot be evaluated. • MRZ-4: An area where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ zone.

Of the four categories, lands classiﬁed as MRZ-2 are of the greatest importance. Such areas are underlain by demonstrated mineral resources or are located where geologic data indicate that signiﬁcant measured or indicated resources are present. MRZ-2 areas are designated by the State of California Mining and Geology Board as being “regionally signiﬁcant.” Such designations require that a Lead Agency’s land use decisions involving designated areas are to be made in accordance with its mineral resource management policies and that it consider the importance of the mineral resource to the region or the State as a whole, not just to the Lead Agency’s jurisdiction.

4.12.2.3 Local Policies and Regulations
City of Fresno General Plan. The City’s General Plan is a set of policies and programs that form a blueprint for the physical development of the city. The following goals and policies related to mineral resources are presented in the approved General Plan:

Policy RC-10-b: Zoning in San Joaquin Riverbottom. Maintain zoning consistent with on-going mineral extraction in the San Joaquin Riverbottom that also allows multiple open space uses in conformance with State law and the City’s Surface Mining Ordinance.

Policy RC-10-d: Manage MRZ-2 Areas. Prohibit land uses and development projects that preclude mineral extraction in potential high-quality mineral resource areas designated MRZ-2 by the California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology.

4.12.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to mineral resources that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of signiﬁcance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is signiﬁcant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for signiﬁcant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less than signiﬁcant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.12-3

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.12.3.1 Signiﬁcance Criteria
Based on State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, the proposed project would have a signiﬁcant impact on land mineral resources if it would:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state.
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, speciﬁc plan, or other land use plan.

4.12.3.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to mineral resources that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

MIN-1 The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state.

According to the City’s General Plan mineral resources are concentrated along the San Joaquin River Corridor. The California Department of Mines and Geology classiﬁes lands along the San Joaquin River Corridor as MRZ-1, MRZ-2, and MRZ-3; portions of the city classiﬁed as MRZ-2 indicate that mineral deposits are present or are likely present. The mineral resources present in the city are comprised of aggregate materials and are being removed via surface mining operations.

The proposed project consists of the adoption of the Fresno VMT Reduction Program, which aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank. The proposed project program would identify, quantify, and prioritize applicable mitigation measures and relevant VMT-reducing projects within the City to be funded by the proposed mitigation bank. The project would not result in any physical improvements or change the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the city. Future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be required to conduct project-speciﬁc environmental analysis to assess potential impacts to mineral resources. However, as shown in Figure 3-3 of Chapter

3.0, Project Description, no VMT-reducing projects associated with the proposed project would occur within a mineral resource zone identiﬁed by the City’s General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource. As a result, a less- than-signiﬁcant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

MIN-2 The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, speciﬁc plan, or other land use plan.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.12-4
As identiﬁed under impact discussion a above, the proposed project would not result in any physical improvements in the project area. Additionally, as shown in Figure 3-3 of Chapter 3.0, Project Description, future VMT-reducing projects to be funded by the proposed mitigation bank would not occur within mineral resource zone identiﬁed by the City’s General Plan. As a result, a less-than- signiﬁcant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

4.12.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project would have a signiﬁcant eﬀect on the environment if it—in combination with other projects—would contribute to a signiﬁcant cumulative impact related to mineral resources.

The cumulative study area for mineral resources is the City of Fresno.

As identiﬁed in this section, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of mineral resources in the city of Fresno. As a result, implementation of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program, in combination with other projects, would not contribute to a signiﬁcant cumulative impact to mineral resources. Therefore, the impact would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-1

4.13 NOISE
This section provides a discussion of the existing noise environment in the Planning Area and in the surrounding area, and evaluates the potential for changes in noise that could result from the implementation of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program (project).

4.13.1 Methodology

4.13.1.1 Characteristics of Sound
Noise is usually deﬁned as unwanted sound and consists of any sound that may produce physio- logical or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, or sleep. To the human ear, sound has two signiﬁcant characteristics: pitch and loudness. Pitch is generally related to annoyance, while loudness can aﬀect our ability to hear through hearing damage. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations, or cycles per second, of a wave, resulting in the tone’s range from high to low. Loudness is the strength of a sound that describes a noisy or quiet environment and is measured by the amplitude of the sound wave. Loudness is determined by the intensity of the sound waves, combined with the reception characteristics of the human ear. Sound pressure refers to how hard the sound wave strikes an object, which in turn produces the sound’s eﬀect. This characteristic of sound can be measured precisely with instruments. The project analysis deﬁnes the noise environment of the planning area in terms of sound pressure levels and the project’s eﬀect on sensitive land uses.

4.13.1.2 Measurement of Sound
Sound intensity is measured with the A-weighted decibel scale to correct for the relative frequency response of the human ear. That is, an A-weighted noise level de-emphasizes low and very high frequencies of sound, similar to the human ear’s de-emphasis of these frequencies. Decibels, unlike linear units (e.g., inches or pounds), are measured on a logarithmic scale representing points on a sharply rising curve.

For example, 10 decibels (dB) is 10 times more intense than 1 dB, 20 dB is 100 times more intense than 1 dB, and 30 dB is 1,000 times more intense than 1 dB. Thirty decibels (30 dB) represents 1,000 times as much acoustic energy as 1 dB. The decibel scale increases as the square of the change, representing the sound pressure energy. A sound as soft as human breathing is about 10 times greater than 0 dB. The decibel system of measuring sound gives a rough connection between the physical intensity of sound and its perceived loudness to the human ear. A 10 dB increase in sound level is perceived by the human ear as only a doubling of the sound’s loudness.

Ambient sounds generally range from 30 dB (very quiet) to 100 dB (very loud).

Sound levels generate from a source, and their decibel level decreases as the distance from that source increases. Sound levels dissipate exponentially with distance from their noise sources. For a single point source, sound levels decrease approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from the source. This drop-oﬀ rate is appropriate for noise generated by stationary equipment. If noise is produced by a line source (e.g., highway traﬃc or railroad operations) the sound decreases 3 dB for each doubling of distance in a hard site environment. Line source sound levels decrease 4.5 dB for each doubling of distance in a relatively ﬂat environment with absorptive vegetation.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-2
There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise aﬀecting humans also accounts for the annoying eﬀects of sound. The equivalent continuous sound level (L
eq) is the total sound energy of time-varying noise over a sample period. However, the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Leq and Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or the day-night average noise level (Ldn) based on A-weighted decibels (dBA). CNEL is the time-varying noise over a 24-hour period, with a 5 dBA weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noise occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (deﬁned as relaxation hours) and a 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (deﬁned as sleeping hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale but without the adjustment for events occurring during the relaxation and sleeping hours. CNEL and Ldn are within 1 dBA of each other and are normally interchangeable. The City uses the CNEL noise scale for long-term noise impact assessment.

Other noise rating scales of importance when assessing the annoyance factor include the maximum instantaneous noise level (L
max), which is the highest exponential time-averaged sound level that occurs during a stated time period. The noise environments discussed in this analysis for short-term noise impacts are speciﬁed in terms of maximum levels denoted by Lmax, which reﬂects peak operating conditions and addresses the annoying aspects of intermittent noise. It is often used together with another noise scale, or noise standards in terms of percentile noise levels, in noise ordinances for enforcement purposes. For example, the L 10 noise level represents the noise level
exceeded 10 percent of the time during a stated period. The L50 noise level represents the median noise level. Half the time the noise level exceeds this level, and half the time it is less than this level.

The L
90 noise level represents the noise level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is considered the background noise level during a monitoring period. For a relatively constant noise source, the Leq and L50 are approximately the same.

Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The ﬁrst category includes audible impacts that refer to increases in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dB or greater because this level has been found to be barely perceptible in exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise level between 1 dB and 3 dB. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in laboratory environments. The last category includes changes in noise levels of less than 1 dB, which are inaudible to the human ear . Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially signiﬁcant.

Table 4.13.A lists deﬁnitions of acoustical terms, and Table 4.13.B shows common sound levels and their sources.

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-3
Table 4.13.A: Deﬁnitions of Acoustical Terms
Term Deﬁnitions
Decibel, dB A unit of sound level that denotes the ratio between two quantities that are proportional to power; the number of decibels is 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10) of this ratio.

Frequency, Hz Of a function periodic in time, the number of times that the quantity repeats itself in 1 second (i.e., the number of cycles per second).

A-Weighted Sound
Level, dBA
The sound level obtained by use of A-weighting. The A-weighting ﬁlter de-emphasizes the very low and very high-frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. (All sound levels in this report are A-weighted unless reported otherwise.) L01, L10, L50, L90 The fast A-weighted noise levels that are equaled or exceeded by a ﬂuctuating sound level 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of a stated time period, respectively.

Equivalent Continuous
Noise Level, Leq
The level of a steady sound that, in a stated time period and at a stated location, has the same A-weighted sound energy as the time varying sound.

Community Noise
Equivalent Level, CNEL
The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of 5 dBA to sound levels occurring in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

Day/Night Noise Level,
Ldn
The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted sound levels measured on a sound level meter, during a designated time interval, using fast time averaging.

Ambient Noise Level The all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment at a speciﬁed time. It is usually a composite of sound from many sources from many directions, near and far; no particular sound is dominant.

Intrusive The noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content, as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.

Sources: Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement to the Traﬃc Noise Analysis Protocol (Caltrans 2013), Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018).

4.13.1.3 Physiological Eﬀects of Noise
Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to sound levels higher than 85 dBA. Exposure to high sound levels aﬀects the entire system, with prolonged sound exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby aﬀecting blood pressure and functions of the heart and the nervous system. In comparison, extended periods of sound exposure above 90 dBA would result in permanent cell damage. When the sound level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the human ear, even with short-term exposure. This level of sound is called the threshold of feeling. As the sound reaches 140 dBA, the tickling sensation is replaced by a feeling of pain in the ear (i.e., the threshold of pain). A sound level of 160–165 dBA will result in dizziness or a loss of equilibrium. The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more concentrated in urban areas than in outlying, less-developed areas.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-4
Table 4.13.B: Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels
Source: Compiled by LSA (2016).

4.13.1.4 Vibration
Vibration energy propagates from a source through intervening soil and rock layers to the foundations of nearby buildings. The vibration then propagates from the foundation throughout the remainder of the structure. Building vibration may be perceived by occupants as the motion of building surfaces, the rattling of items sitting on shelves or hanging on walls, or a low-frequency rumbling noise. The rumbling noise is caused by the vibration of walls, ﬂoors, and ceilings that radiate sound waves. Annoyance from vibration often occurs when the vibration exceeds the threshold of perception by 10 dB or less. This is an order of magnitude below the damage threshold for normal buildings.

Typical sources of ground-borne vibration are construction activities (e.g., blasting, pile-driving, and operating heavy-duty earthmoving equipment), steel-wheeled trains, and occasional traﬃc on rough roads. Problems with both ground-borne vibration and noise from these sources are usually localized to areas within approximately 100 feet from the vibration source, although there are examples of ground-borne vibration causing interference out to distances greater than 200 feet. When roadways

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-5
are smooth, vibration from traﬃc, even heavy trucks, is rarely perceptible. It is assumed for most projects that the roadway surface will be smooth enough that ground-borne vibration from street traﬃc will not exceed the impact criteria; however, both construction of the project and the freight train operations could result in ground-borne vibration that may be perceptible and annoying.

Ground-borne noise is not likely to be a problem because noise arriving via the normal airborne path will usually be greater than ground-borne noise.

Ground-borne vibration has the potential to disturb people and damage buildings. Although it is very rare for train-induced ground-borne vibration to cause even cosmetic building damage, it is not uncommon for construction processes such as blasting and pile-driving to cause vibration of suﬃcient amplitudes to damage nearby buildings. Ground-borne vibration is usually measured in terms of vibration velocity, either the root-mean-square (RMS) velocity or peak particle velocity (PPV). The RMS is best for characterizing human response to building vibration, and PPV is used to characterize potential for damage. Decibel notation acts to compress the range of numbers required to describe vibration. Vibration velocity level in decibels is deﬁned as:

L
v = 20 log10 [V/Vref]
where “Lv” is the vibration velocity in decibels (VdB), “V” is the RMS velocity amplitude, and “Vref” is the reference velocity amplitude, or 1 x 10-6 inches/second (in/sec) used in the United States.

Table 4.13.C illustrates human response to various vibration levels, as described in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA Manual).1 Table 4.13.C: Human Response to Diﬀerent Levels of Ground-Borne Noise and Vibration
Vibration
Velocity Level
Noise Level
Human Response Low
Frequency1
Mid
Frequency2
65 VdB 25 dBA 40 dBA
Approximate threshold of perception for many humans. Low-frequency sound is usually inaudible; mid-frequency sound is excessive for quiet sleeping areas.
75 VdB 35 dBA 50 dBA
Approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible. Many people ﬁnd transit vibration at this level unacceptable. Low-frequency noise is acceptable for sleeping areas; mid-frequency noise is annoying in most quiet occupied areas. 85 VdB 45 dBA 60 dBA
Vibration is acceptable only if there are an infrequent number of events per day. Low-frequency noise is unacceptable for sleeping areas; mid- frequency noise is unacceptable even for infrequent events with institutional land uses, such as schools and churches.

Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA 2018). 1 Approximate noise level when vibration spectrum peak is near 30 Hz. 2 Approximate noise level when vibration spectrum peak is near 60 Hz. dBA = A-weighted decibels
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
Hz = Hertz
VdB = vibration velocity decibels

1 Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. Oﬃce of Planning and Environment. Report No. 0123. September.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-6
Factors that inﬂuence ground-borne vibration and noise include:
• Vibration Source: Vehicle suspension, wheel types and condition, railroad track/roadway surface, railroad track support system, speed, transit structure, and depth of vibration source. • Vibration Path: Soil type, rock layers, soil layering, depth to water table, and frost depth. • Vibration Receiver: Foundation type, building construction, and acoustical absorption.

Among the factors listed above, there are signiﬁcant diﬀerences in the vibration characteristics when the source is underground compared to at the ground surface. In addition, soil conditions are known to have a strong inﬂuence on the levels of ground-borne vibration. Among the most important factors are the stiﬀness and internal damping of the soil and the depth to bedrock.

Experience with ground-borne vibration indicates (1) vibration propagation is more eﬃcient in stiﬀ, clay soils than in loose, sandy soils; and (2) shallow rock seems to concentrate the vibration energy close to the surface and can result in ground-borne vibration problems at large distances from a railroad track. Factors such as layering of the soil and the depth to the water table can have signiﬁcant eﬀects on the propagation of ground-borne vibration. Soft, loose, sandy soils tend to attenuate more vibration energy than hard, rocky materials. Vibration propagation through groundwater is more eﬃcient than through sandy soils.

4.13.2 Existing Environmental Setting
The study area for project impacts regarding noise is the City of Fresno Planning Area and the immediate surrounding areas including the county of Fresno, county of Madera, and city of Clovis because potential development under the proposed project could aﬀect areas inside and outside the Planning Area.

The study area for the analysis of cumulative noise impacts is similar to the study area for project impacts. The study area for cumulative noise impacts is the City of Fresno Planning Area and the immediate surrounding county of Fresno, county of Madera, and city of Clovis areas because cumulative development in the areas immediately surrounding the City of Fresno Planning Area could combine with development under the proposed project and result in cumulative noise impacts.

4.13.2.1 Existing Noise Levels
Generally, the three primary sources of substantial noise that aﬀect the city of Fresno and its residents are all transportation-related and consist of local streets and regional highways; airport operations at the Fresno Yosemite International, the Fresno-Chandler Downtown, and the Sierra Sky Park Airports; and railroad operations along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway and the Union Paciﬁc Railroad lines.

The existing noise conditions in the Planning Area were measured at nine locations from May 30 to June 1, 2012. Noise monitoring sites were selected to be representative of typical residential, commercial, and industrial sites within the Planning Area, as well as arterial roadways, elevated and

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-7
below-grade freeways, and railroad crossings with and without train horn soundings. At each of the nine long-term 24-hour noise monitoring sites, day-night statistical noise level trends were recorded to develop DNL values. Descriptions of each location and the measured noise levels are provided in Table 4.13.D.

Table 4.13.D: Measured Existing Noise Levels from Approved General Plan Location Distance from Noise
Source Centerline (feet)
Measured Noise
Level (dBA Ldn)
Railroad crossing at Shields Avenue 100 84
Along Railroad near W Barstow Avenue 100 74
SR 41 between W Barstow Avenue and W Shaw Avenue 100 76 SR 180 near N Peach Avenue 100 76
E Shaw Avenue near N Cedar Avenue 100 72
N Blackstone Avenue near E Ashlan Avenue 100 70
S Elm Avenue near E Jensen Avenue 100 68
N Valentine Avenue between W Ashlan Avenue and W Holland Avenue 100 67 S Fruit Avenue north of Church Avenue 100 65
Source: City of Fresno General Plan (2014).

4.13.2.2 Roadways
Those areas in the city that experience sound levels greater than 60 dBA Ldn are typically near major vehicular traﬃc corridors. Highway traﬃc noise levels typically depend on three factors: (1) the volume of traﬃc, (2) the average speed of traﬃc, and (3) the vehicle mix (i.e., the percentage of trucks versus automobiles in the traﬃc ﬂow). Vehicle noise includes noises produced by the engine, exhaust, tires, and wind generated by taller vehicles. Other factors that aﬀect the perception of traﬃc noise include the distance from the highway, terrain, vegetation, and natural and structural obstacles. While tire noise from automobiles is generally located at ground level, truck noise sources can be located as high as 10 to 15 feet above the roadbed due to tall exhaust stacks and higher engines.

Freeway traﬃc is the dominant noise source in Fresno. The freeways in Fresno consist of State Route (SR) 41. Although most noise sensitive land uses adjacent to these freeways are mitigated by existing sound walls, topography or buildings, there are still some noise sensitive land uses that currently exceed the City’s 60 dBA L
dn noise standard. In addition to the freeways, there are places throughout the city where traﬃc volumes on every roadway classiﬁcation are high enough to create noise levels that currently exceed the City’s 60 dBA L
dn noise standard at the sensitive land uses.

4.13.2.3 Airport Operations
There are currently three airports located within the city of Fresno and consist of Fresno Yosemite International Airport, Fresno-Chandler Downtown Airport (also known as the “Fresno-Chandler Executive Airport”), and Sierra Sky Park Airport. CNEL Noise contours have been developed and are provided in the Land Use Policy Plan prepared for the airport (refer to Section 4.13.5.3, Local Regulations and Policies, below). The Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan includes CNEL noise

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-8
contours based on projected airport and aircraft operations. These noise contours are used to determine land use compatibility and locations for noise mitigation measures.

Commercial jet aircraft operations are limited to the Fresno Yosemite International Airport. The Air National Guard is also stationed there and operates military jets and other aircraft. Private and commercial operations with smaller aircraft use the Fresno Chandler Downtown Airport, while only small private aircraft use the Sierra Sky Park Airport.

4.13.2.4 Railroad Operations
The two major rail lines that traverse the city are the Union Paciﬁc Railroad line, which is generally located along SR-99, and the BNSF Railway, which diverges from SR-99 in the southwest and travels through downtown (behind City Hall) to the northwest. The Union Paciﬁc line is generally located within a heavy commercial and industrial corridor, although residential uses occur in the vicinity of the line north of Shaw Avenue. The Union Paciﬁc line limits its use to only freight traﬃc.

South of the Downtown, the BNSF Railway is bound by industrial uses, while north of the Downtown the line is generally located within a residential area. The BNSF Railway carries both freight and passenger traﬃc (Amtrak).

4.13.2.5 Stationary Noise Sources
Stationary noise sources can also have an eﬀect on the population, and unlike mobile, transportation-related noise sources, these sources generally have a more permanent and consistent impact on people. These stationary noise sources involve a wide spectrum of uses and activities, including various industrial uses, commercial operations, agricultural production, school playgrounds, high school football games, HVAC units, generators, lawn maintenance equipment, and swimming pool pumps.

Even with incorporation of the best available noise control technology, noise emanating from industrial uses can be substantial and exceed local noise standards. These noise sources can be continuous and may contain tonal components that may be annoying to nearby receptors. Although industrial uses in the city of Fresno are typically located in industrial districts near freeways and commercial uses, and away from residences and other sensitive noise receptors, noise sources associated with commercial uses such as automotive repair facilities, recycling centers, and loading docks may occur in the vicinity of residential uses.

4.13.3 Regulatory Setting

4.13.3.1 Federal Policies and Regulations
United States Environmental Protection Agency. In 1972, Congress enacted the United States Noise Control Act. This act authorized the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to publish descriptive data on the eﬀects of noise and establish levels of sound “requisite to protect the public welfare with an adequate margin of safety.” These levels are separated into health (hearing loss levels) and welfare (annoyance levels), as shown in Table 4.13.E. The USEPA cautions that these identiﬁed levels are not standards because they do not take into account the cost or feasibility of the levels.

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-9
For protection against hearing loss, 96 percent of the population would be protected if sound levels were less than or equal to an Leq(24) of 70 dBA. The “(24)” signiﬁes an Leq duration of 24 hours. The USEPA activity and interference guidelines are designed to ensure reliable speech communication at about 5 feet in the outdoor environment. For outdoor and indoor environments, interference with activity and annoyance should not occur if levels are below 55 dBA and 45 dBA, respectively.

Table 4.13.E: Summary of USEPA Noise Levels
Eﬀect Level Area
Hearing loss Leq(24) < 70 dB All areas.

Outdoor activity
interference and annoyance
Ldn < 55 dB
Outdoors in residential areas and farms and other outdoor areas where people spend widely varying amounts of time and other places in which quiet is a basis for use.

Leq(24) < 55 dB Outdoor areas where people spend limited amounts of time, such as school yards, playgrounds, etc.

Indoor activity interference
and annoyance
Leq < 45 dB Indoor residential areas.

Leq(24) < 45 dB Other indoor areas with human activities such as schools, etc.

Source: Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety (United States Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] March 1974). dB = decibels
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency

Table 4.13.F summarizes the noise eﬀects associated with an outdoor Ldn of 55 dBA. At 55 dBA Ldn, 95 percent sentence clarity (intelligibility) may be expected at 11 feet, with no community reaction.

However, 1 percent of the population may complain about noise at this level, and 17 percent may indicate annoyance.

Table 4.13.F: Summary of Human Eﬀects in Areas Exposed to 55 dBA CNEL Type of Eﬀect Magnitude of Eﬀect
Speech – Indoors 100 percent sentence intelligibility (average) with a 5 dB margin of safety.

Speech – Outdoors
100 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 0.35 meter (1.14 feet). 99 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 1.0 meter (3.28 feet). 95 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 3.5 meters (11.5 feet).

Average Community Reaction None evident; 7 dB below level of signiﬁcant complaints and threats of legal action and at least 16 dB below “vigorous action.”
Complaints 1 percent dependent on attitude and other non-level related factors.

Annoyance 17 percent dependent on attitude and other non-level related factors.

Attitude Towards Area Noise essentially the least important of various factors.

CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB = decibels
dBA = A-weighted decibels

Federal Transit Administration. Vibration standards included in the Federal Transit Administration’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA Manual) are used in this analysis for ground-borne vibration impacts on human annoyance, as shown in Table 4.13.G. The criteria

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-10
presented in Table 4.13.G account for the variations in project types, which diﬀer widely among projects.

The criteria for environmental impact from ground-borne vibration and noise are based on the maximum levels for a single event. Table 4.13.H lists the potential vibration building damage criteria associated with construction activities, as suggested in the FTA Manual.

Table 4.13.G: Interpretation of Vibration Criteria for Detailed Analysis Land Use Max Lv
(VdB)1 Description of Use
Workshop 90 Vibration that is distinctly felt. Appropriate for workshops and similar areas not as sensitive to vibration.

Oﬃce 84 Vibration that can be felt. Appropriate for oﬃces and similar areas not as sensitive to vibration.

Residential Day 78 Vibration that is barely felt. Adequate for computer equipment and low-power optical microscopes (up to 20×).

Residential Night and
Operating Rooms
72 Vibration is not felt, but ground-borne noise may be audible inside quiet rooms. Suitable for medium-power microscopes (100×) and other equipment of low sensitivity.

Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018). 1 As measured in 1/3-Octave bands of frequency over the frequency range 8 to 80 Hertz.

FTA = Federal Transit Administration
LV = velocity in decibels
Max = maximum
VdB = vibration velocity decibels

Table 4.13.H: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria
Building Category PPV (in/sec) Approximate LV
(VdB)1
Reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.50 102 Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.30 98
Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.20 94
Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 90 Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA 2018). 1 RMS vibration velocity in decibels (VdB) re 1 µin/sec. µin/sec = microinches per second
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
in/sec = inch/inches per second
LV = velocity in decibels
PPV = peak particle velocity
RMS = root-mean-square
VdB = vibration velocity decibels

FTA Manual guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 0.5 in/sec in PPV is considered safe for buildings consisting of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster), and would not result in any construction vibration damage. For a non-engineered (those not designed by an engineer or architect) timber and masonry building, the construction building vibration damage criterion is

0.2 in/sec in PPV.

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-11

4.13.3.2 State Policies and Regulations
The State of California has established regulations that help prevent adverse impacts to occupants of buildings near noise sources. Referred to as the State Noise Insulation Standard, it requires noise- sensitive land uses to meet performance standards through design and/or building materials that would oﬀset any noise source in the vicinity of the building. Chapter 5, Section 5.507 of the California Green Building Standards Code includes nonresidential mandatory measures, which require that buildings exposed to a noise level of 65 dB L eq-1-hour during any hour of operation shall
have building, addition, or alteration exterior wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the noise source meeting a composite Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 45 (or Outdoor/Indoor Transmission Class [OITC] 35) with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 (or OITC 30).

The State has also established land use compatibility guidelines for determining acceptable noise levels for speciﬁed land uses, as shown in Table 4.13.H.

4.13.3.3 Local Policies and Regulations
City of Fresno General Plan. The City of Fresno’s General Plan Noise and Safety Element includes objectives and policies that work to protect the citizens of Fresno from the harmful and annoying eﬀects of exposure to excessive noise. Policies related to noise applicable to the proposed project are listed below. In addition, Noise and Safety Element noise standards for transportation and stationary noise sources are listed below.

Policy NS-1-a: Desirable and Generally Acceptable Exterior Noise Environment. Establish 65 dBA L
dn or CNEL as the standard for the desirable maximum average exterior noise levels for deﬁned usable exterior areas of residential and noise-sensitive uses for noise, but designate 60 dBA Ldn or CNEL (measured at the property line) for noise generated by stationary sources impinging upon residential and noise-sensitive uses. Maintain 65 dBA Ldn or CNEL as the maximum average exterior noise levels for non-sensitive commercial land uses, and maintain 70 dBA Ldn or CNEL as maximum average exterior noise level for industrial land uses, both to be measured at the property line of parcels where noise is generated which may impinge on neighboring properties.

Policy NS-1-b: Conditionally Acceptable Exterior Noise Exposure Range. Establish the conditionally acceptable noise exposure level range for residential and other noise sensitive uses to be 65 dB L
dn or require appropriate noise reducing mitigation measures as determined by a site-speciﬁc acoustical analysis to comply with the desirable and conditionally acceptable exterior noise level and the required interior noise level standards set in Table 4.13.H.

Policy NS-1-c: Generally Unacceptable Exterior Noise Exposure Range. Establish the exterior noise exposure of greater than 65 dB Ldn or CNEL to be generally unacceptable for residential and other noise sensitive uses for noise generated by sources in Policy NS-1-a, and study alternative less noise-sensitive uses for these areas if otherwise appropriate. Require appropriate noise reducing mitigation measures as determined by a site-speciﬁc acoustical analysis to comply with the generally desirable or generally acceptable exterior noise level and the required 45 dB interior noise level standards set in Table 4.13.H as conditions of permit approval.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-12
Policy NS-1-d: Allowable Exterior Noise Environment for BRT and Activity Centers. Exclude residential and noise sensitive uses located along Bus Rapid Transit corridors or within Activity Centers identiﬁed by this General Plan, from exterior noise standards in Policies NS-1-a through NS-1-c where it is determined application of noise mitigation measures will be detrimental to the realization of the General Plan's mixed use policies.

Policy NS-1-g: Noise mitigation measures which help achieve the noise level targets of this plan include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Façades with substantial weight and insulation;
• Installation of sound-rated windows for primary sleeping and activity areas; • Installation of sound-rated doors for all exterior entries at primary sleeping and activity areas;
• Greater building setbacks and exterior barriers;
• Acoustic baﬄing of vents for chimneys, attic and gable ends; • Installation of mechanical ventilation systems that provide fresh air under closed window conditions.

The aforementioned measures are not exhaustive and alternative designs may be approved by the City, provided that a qualiﬁed Acoustical Consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative design(s) will achieve and maintain the speciﬁc targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces.

Policy NS-1-h: Interior Noise Level Requirement. Comply with the State Code requirement that any new multifamily residential, hotel, or dorm buildings must be designed to incorporate noise reduction measures to meet the 45 dB L
dn interior noise criterion, and apply this standard as well to all new single-family residential and noise sensitive uses.

Policy NS-1-i: Mitigation by New Development. Require an acoustical analysis where new development of industrial, commercial, or other noise generating land uses (including transportation facilities such as roadways, railroads, and airports) may result in noise levels that exceed the noise level exposure criteria established by Tables 4.13.I and 4.3.J to determine impacts and require developers to mitigate these impacts in conformance with Tables 4.13.I and

4.13.J as a condition of permit approval through appropriate means. Noise mitigation measures may include:
• The screening of noise sources such as parking and loading facilities, outdoor activities, and mechanical equipment;
• Providing increased setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings;

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-13
• Installation of walls and landscaping that serve as noise buﬀers; • Installation of soundprooﬁng materials and double-glazed windows; and • Regulating operations, such as hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup.

Table 4.13.I: Transportation (Non-Aircraft) Noise Sources Noise-Sensitive Land Use1 Outdoor Activity Areas2 Interior Spaces Ldn/CNEL, dB Ldn/CNEL, dB Leq dB2
Residential 65 45 -
Transient Lodging 65 45 -
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 65 45 -
Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls - - 35
Churches, Meeting Halls 65 - 45
Oﬃce Buildings - - 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums - - 45
Source: General Plan (City of Fresno, 2014).
1 Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown or is not applicable, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the property line of the receiving land use. 2 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.

CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB = decibels
Ldn = day-night average noise level

Table 4.13.J: Stationary Noise Sources
Daytime
(7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (Leq),
dBA 50 45
Maximum Sound Level (Lmax), dBA 70 60
Source: General Plan (City of Fresno, 2014).
1 The Planning and Development Director, on a case-by-case basis, may designate land uses other than those shown in this table to be noise-sensitive, and may require appropriate noise mitigation measures. 2 As determined at outdoor activity areas. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown or not applicable, the noise exposure standard shall be applied at the property line of the receiving land use.

When ambient noise levels exceed or equal the levels in this table, mitigation shall only be required to limit noise to the ambient plus ﬁve dB.
dB = decibels
dBA = A-weighted decibels

Alternative acoustical designs that achieve the prescribed noise level reduction may be approved by the City, provided a qualiﬁed Acoustical Consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative designs will achieve and maintain the speciﬁc targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces. As a last resort, developers may propose to construct noise walls along roadways when compatible with aesthetic concerns and neighborhood character. This would be a developer responsibility, with no City funding.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-14
Policy NS-1-j: Signiﬁcance Threshold. Establish, as a threshold of signiﬁcance for the City's environmental review process, that a signiﬁcant increase in ambient noise levels is assumed if the project would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity by 3 dB Ldn or CNEL or more above the ambient noise limits established in this General Plan Update.

Policy NS-1-k: Proposal Review. Review all new public and private development proposals that may potentially be aﬀected by or cause a signiﬁcant increase in noise levels, per Policy NS-1-i, to determine conformance with the policies of this Noise Element. Require developers to reduce the noise impacts of new development on adjacent properties through appropriate means.

Policy NS-1-m: Transportation Related Noise Impacts. For projects subject to City approval, require that the project sponsor mitigate noise created by new transportation and transportation-related stationary noise sources, including roadway improvement projects, so that resulting noise levels do not exceed the City’s adopted standards for noise-sensitive land uses.

Policy NS-1-n: Best Available Technology. Require new noise sources to use best available control technology to minimize noise emissions.

Policy NS-1-o: Sound Wall Guidelines. Acoustical studies and noise mitigation measures for projects shall specify the heights, materials, and design for sound walls and other noise barriers.

Aesthetic considerations shall also be addressed in these studies and mitigation measures such as variable noise barrier heights, a combination of a landscaped berm with wall, and reduced barrier height in combination with increased distance or elevation diﬀerences between noise source and noise receptor, with a maximum allowable height of 15 feet. The City will develop guidelines for aesthetic design measures of sound walls, and may commission area wide noise mitigation studies that can serve as templates for acoustical treatment that can be applied to similar situations in the urban area.

City of Fresno Municipal Code. Chapter 10, Article 1 of the Fresno Municipal Code (i.e., City’s Noise Ordinance) establishes excessive noise guidelines and exemptions. Standards are set for ambient noise based on district type (residential, commercial, and industrial) and time of day, as shown in Table 4.13.K below.

Table 4.13.K : Ambient Noise Standards in Decibels
District (7:00 a.m. – 7:00 p.m.) (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) (10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m.) Residential 60 55 50
Commercial 65 65 60
Industrial 70 70 70
Source: City of Fresno (January 2024).

Section 10-109 of the Municipal Code also addresses construction activity noise and states that construction activity noise is exempt from the noise standards when work takes place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any day except Sunday.

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-15
Airport Land Use Commission of Fresno County. The Airport Land Use Commission of Fresno County adopted the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) on December 3, 2018. This document represents an update of the state-mandated ALUCP for the environs of the nine public use airports in Fresno County. The Fresno County public use airports include Coalinga Municipal, Firebaugh, Fresno Chandler Executive, Fresno Yosemite International, Harris Ranch, Reedley Municipal, Selma, Sierra Sky Park, and William Robert Johnston Municipal. The ALUCP includes policies designed to regulate the compatibility of land uses surrounding the airport and associated operations. In addition, the ALUCP provides compatibility policies and sets Airport/Land Use Noise Compatibility Criteria to avoid establishment of new noise- sensitive land uses and exposure of the users to levels of aircraft noise that can disrupt activities involved and establishes noise contours for the purpose of evaluating noise compatibility of land use.

4.13.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to noise and vibration that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of signiﬁcance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is signiﬁcant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for signiﬁcant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less-than-signiﬁcant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.13.4.1 Signiﬁcance Criteria
The thresholds for impacts related to noise used in this analysis are consistent with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Development of the proposed project would result in a signiﬁcant impact related to noise if it would:
a. Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;
b. Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip 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, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

4.13.4.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to noise that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

NOI-1 The project could generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-16
Short-Term Construction Impacts. The proposed program would fund future VMT-reducing transportation improvements within the City, which would generate noise during construction activities. Construction noise levels are dependent upon the speciﬁc locations, site plans, and construction details of individual VMT improvements. Given the programmatic level of the proposed project, construction-related noise impacts that may occur at any one time are speculative and cannot be accurately determined at this stage of the planning process. Construction would be localized and would occur intermittently for varying periods of time. Because speciﬁc project-level information is not available at this time, it is not possible to quantify the construction noise impacts at speciﬁc sensitive receptors. Construction of individual transportation improvements funded by the proposed program could temporarily increase the ambient noise environment in the vicinity of each individual project. However, all future transportation improvements, including those implemented as part of development projects, would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA (e.g., preparation of a Categorical Exemption, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report) to evaluate project-speciﬁc construction noise impacts and identify any required mitigation. Moreover, based on the range of VMT-reducing facilities potentially funded by the proposed project, the majority of potential future improvements would be limited in scope and scale (e.g., sidewalk/path improvements, signal/crosswalk enhancements, etc.), requiring a limited range of construction equipment and a brief construction duration.

As set forth by Chapter 10, Article 1, Section 10-109 – Exemptions, the provisions of Article 1 – Noise Regulations of the Fresno Municipal Code shall not apply to:

Construction, repair or remodeling work accomplished pursuant to a building, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, or other construction permit issued by the city or other governmental agency, or to site preparation and grading, provided such work takes place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any day except Sunday.

Construction impacts would be further reduced through implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI- 1 which would require construction best management practices (BMPs). Speciﬁcally, Mitigation Measure NOI- 1 would require that all construction equipment be equipped with properly operating and maintained muﬄers, locate stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest noise sensitive receptors, locate equipment staging in areas furthest away from sensitive receptors, and limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours speciﬁed for construction equipment. Therefore, compliance with Noise Regulations of the Fresno Municipal Code and implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce short-term construction noise impacts to less than signiﬁcant levels.

Mobile Sources. The purpose of the proposed program is to establish a mitigation fee mechanism for development projects that trigger a potentially signiﬁcant VMT impact under CEQA, and to utilize collected funds towards future VMT-reducing transportation improvements to reduce Citywide VMT.

As such, the proposed program is not considered a trip-generating land use project. The majority of potential transportation improvements would not increase traﬃc volumes or cause an increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity.

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-17
For example, pedestrian improvements to underserved neighborhoods would not result in long-term mobile noise impacts.

Further, the transportation improvements would be required to implement any required mitigation measures on a project-by-project basis, as applicable, pursuant to CEQA provisions. Impacts would be less than signiﬁcant in this regard.

Stationary Sources. Stationary noise sources are generally associated with residential, commercial, and industrial developments involving mechanical equipment, loading areas, parking areas, heating, and ventilation units, etc. Due to the scope and nature of the proposed project (VMT-reducing transportation improvements), no long-term stationary noise impacts are anticipated to occur. No noise-generating stationary operations are anticipated. Therefore, the proposed project would result in less than signiﬁcant impacts in this regard.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1 Each transportation improvement funded by the proposed program subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review shall ensure through contract specifications that construction best management practices (BMPs) are implemented by construction contractors to reduce construction noise levels. Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Fresno Planning and Development Director prior to issuance of a grading or building permit (whichever is issued first). BMPs to reduce construction noise levels may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Ensure that construction equipment is properly muﬄed
according to industry standards and is in good working
condition.
• Place noise-generating construction equipment and
construction staging areas away from sensitive uses.
• Construction activities shall occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, pursuant to Section 10-109 of the City of Fresno Municipal Code.
• Implement noise attenuation measures, as needed, which may include, but are not limited to, temporary noise barriers or noise blankets around stationary construction noise sources.
• Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment, where feasible.
• Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty
equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned oﬀ when not in use for more than ﬁve minutes.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-18
• The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours speciﬁed for construction equipment (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through
Saturday). The haul route exhibit shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck-related noise.
• Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow surrounding owners and
residents to contact the job superintendent. If the City or the job superintendent receives a complaint, the superintendent shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action taken to the reporting party and the Director of Development.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.

NOI-2 The project could generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

Ground vibration generated by construction equipment and transportation sources spreads through the ground and diminishes in strength with distance. The eﬀects of ground vibration can vary from no perceptible eﬀects at the lowest levels, low rumbling sounds and detectable vibrations at moderate levels, and slight damage to nearby structures at the highest levels. At the highest levels of vibration, damage to structures is primarily architectural (e.g., loosening and cracking of plaster or stucco coatings) and rarely results in structural damage.

Construction activities associated with projects that could occur under the approved General Plan could result in exposure of sensitive land uses to excessive groundborne vibration and noise levels.

Problems, such as disturbance, due to groundborne vibration and noise from these sources are usually contained to areas within about 100 feet of the vibration source. 2 Typically, the main eﬀect of
groundborne vibration and noise is to cause annoyances for occupants of nearby buildings.

Implementation of the approved General Plan would allow for inﬁll development in more densely developed areas where oﬀsite structures would be more prevalent. Even during these occurrences, the mandatory buﬀers set forth by the City of Fresno Development Code (e.g., setbacks, easements, right-of-ways) would ensure that in most cases onsite and oﬀsite structures would be separated by at least 25 feet, and thus construction activities would be buﬀered by at least 25 feet from existing oﬀsite structures. However, if construction activities would occur within 25 feet of existing structures, short-term construction impacts associated with groundborne vibration would be potentially signiﬁcant. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would be required to increase the distance between heavy construction equipment and the surrounding structures to a minimum of 25 feet. Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2, would ensure that construction

2 U.S. Department of Transportation, 1995. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. April.

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.13-19
vibration level would be below the threshold of 0.2 in/sec PPV for building damage and would reduce impacts to a less-than-signiﬁcant level.

Mitigation Measure NOI-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, each transportation improvement funded by the proposed program subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review with construction activities requiring operation of groundborne vibration generating equipment (i.e., vibratory compactor/roller, large bulldozer, caisson drilling, loaded trucks, and jackhammer) within 25 feet of an existing structure shall be required to prepare a project-specific vibration impact analysis to evaluate potential construction vibration impacts associated with the project, and to determine any specific vibration control mechanisms that shall be incorporated into the project’s construction bid documents to reduce such impacts. Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.

NOI-3 The proposed would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

One public commercial airport, Fresno Yosemite International Airport, and two public general aviation airports, Fresno-Chandler Downtown Airport, and Sierra Sky Park Airport, are located in the city of Fresno. Future improvements associated with the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable noise standard requirements if the future improvements are located within Fresno County ALUCP . Additionally, given the nature of future transportation improvements, the improvements would not introduce new residents or employees to the area. Thus, the proposed project would not expose people to excessive noise levels, and less-than-signiﬁcant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

4.13.4.3 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 requires an analysis of cumulative impacts, which are deﬁned as, “two or more individual eﬀects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The cumulative analysis below considers the proposed project’s impacts in conjunction with future buildout of the General Plan.

NOI-4 The project, in combination with other projects, could contribute to a signiﬁcant cumulative impact related to noise.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 202 5

4.13-20
Construction. Construction activities associated with the proposed project and cumulative projects may overlap, resulting in construction noise in the area. However, construction noise impacts primarily aﬀect the areas immediately adjacent to the construction site. As previously discussed, future VMT-reducing transportation improvements within the City would generate noise during construction activities. However, all future improvements would undergo environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-speciﬁc construction noise impacts and identify any required mitigation. Further, implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would ensure BMPs related to construction noise are implemented to further reduce such impacts. Future construction activities associated with cumulative development projects in accordance with the General Plan would also be required to comply with the Municipal Code and incorporate mitigation measures on a project-by- project basis, as applicable, to reduce construction noise pursuant to CEQA provisions. Therefore, the project’s contribution to cumulative noise impacts would be less than signiﬁcant with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1.

Vibration. As discussed above, project-related construction and operational activities would not generate groundborne vibration on-site above the signiﬁcance criteria (i.e. 0.2 in-per-second PPV threshold as established by Caltrans) with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2.

Groundborne vibration generated from cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo environmental review under CEQA to determine project- speciﬁc impacts and any required mitigation measures on a project-by-project basis. Therefore, the project’s contribution to cumulative vibration impacts would be less than signiﬁcant with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2.

Mobile Noise. The project’s potential traﬃc redistribution noise levels would not exceed the established signiﬁcance criteria (i.e., 3.0 dB increase and exceedance of 65 dBA CNEL). Traﬃc noise generated from cumulative development projects would be required to implement any required mitigation measures on a project-by-project basis, as applicable, pursuant to CEQA provisions.

Therefore, the proposed project, in combination with cumulative traﬃc noise levels, would result in less than signiﬁcant impacts.

Stationary Noise. Although cumulative development could occur in proximity to future transportation improvements implemented under the proposed project, the proposed transportation improvements would not involve stationary noise sources. Further, each cumulative project would require separate discretionary approval and CEQA analysis, which would address potential noise impacts and identify necessary attenuation measures, where appropriate.

Additionally, as noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, noise impacts from stationary sources would be limited to each of the respective sites and their vicinities. Thus, the project and any cumulative development in the project vicinity are not anticipated to result in a signiﬁcant cumulative impact. A less than signiﬁcant impact would occur in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure NOI-1 and Mitigation Measure NOI-2.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.

4.14-1

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
This section provides an evaluation of the potential environmental effects related to population and housing associated with implementation of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program (proposed project).

4.14.1 Existing Environmental Setting
The study area for project impacts regarding population and housing is the Planning Area established by the City’s General Plan because potential development under the proposed project is limited to areas within the Planning Area. The Planning Area established by the City includes all areas within the city’s current city limits, including the Fresno‐Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), the areas within the current Sphere of Influence (SOI), and an area north of the city’s most northeasterly portion of the city (referred to as the North Area).

In 1885, the city of Fresno was incorporated and had a population of 10,000 by 1890. Based on 2025 population estimates by the California Department of Finance, Fresno was the fifth largest city in the state of California with 557,032.1 Centrally located within the Central San Joaquin Valley, Fresno is the financial, industrial, trade, and commercial capital in the region.

The current Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) Fresno Regional Transportation Plan (2022) utilized population projections for Fresno county identified in the Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections prepared for Fresno COG in May 2017.2 The population estimates for the county are provided in Table 4.14.A. The Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections only forecasted population to 2050, but based on the growth forecasted for the previous five years (i.e., between 2040 and 2045), a similar growth rate was used to forecast growth between 2050 and 2055. In addition, a similar growth rate was used to project the population for one additional year to 2056.

1 United States Census Bureau. QuickFacts. Fresno city, California. Website: https://www.census.gov/ quickfacts/fact/table/fresnocitycalifornia/PST120223 (accessed May 2024). 2 Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG). 2017. Executive Summary ‐ Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections. May 4. Website: https://www.fresnocog.org/wp‐content/uploads/publications/ Demographics/Fresno_COG_2050_Projections_Exec_Sum_0517.pdf (accessed May 2024).

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.14-2
Table 4.14.A: Population Estimate for City of Fresno Planning Area Year Population Estimate for County of Fresno Population Estimate for City of Fresno Planning Area 2015 972,3001 583,3802
2020 1,047,4401 628,4642
2025 1,122,8401 673,7042
2030 1,191,8501 715,1102
2035 1,258,8601 755,3162
2040 1,323,0701 793,8422
2045 1,383,6901 830,2142
2050 1,447,0901 868,2542
2055 1,519,4453 911,6672
2056 1,535,0954 921,0572
Source: City of Fresno (2019).
1 Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections, Fresno Council of Governments, Table 1. 2 Planning Area population estimate is 60 percent of the County’s population. 3 Estimated County Population in 2055 based upon previous 5 year growth increments of approximately 5%. 4 The one‐year growth increment used for 2056 was approximately 1.03%, which was generally a similar increment if the growth. increment was extended over 5‐years, and it was based upon the previous 5‐year growth of approximately 5%.

Historically, the population within the City of Fresno Planning Area has been approximately 60 percent of the population within the county of Fresno. This population percentage of 60 percent was used to provide a population forecast for the Planning Area, as shown in Table 4.14.A. In 2024, Fresno COG published new estimates prepared by Applied Development Economics, Inc for the upcoming RTP update in 2026. These estimates forecast the City of Fresno population to be 648,980 by 2055 (0.24% growth rate). In 2025, the Department of Finance (DOF) projected the City of Fresno’s population to be 718,074 by 2055 (assuming a city share of 63% of the county population).

The Department of Finance is tracking population growth of California cities annually and documented that over the last year, the city’s population increased by 4,281, a 0.77% growth rate).3

4.14.1.1 Employees to Housing Ratio
An important indicator of providing adequate housing within a community is to determine the number of employees who currently reside there compared to the number of occupied housing units. As shown in Table 4.14.B below, the employees to occupied housing ratio estimate for Fresno County in has generally remained stable between 2019 and 2022 at 1.33.

3 Fresno Council of Governments. 2024. Fresno County 2023‐2060. Growth Projections Website:
https://www.fresnocog.org/wp‐content/uploads/2023/11/2024‐Fresno‐COG‐2023‐2060‐Growth‐ Projections‐REPORT.pdf (accessed June 2025).

4.14-3

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Table 4.14.B: Employees per Occupied Housing Unit in Fresno County Year Number of Employees Living in
Fresno County
Number of Occupied Housing Units
in Fresno County
Employees per Occupied Housing
Unit Ratio
2019 407,5111 307,1422 1.33
2020 408,6251 310,0972 1.32
2021 415,6691 314,4212 1.32
2022 423,3991 318,3222 1.33
Sources:
1 United States Census Bureau. Table DP‐3 – Selected Economic Characteristics. Fresno County, California. Website:
https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP1Y2019.DP03?q=DP03&g=050XX00US06019 (accessed May 2024). 2 United States Census Bureau. Table DP04 – Selected Housing Characteristics. Fresno County, California. Website:
https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP5Y2019.DP04?q=DP04&g=050XX00US06019 (accessed May 2024).

4.14.1.2 Jobs to Housing Ratio
An additional housing indicator for Fresno County is to determine the number of jobs within the county compared to the total number of housing units within the county. Employment and housing estimates for the county were identified in the Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections. The Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections only forecasted job and housing growth to 2050, but based on the growth forecasted for the previous five years (i.e., between 2040 and 2045), a similar growth rate was used to forecast growth between 2050 and 2055. In addition, a similar growth rate was used to project the job and housing growth for one additional year to 2056, the estimated buildout date for the General Plan. Table 4.14.C below shows that the projected job estimate under buildout conditions within Fresno county is 533,812 jobs by 2056. The projected total number of housing units in the county under full buildout conditions is 450,832 housing units by 2056. The jobs per housing unit ratio is projected to decrease from 1.24 in 2015 to 1.18 in 2056 indicating that there will be fewer jobs per housing unit under projected conditions.

Table 4.14.C: Number of Jobs per Housing Unit in Fresno County Year Number of Jobs in Fresno County Total Number of Housing Units in Fresno County Jobs Per Housing Unit Ratio
2015 372,4001 299,4502 1.24
2020 398,1001 328,3002 1.21
2025 422,0001 348,1202 1.21
2030 441,2001 362,8602 1.22
2035 460,1001 375,2902 1.23
2040 476,8001 388,9302 1.23
2045 491,3001 405,2602 1.21
2050 506,3001 424,4802 1.19
2055 529,0563 446,2544 1.19
2056 533,8125 450,8326 1.18
Sources:
1 Fresno County Council of Governments. 2017. Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections. Table 1. 2 Fresno County Council of Governments. 2017. Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections. Table 9. 3 Number of Jobs in Fresno County in 2055 is based upon previous 5‐year growth increments of approximately 4.49%. 4 Total Number of Housing Units in Fresno County in 2055 is based upon previous 5‐year growth increments of approximately 5.13% 5 The one‐year growth increment used for 2056 was approximately 1.03%, which was generally a similar increment if the growth increment was extended over 5‐years, and it was based upon the previous 5‐year growth of approximately 5%. 6 The one‐year growth increment used for 2056 was approximately 0.90%, which was generally a similar increment if the growth increment was extended over 5‐years, and it was based upon the previous 5‐year growth of approximately 5%.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.14-4
When comparing the number of employees and jobs in Tables 4.14.B and 4.14.C, the data shows that in the year 2020, there were a greater number of employees who lived in Fresno county (408,625 employees) compared to the number of jobs in Fresno county (398,100). Therefore, some employees who lived in Fresno county travelled outside the county to their place of employment.

4.14.2 Methodology
The potential project‐related impacts related to population and housing were evaluated on a qualitative basis due to the programmatic nature of this EIR. Qualitative impacts were assessed by evaluating the project’s potential for impacting population and housing within the Planning Area.

4.14.3 Regulatory Setting

4.14.3.1 Federal Policies and Regulations
No federal policies or regulations pertaining to population and housing are applicable to the proposed project.

4.14.3.2 State Policies and Regulations
2017 Legislative Housing Package. In 2017, Governor Jerry Brown signed a housing package that consisted of 15 bills aimed at addressing the State’s affordable housing crises. While each of these bills takes different approaches to increasing the supply of affordable housing units, several bills aim to facilitate privately funded housing by streamlining local and environmental review processes for certain types of high‐priority housing developments.

Senate Bill 35. Senate Bill (SB) 35 requires cities and counties to follow a streamlined local review process for particular housing projects if the city or county has failed to meet established goals for accommodating a fair share of new housing development, as identified in the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). SB 35 requires cities and counties to streamline the review and approval of certain affordable housing projects by providing a ministerial process to approve such processes, thereby removing the requirement for CEQA review. Under this process, a project applicant may request a streamlined review and a ministerial approval if a project meets specific eligibility criteria. SB 35 also requires local jurisdictions to report more complete information about their progress in meeting housing goals to the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

4.14.3.3 Regional Policies and Regulations
Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG). Fresno COG is a voluntary association of local governments, one of California’s 38 regional planning agencies, and one of more than 500 nationwide. Regional planning agencies such as Fresno COG recognize that planning issues extend beyond the boundaries of individual cities. Efforts to address regional planning issues such as affordable housing, transportation, and air pollution have resulted in the adoption of regional plans that affect the City of Fresno.

Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy. Fresno COG prepares a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), a long‐range planning document that defines how the

4.14-5

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

region plans to invest in the transportation system over the next 20 years or more. The RTP is based on regional goals, multi‐modal transportation needs for people and goods, and estimates of available funding. Fresno COG’s first RTP was adopted in 1975. Updated editions are required every four years, with the latest version being the 2022 RTP , which charts regional transportation’s long‐range vision through 2046.

California’s Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) encourages coordinated transportation and land‐use planning to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and requires each metropolitan planning organization (MPO) to prepare a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) as an integrated element of the regional transportation plan (RTP) that is updated every four years. The SCS is intended to identify integrated land‐use and transportation strategies that lower per capita GHG emissions from cars and light duty trucks, and foster communities that are more equitable, healthy, and sustainable. Under SB 375, an SCS must:
• Set forth a future land‐use pattern that, if implemented, will meet the GHG emission reduction targets when integrated with the proposed transportation network • Accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) determination • Use the most recent planning assumptions
The 2022 SCS is Fresno COG’s third SCS; the first was adopted in 2014 and the second in 2018.

The 2022 SCS builds on lessons learned in the previous SCSs, as well as advancements in approaches and strategies, modeling tools and capabilities, an updated growth regional forecast, and new GHG emission reduction targets.

Growth Forecasts. Fresno COG prepared the Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections report in 2017 to assist with updating the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) as well as the Sustainable Communities Plan (SCP). The report provides growth projections for Fresno County and the spheres of influence of each of its cities between 2015 and 2050. Growth projections provided include both population and employment projections for the Fresno County region.

4.14.3.4 Local Policies and Regulation
City of Fresno General Plan. The General Plan is a set of policies and programs that form a blueprint for the physical development of the city. The following objectives and policies related to population and housing are contained in the City’s Housing Element and are applicable to the project:

Housing Element. Housing Elements are the only elements of general plans that require approval and certification by a state agency, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Due to the nature of economic cycles related to real estate, housing elements are on a 5‐to‐8‐year cycle, and are often updated independent of the general plan.

Currently, the County of Fresno and 14 cities in Fresno County including the City of Fresno are completing a Multi‐Jurisdictional Housing Element for the 6th round of housing element

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.14-6
updates. Fresno COG is helping to coordinate the effort. The Multi‐Jurisdictional Housing Element covers the planning period of December 31, 2023, through December 31, 2031. The Fresno City Council adopted Fresno’s 6th Cycle Multi‐Jurisdictional Housing Element and Fresno Appendix on December 12, 2024 and HCD certified it on January 21, 2025. 2024 Housing Element Policies. The following Fresno Housing Element policies that address transportation are the following:
• Policy 1.6: Promote development of higher‐density housing, mixed‐use, and transit‐oriented development in areas located along major transportation corridors and transit routes and served by the necessary infrastructure.
• Policy 1.7: Ensure the adequate provision of water, sewer, storm drainage, roads, public facilities, and other infrastructure necessary to serve new housing. • Policy 1.9: Encourage development around employment centers that provides the opportunity for local residents to live and work in the same community by balancing job opportunities with housing types.

In addition, Housing Element Program 31 will determine the unit percentage threshold to allow affordable housing projects to be exempt from Vehicle Miles Traveled fees. The objective of this program is to reduce costs and application processing times associated with VMT analysis for new developments that include affordable housing and support improvements for active transportation infrastructure.

4.14.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to population and housing that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of significance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is significant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for significant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less‐than‐significant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.14.4.1 Significance Criteria
The thresholds for impacts related to population and housing used in this analysis are consistent with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Development of the proposed project would result in a significant impact related to population and housing if it would:
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); or
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

4.14-7

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.14.4.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to population and housing that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

POP-1 The proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure).

The proposed project consists of the adoption of the Fresno VMT Reduction Program which aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank. The program would identify, quantify, and prioritize applicable mitigation measures and relevant VMT‐reducing projects within the City to be funded by the proposed mitigation bank.

The proposed project would not result in any physical improvements or change the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area. As such, the proposed project would not result in population growth within the City, either directly or indirectly.

The adoption of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program would support future multi‐modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT‐reducing projects identified by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be required to conduct project‐specific environmental analyses to assess potential impacts to population and housing. However, these future projects would not include residential components that would directly contribute to growth in the City. Future improvements may include the extension and widening of roadways within the Planning Area, but such projects would be required to identify and address potential impacts with appropriate mitigation measures once they are proposed for development.

As such, the proposed project would not result in direct or indirect unplanned population growth, and the impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

POP-2 The proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

The proposed project consists of the adoption of the Fresno VMT Reduction Program which aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank. The proposed project would not include physical improvements that could displace people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing within the Planning Area.

However, the adoption of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program would support future multi‐ modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT‐reducing projects identified by the Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be required to conduct project‐ specific environmental analyses to assess potential impacts to population and housing, as well as provide appropriate mitigation measures if it is determined a project would result in the displacement of people or housing.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.14-8
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing units that would necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. As a result, a less‐than‐significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.14.4.3 Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project would have a significant effect on the environment if, in combination with other projects, it would contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to population and housing. The cumulative impact analysis for population and housing considers the larger context of future development of the City of Fresno as envisioned by the General Plan. Cumulative impacts on population and housing would be those impacts that result from incremental changes from increased development.

As described above, the proposed project would establish a mitigation bank to support the development of future VMT‐reducing projects in the City. The project itself would not result in physical improvements that would result in unplanned population growth or displace existing people and housing. Additionally, future VMT‐reducing projects identified by the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program would be required to prepare project‐specific analysis to assess potential impacts related to population and housing, and provide appropriate mitigation if applicable.

As such, the proposed project would be consistent with planned growth projections in the City’s General Plan and would not contribute to cumulative unplanned growth in the City of Fresno.

Therefore, a less‐than‐significant cumulative impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.15-1

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
This section addresses potential impacts to public services such as police protection, ﬁre protection, schools, parks/recreation, and other public facilities resulting from implementation of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program.

4.15.1 Existing Environmental Setting
The study area for project impacts regarding public services is the City of Fresno Planning Area because potential development under the proposed project would be limited to areas within the Planning Area.

4.15.1.1 Fire Protection
City of Fresno Fire Department. The City of Fresno Fire Department (FFD) provides ﬁre suppression, ﬁre prevention, hazardous material mitigation, rescue, and emergency medical services to 124 square miles through ﬁve divisions. The ﬁve divisions that comprise the City’s Fire Department are the Operations Division; the Fire Prevention and Support Services Division; the Training Division; the Personnel and Investigations Division; and the Administration Division. 1 In 2007, the Fire Department
merged operational services with the Fig Garden Fire Protection District (FGFPD). As of July 2019 the Fire Department no longer provides contractual ﬁre protection for the North Central Fire Protection District (NCFPD). However, there are new automatic aid contracts in place for the NCFPD areas within the Fresno’s sphere of inﬂuence, and mutual aid contracts for the areas outside Fresno’s sphere of inﬂuence.

The 2025 FFD staﬃng consists of 366 sworn ﬁreﬁghting personnel, 25 sworn non-safety personnel, and 26 civilian positions.
2 Daily staﬃng for the Fire Department and FGFPD service area consists of a minimum of 109 on-duty ﬁreﬁghters. Other services provided by the FFD include hazardous material services, swift water rescue, and heavy rescue apparatus.

The City of Fresno participates in aid agreements with surrounding emergency response agencies within Fresno county to ensure that the nearest responding ﬁre agency responds to an emergency regardless of jurisdiction within which it is located. The combination of these agreements and the City of Fresno Fire Department’s own resources ensure that a high quality of ﬁre suppression, ﬁre protection, and emergency medical services are provided to the residents within the Planning Area.

Emergency medical response is provided by the Fire Department, but emergency transport (such as ambulance service) is provided by private carriers/companies.

The FFD aims to provide response to the scene of an emergency within four minutes from the time the station receives notiﬁcation. In 2022, depending on the speciﬁc service area, the Fire Department was able to respond to structure ﬁres within four minutes 68 percent of the time, and to calls for medical aid within four minutes 63 percent of the time. 3 Given the Planning Area

1 Fresno Fire Department. 2022. Annual Report. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/wp-content/uploads/ 2023/02/2022-Annual-Report.pdf (accessed June 2025).
2 Ibid
3 Ibid.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-2
population of approximately 557,000 and the 2025 number of sworn ﬁre-ﬁghting personnel, the Fire Department has a staﬃng level of 0.66 ﬁreﬁghters per 1,000 persons.4 Non-emergency services provided by the Fire Department include the review of building permits and subdivision maps to ensure proper location and access to ﬁre suppression equipment, and annual business safety inspections.

In 2007, the NCFPD, whose service area is located to the west of the Planning Area, entered into a service agreement with the Fresno Fire Department for ﬁre service and protection. As of July 2019 the service agreement was no longer in place and the Fire Department no longer provides contractual ﬁre protection for the North Central Fire Protection District. There are new automatic aid contracts in place for the NCFPD areas within the sphere of inﬂuence, and mutual aid contracts for the areas outside the sphere of inﬂuence. The North Central Fire Protection District serves approximately 50,000 residents over 230 square miles, and includes ﬁve ﬁre stations. Three NCFPD ﬁre stations (Station Nos. 21, 22, and 23) were part of the merger between the Fresno Fire Department and the NCFPD.

The Fresno County Fire Protection District service area includes 2,655 square miles and 220,000 citizens, and 15 stations throughout the San Joaquin Valley. Station 87 is located within the southern portion of the Planning Area. Station 89 is located outside of the Planning Area to the south, but provides service to residents and businesses within the unincorporated communities in the southern portion of the Planning Area.

Fire protection is provided to the community of Fig Garden through the Fig Garden Fire Protection District (FGFPD) contract with the Fresno Fire Department. The 30-year contract began in 2006, and as a result, FGFPD Station No. 80 (originally a Fresno County Fire Protection District Station) was changed to Fresno Fire Department Station No. 20. Station No. 20 is staﬀed with three ﬁreﬁghters and one ﬁre investigator every day. Station No. 20 is located within the Planning Area in the unincorporated area of Fig Garden.

City of Fresno Fire Hazards. The City of Fresno Planning Area and greater region is bound by high and very high ﬁre hazard severity zones, and some areas along the San Joaquin River Bluﬀ area at the northern boundary of the Planning Area are classiﬁed as Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zones within the City’s Local Responsibility Area (LRA),
5 However, the City of Fresno Planning Area does not
contain high or very high ﬁre hazard zones and is categorized as having a moderate or no ﬁre hazard.

This is largely attributable to the non-vegetated/built-out nature of Fresno. Fire activity is more likely to occur in the form of a structure or an urban ﬁre, and a wildland ﬁre is unlikely to aﬀect the area.

Some small areas along the San Joaquin River Bluﬀ in the northern portion of Fresno are prone to wildﬁre due to the relatively steep terrain and vegetation.

4 557,000 / 1,000 = 557; 366 / 557 = 0.66
5 High and Very High Hazard Severity Zones are classiﬁcation zones established by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Maps. Website: https://osfm.ﬁre.ca.gov/what-we- do/community-wildﬁre-preparedness-and-mitigation/ﬁre-hazard-severity-zones (accessed June 2025).

4.15-3

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Table 4.15.A: Existing City of Fresno Fire Stations
Station No. Address (Fresno) Equipment/Personnel
ARFF
(Airport)
5065 E. Anderson The ARFF Specialty Team provides ARFF response, hazardous materials response, ﬁrst responder calls, and response to all structure ﬁres within airport boundaries. 1 1264 N. Jackson Single engine company, a ladder truck, a Battalion Chief, and the HMRT 2 7114 N West Single engine company, and an ICS/FIRESCOPE type 6 patrol vehicle 3 1406 Fresno Single engine company, a ladder truck, an ICS/FIRESCOPE type 3 brush engine, a mobile ventilation unit, EMT, and the CERT vehicle.
4 3065 E Iowa EMT and single engine company
5 3131 N Simpson EMT and single engine company
6 4343 E Gettysburg Single engine company
7 2571 S Cherry Single engine company, an ICS/FIRESCOPE type 6 patrol, and a water tender 8 1428 S Cedar Single engine company and FFD Communications Team 9 2340 N Vagedes EMT, single engine company, a ladder truck, and a Battalion Chief. 10 5545 Aircorp Way Single engine company
11 5544 N Fresno Single engine company, a truck company, a rescue vehicle, and a Battalion chief. 12 2874 W Acacia Single engine company
13 815 E Nees Single engine company and one water tender. 14 6239 N Polk Ladder truck and an ICS/FIRESCOPE type 3 brush engine rig. Central location for the tracking, repair, and maintenance of the miles of ﬁre hose used by the Fresno Fire Department.
15 5630 E Park Circle Single engine company, an ICS/FIRESCOPE type 3 brush engine, and an OES engine, used for the “Oﬃce of Emergency Services,” or as a reserve engine when needed. 16 2510 N Polk Single engine company
17 10512 N Maple Single engine company and an ICS/FIRESCOPE type 5 brush vehicle. 18 5938 N La Ventana Single engine company
19 3187 W Belmont Station equipped with an engine and one Battalion Chief. Also houses the Water Rescue Team (WRT) which provides swift water rescue, rescue boat operations, and rescue/recovery dive operations. Specialty apparatus assigned to WRT include Dive 19, a utility vehicle that carries various types of SCUBA equipment including surface supplied dive helmets, and Boat 19, a rescue type utility truck towing a trailer carrying two rescue boats.
20 4537 N Wishon
(FGFPD)
Single engine company and a 24-hour Arson Investigator
Source: City of Fresno Fire Department Station Locations (2025) (website: https://www.fresno.gov/ﬁre/station-locations/).

FFD = Fresno Fire Department
ARFF = Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting
HMRT = Hazardous Materials Response Team
ICS = Incident Command System
FIRESCOPE = Fireﬁghting Resources of Southern California Organized for Potential Emergencies CERT = Community Emergency Response Team
OES = Oﬃce of Emergency Services
WRT = Water Rescue Team
FGFPD = Fig Garden Fire Protection District

4.15.1.2 Police Protection
The Planning Area contains numerous agencies that provide police protection services: the City of Fresno Police Department, the Fresno County Sheriﬀ’s Department, the California Highway Patrol, Fresno State Police Department, and Fresno City College Police Department.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-4
City of Fresno Police Department. The City of Fresno Police Department (Police Department) provides a full range of police services, including: uniformed patrol response to calls for service, crime prevention, tactical crime enforcement (such as gang/violent crime suppression), as well as traﬃc enforcement/accident prevention. Other services and special units include the Explosive Ordinance Disposal Unit (EOD), Internal Aﬀairs, the K9 Unit, horse-mounted Mounted Patrol, Skywatch, Specialized Weapons and Tactics (SWAT), and the Records Bureau. The Department consists of four divisions: The Support Division, the Investigations Division, the Patrol Division, and the Administration Division. The Police Department has a target staﬃng ratio of 1.5 unrestricted oﬃcers per 1,000 residents. Given the 2024 staﬃng level of 900 sworn oﬃcers 6 and the Planning
Area population of 545,000, the staﬃng ratio is currently 1.5 oﬃcers per 1,000 residents. However, of the 825 sworn oﬃcers, 64 are restricted. As a result, the staﬃng ration is currently 1.4 unrestricted oﬃcers per 1,000 residents, and the Police Department’s Standard is currently not being met.

The Police Department Patrol Division is divided into ﬁve policing districts. The Southwest Policing District is located south of McKinley Avenue and West of East Avenue and SR 99. The Northwest Policing District is located north of McKinley Avenue to the San Joaquin River to and west of Blackstone Avenue to the western city limits. The Southeast Policing District is located south of Ashlan Avenue (east of Clovis Avenue), south of McKinley Avenue between East Avenue and Clovis Avenue, and east of SR 99 south of Church Avenue to the southern city limits. The Northeast Policing District is located north of McKinley Avenue to the San Joaquin River and east of Blackstone Avenue to Clovis. The Central Policing District encompasses the area south of Ashlan to Belmont and from SR 99 to First Street.

The Police Department operates six police stations within Fresno, listed below:
• Headquarters: 2323 Mariposa Mall, Fresno CA 93721
• Southwest: 1211 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93706
• Southeast: 224 South Argyle, Fresno, CA, 93727
• Northeast: 1450 East Teague Avenue, Fresno, CA 93720
• Northwest: 3080 West. Shaw Avenue, Fresno, CA 93711
• Central: 3502 North Blackstone Avenue, Suite 201, Fresno, CA 93726 Fresno County Sheriﬀ’s Department. The Fresno County Sheriﬀ’s Department (Sheriﬀ’s Department) provides law enforcement/crime prevention to the unincorporated portions of the metropolitan area and Fresno County. The Sheriﬀ’s Department is divided into four Patrol Areas. The unincorporated communities within the Planning Area are Calwa, Malaga, Mayfair, Sunnyside, Fig Garden, and Tarpey. These areas are served by the Sheriﬀ’s Department Patrol Area 2. Patrol Area 2 serves communities within the boundaries of American Avenue to the Madera county line, and Chateau Fresno to McCall Avenue. The Area 2 Sheriﬀ’s Department oﬃce is located at 5717 E. Shields Avenue, which is located in the southeast portion of the Planning Area.

6 Fresno, City of. 2024. Adopted Fiscal Year 2024 Budget.

4.15-5

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Other Law Enforcement Agencies. Other law enforcement agencies that serve the Planning Area include the California Highway Patrol, Fresno State Police Department, and Fresno City College Police Department. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) is responsible for providing uniform traﬃc law enforcement throughout the State highway system. CHP assists the City of Fresno by providing law enforcement within the city under Special Programs. The CHP oﬃces within the Planning Area are the CHP Central Division oﬃce (located at 5179 North Gates Avenue, in the northwestern portion of the Planning Area) and the CHP Area oﬃce (located at 1382 West Olive Avenue, also located in the northwest portion of the Planning Area). The CHP Central Division oﬃce oversees the Area oﬃces that are located throughout the San Joaquin Valley.

The Fresno State Police Department is responsible for providing safety and security for students, staﬀ, and faculty within the Fresno State University campus, which is located in the northeast portion of the Planning Area. Their jurisdiction extends one mile beyond the University’s boundary.

Additionally, State Center Community College District (SCCCD) Police Department (SCCCDPD) serves communities across SCCCD campuses, including the Fresno City College campus which is located within the Planning Area. The SCCCDPD provides a full range of police-related services, and immediate response to all medical and ﬁre emergencies on campus. 7 4.15.1.3 Schools
The Planning Area includes various schools that provide primary, secondary, and post-secondary education.

Primary and Secondary Schools (Kindergarten through Twelfth Grades). The Planning Area, which includes areas with the city limits, the areas within the SOI, and an area north of the city’s most northeasterly portion, is served by a number of school districts. These school districts are described below.

Fresno Uniﬁed School District (FUSD) contains seven sub-districts and 99 schools. With an enrollment of over 68,000 students, FUSD is the fourth largest school district in California. FUSD completed a District Master Plan in 2009 aimed at addressing overcrowding in the District’s schools and proposes a new high school in the southern portion of the city of Fresno.

Clovis Uniﬁed School District (CUSD) is the city’s second largest school District. Of CUSD’s 50 schools/campuses, 35 are elementary schools, 6 are intermediate schools, and 6 are high schools.

CUSD also has one adult school and six alternative education campuses. Approximately 44 percent of the students in CUSD are residents of the city of Fresno, and approximately 20 percent of the city of Fresno is located within CUSD’s boundaries.
8 CUSD currently serves nearly 43,000 students, and has a maximum capacity of 49,915 students.9 The District has a staﬀ of approximately 6,400. CUSD

7 State Center Community College District. 2024. Annual Security & Fire Report. Website:
https://www.scccd.edu/_uploaded-ﬁles/documents/departments/police/2024-annual-security-and-ﬁre- safety-report.pdf (accessed June 2025).
8 Clovis Uniﬁed School District. 2025. Demographics. Website: https://www.cusd.com/demographics (accessed May 2025).
9 Ibid.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-6
predominantly serves Fresno’s northeast and north-central areas, and the city of Clovis, which is not included in the Planning Area.

Central Uniﬁed School District (Central USD) serves the northwestern and west area (i.e., west of SR 99) as well as a large rural area west of the city. Central USD currently serves 15,730 students at 24 schools, and has experienced signiﬁcant growth necessitating the expansion of facilities over the past decade.10
Sanger Uniﬁed School District (Sanger USD) serves the Sunnyside area of the city of Fresno, in addition to the city of Sanger and the surrounding unincorporated communities. Sanger West High School, which services students currently living in the Sunnyside/southeast portion of Fresno, is located in southeast Fresno. Sanger USD covers 180 square miles serves 13,634 students across 22 schools.
11 Washington Uniﬁed School District serves a small portion of the southwest area of the city of Fresno through two schools (one elementary school and one combined elementary/intermediate school) located within the boundaries of the City of Fresno.
12 Post-Secondary Schools. Post-secondary schools are institutions that provide education after twelfth grade, or higher education. The academic institutions that provide higher education within the Planning area are California State University, Fresno (Fresno State University), Fresno Paciﬁc University, Fresno City College, Clovis Community College, and a wide variety of vocational and technical schools that prepare students for the workplace.

Fresno State University, which is one of 23 campuses within the California State University system, had a spring 2025 total enrollment of 22,759 undergraduate and graduate students.13 The 388-acre main-campus and 1,011-acre University Farm are located within the northeast portion of the city.

Fresno Paciﬁc University is a private college with 30 undergraduate and graduate degree programs and nearly 4,000 students. The 44-acre campus is located in central southeast Fresno.

The State Center Community College District is comprised of four educational centers and serves 57,341 students from the communities of Fresno, Reedley, Oakhurst, Madera, and Clovis. Fresno City College, which provides general education programs for nearly 36,800 students intending to transfer to an undergraduate university or a vocational program. Clovis Community College, one of the State Center Community College District campuses, is located within the Planning Area and oﬀers

10 Central Uniﬁed School District. 2023. 2023/24 District at a Glance. Available online at:
https://www.centraluniﬁed.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=739772&type=d&pREC_ID=2520980 (accessed May 2025).
11 Sanger Uniﬁed School District. 2025. About Our District. Website https://www.sanger.k12.ca.us/about/ (accessed May 2025).
12 Washington Uniﬁed School District. 2025. Maps and Boundaries. Website: www.washingtonuniﬁed.org/ district/maps (accessed May 2025).
13 Fresno State University. 2024. Headcount Enrollment from Spring 2021 to Spring 2025. Website:
tableau.fresnostate.edu/views/Enrollment/Headcount?:isGuestRedirectFromVizportal=y&:embed=y (accessed June 2025).

4.15-7

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

programs in general education to students who intend to transfer to a four-year institution or obtain a Certiﬁcate or Associate Degree.

4.15.1.4 Parks and Recreation
As identiﬁed in the City’s Parks Master Plan,14 the City of Fresno owns and operates a park system that includes more than 100 public parks, trails, regional parks, neighborhood parks, educational facilities, community pools, splash parks, and dual-use ponding basins. Many of the public parks include additional amenities. School facilities supplement the City’s park system by adding acreage and facilities that are available for recreational use through Joint-Use agreements.

Overall, there are more than 9,000 acres of planned open space in the Planning Area, as shown in Table 4.15.B. Table 4.15.B shows the acreage of all types of open space in the city. Further, as depicted in the table below, ponding basins, which are owned and operated by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) comprise a substantial portion of the open space in the city. Ponding basins account for 1,893 acres within the city and aid in either storm water drainage or year-round groundwater recharge basin.

Table 4.15.B: Planning Area Planned Open Space
Facility Acreage
Multi-Use 4,067
Recreational 8
Ponding Basins 1,893
Airport Approach/Clear Zone 368
Golf Courses 982
Parks 1,688
Canals/Open Space 42
Lake/Water Feature 86
Total: 9,134
Source: City of Fresno (2019)

4.15.1.5 Other Public Facilities
Courts. The Planning Area contains two State and one federal court. The two State courts are a trial court (the Fresno County Superior Court) and the Appellate Court. The federal court is the U.S.

District Court for the Eastern District of California, Eastern Division.

State Courts
Fresno County Superior Court. Within the Planning Area, there are three Superior Court locations: the Fresno Superior Courthouse Downtown, the B.F. Sisk Courthouse, and the “M” Street Courthouse. One additional Superior Court location lies outside of the Planning Area to the south.

14 City of Fresno. 2017. Fresno Parks Master Plan. December 14.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-8
The Fresno Superior Courthouse Downtown is located at 1100 Van Ness Avenue. The Fresno Superior Courthouse Downtown hears criminal (felony, infraction, and misdemeanor), domestic violence, drug, juvenile dependency, and traﬃc cases.

The B. F. Sisk Courthouse is located at 1130 O Street. The B.F. Sisk Courthouse hears non- criminal cases, such as civil cases, conservatorship, restraining order, probate, small claims, and unlawful detainer cases. The B.F. Sisk Courthouse provides family court/family law services.

The “M” Street Courthouse is located at 2317 Tuolumne Street. The “M” Street Courthouse hears Criminal and Traﬃc infractions.

In addition to the three courthouses identiﬁed above, there is a Juvenile Delinquency Court immediately south of the Planning Area, located at 333 East American Avenue. All cases at this facility are matters involving juveniles, and include misdemeanor and felony criminal, drug, traﬃc, and school attendance cases.
5th District Court of Appeals. The State of California 5th District Court of Appeals is located in the city of Fresno at 2424 Ventura Street. The Fifth Appellate District represents nine central California counties, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Stanislaus, Tulare, and Tuolumne. With the exception of death penalty cases, the Courts of Appeal have appellate jurisdiction when trial courts have original jurisdiction and in other cases prescribed by statute. Appeals ﬁled in the trial court are reviewed and hear by the appellate district where the trial court is located.

Federal Court System. The U.S. District Court has a courthouse in the city of Fresno, located at 2500 Tulare Street. This federal district court is the Fresno Division within the Eastern District of California. This court hears civil, criminal, and miscellaneous actions arising in the counties of Calaveras, Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Stanislaus, Tulare, and Tuolumne. The Fresno Divisional Oﬃce is currently staﬀed with three district court judges, and four magistrate judges.
15 Libraries. Libraries in the Planning Area are provided by the Fresno County Public Library System.

This library system consists of 38 libraries and one Community Bookmobile throughout Fresno County.16 Libraries within the Planning Area are shown in Table 4.15.C.

Table 4.15.C: Libraries in the Planning Area
Library Name Address
Woodward Park Regional Library 944 East Perrin Avenue, Fresno, CA 93720 Pinedale Branch Library 7170 North San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 92650 Fig Garden Regional Library 3071 West Bullard Avenue, Fresno, CA 93711 Politi Branch Library 5771 North First Street, Fresno, CA 92710

15 U.S. District Court. 2019. Eastern District of California. All Judges. Website: www.caed.uscourts.gov/ caednew/index.cfm/judges (accessed June 2025).
16 Fresno County Public Library. 2025. All Branches at a Glance. Website: www.fresnolibrary.org/branch/ all.html (accessed June 2025).

4.15-9

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Table 4.15.C: Libraries in the Planning Area
Library Name Address
Teague Branch Library 4718 North Polk Ave, Fresno, CA 93722 Gillis Branch Library 629 West Dakota Avenue, Fresno, CA 93705 Betty Rodriguez Library 3040 North Cedar Ave, Fresno, CA 93703 Talking Book Library for the Blind 770 North San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Fresno County Central Library 2420 Mariposa Street, Fresno, CA 93721 Sunnyside Regional Library 5566 East Kings Canyon Road, Fresno, CA 93727 Mosqueda Branch Library 4670 East Butler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93720 West Fresno Branch Library 188 East Cesar Chavez Boulevard, Fresno, CA 93706 Source: Fresno County Public Library, 2025. Website: www.fresnolibrary.org/branch/all.html

Hospitals. There are nine hospitals that are located within the city of Fresno Planning Area. These hospitals provide a variety of services. There are three hospitals that provide emergency services and one hospital that provides Level 1 trauma service. The location, services oﬀered, and capacity of each of the hospitals are provided in Table 4.15.D.

As shown below, the hospital with the greatest capacity and widest range of services is the Community Regional Medical Center, located in Downtown Fresno. The total number of hospital beds available within the Planning Area is approximately 1,647.

Table 4.15.D: Hospitals in the City of Fresno Planning Area Hospital Name Location Services Oﬀered Capacity
Fresno Surgical Hospital 6125 North Fresno Street
Fresno CA 93710
General Acute Care Hospital 27 Beds
Fresno Heart and
Surgical Hospital
15 East Audubon Drive
Fresno, CA 93720
General Acute Care Hospital, Cardiac, Vascular,
and Bariatric Surgical Services
57 Beds
St. Agnes Medical Center 1303 East Herndon Avenue
Fresno, CA 93720
General Acute Care Hospital, Emergency
Services
436 Beds
Kaiser Foundation
Hospital – Fresno
7300 North Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93720
General Acute Care Hospital, Emergency
Services
169 Beds
Community Regional
Medical Center
2823 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721
General Acute Care Hospital, Emergency
Services, Neuroscience Institute, Level 3
Neonatal ICU, Level 1 Trauma and
Comprehensive Burns Center
685 Beds
Community Behavioral
Health Center
7171 North Cedar Avenue
Fresno, CA 93720
Inpatient and outpatient acute psychiatric care 73 Beds Community Subacute
and Transitional Care
Center
3003 N. Mariposa Street
Fresno, CA
Chronic Subacute Conditions 106 Beds
San Joaquin Valley
Rehabilitation Hospital
7173 North Sharon Avenue
Fresno, CA 93720
General Acute Care Hospital, Outpatient and
Inpatient Rehabilitation Services
62 Beds
Central Star Psychiatric
Health Facility
4411 E. Kings Canyon Road
Fresno, CA 93702
Psychiatric Health Facility 16 Beds
Exodus Psychiatric
Health Facility Fresno
4411 E. Kings Canyon Road
Fresno, CA 93702
Psychiatric Health Facility 16 Beds
Source: California Department of Health Care Access and Information, 2025. Website: https://hcai.ca.gov/facility-ﬁnder/

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-10

4.15.2 Regulatory Setting

4.15.2.1 Fire Protection
City of Fresno General Plan. The following objectives and policies from the current General Plan are relevant to the provision of ﬁre protection services within the Planning Area.

PU-2-e: Service Standards. Strive to achieve a community wide risk management plan that includes the following service level objectives 90 percent of the time:

First Unit on Scene – First ﬁre unit arriving with minimum of three ﬁreﬁghters within 5 minutes and 20 seconds from the time the unit was alerted to the emergency incident.

Eﬀective Response Force – Provide suﬃcient number of ﬁreﬁghters on the scene of an emergency within 9 minutes and 20 seconds from the time of unit alert to arrival. The eﬀective response force is measured as 15 ﬁreﬁghters for low risk ﬁre incidents and 21 ﬁreﬁghters for high risk ﬁre incidents and is the number of personnel necessary to complete speciﬁc tasks required to contain and control ﬁre minimizing loss of life and property.

Policy PU-3-d: Review Development Applications. Continue Fire Department review of development applications, provide comments and recommend conditions of approval that will ensure adequate on-site and oﬀ-site ﬁre protection systems and features are provided.

Policy PU-3-e: Building Codes. Adopt and enforce amendments to construction and ﬁre codes, as determined appropriate, to systematically reduce the level of risk to life and property from ﬁre, commensurate with the City’s ﬁre suppression capabilities.

Policy PU-3-f: Adequate Infrastructure. Continue to pursue the provision of adequate water supplies, hydrants, and appropriate property access to allow for adequate ﬁre suppression throughout the City.

Policy PU-3-g: Cost Recovery. Continue to evaluate appropriate codes, policies, and methods to generate fees or other sources of revenue to oﬀset the ongoing personnel and maintenance costs of providing ﬁre prevention and response services.

City of Fresno Municipal Code
Section 12-4.901. In order to implement the goals, objectives and policies of the City’s General Plan, and to mitigate the impacts caused by future development in the city, certain ﬁre department facilities must be constructed. The City Council has determined that a Fire Facilities Fee is needed in order to pay for (a) land acquisition for, and design, engineering, and construc- tion of the public facilities designated in the Council resolution and reasonable costs of outside consultant studies related thereto; (b) to reimburse the City for designated public facilities construction by the City with funds (other than gifts or grants) from other sources together with accrued interest; (c) to reimburse developers who have designed and constructed designated public facilities which are oversized and supplemental size, length, or capacity; and/or (d) to pay for and/or reimburse costs of program development and ongoing administration of the Fire

4.15-11

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Facilities Fee program. Table 4.15.E below describes the Fire Facilities Fee by type of development as established in the City’s Master Fee Schedule.

Table 4.15.E: Fire Facilities Fee Program
Type Fee
Single-Family Residential/per unit $2,326.13
Multi-Family Residential(>7.5 units/acre)/per unit $1,774.37 Industrial (fee per 1,000 Sq. Ft. of building) $350.19
Retail (per 1000 sf of building) $612.84
Oﬃce (per 1000 sf of building) $700.38
Source: City of Fresno Master Fee Schedule, Eﬀective July 2023.

4.15.2.2 Police Protection
City of Fresno General Plan. The following objectives and policies from the approved General Plan are relevant to the provision of police services within the Planning Area.

PU-1-c: Safety Considerations in Development Approval. Continue to identify and apply appropriate safety, design and operational measures as conditions of development approval, including, but not limited to, street access control measures, lighting and visibility of access points and common areas, functional and secure on-site recreational and open space improvements within residential developments, and use of State licensed, uniformed security.

PU-1-d: New Police Station Locations. Consideration will be given to co-locating new police station facilities with other public property including, but not limited to, schools, parks, playgrounds, and community centers to create a synergy of participation in the neighborhood with the potential result of less vandalism and promotion of a better sense of security for the citizens using these facilities.

City of Fresno Municipal Code
Section 12-4.801 of the Municipal Code. In order to implement the goals, objectives and policies of the City’s General Plan, and to mitigate the impacts caused by future development in the city, certain police facilities must be constructed. The City Council has determined that a Police Facilities Fee is needed in order to pay for (a) land acquisition for, and design, engineering, and construction of the public facilities designated in the Council resolution and reasonable costs of outside consultant studies related thereto; (b) to reimburse the city for designated public facilities construction by the city with funds (other than gifts or grants) from other sources together with accrued interest; (c) to reimburse developers who have designed and constructed designated public facilities which are oversized and supplemental size, length, or capacity; and/or (d) to pay for and/or reimburse costs of program development and ongoing administration of the Police Facilities Fee program. Table 4.15.F below describes the Police Facilities Fee by type of development as established in the City’s Master Fee Schedule.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-12
Table 4.15.F: Police Facilities Fee Program
Type Fee
Single-Family Residential/per unit $965.06
Multi-Family Residential(>7.5 units/acre)/per unit $736.01 Industrial (per 1,000 sf of building) $429.60
Retail (per 1000 sf of building) $901.95
Oﬃce (per 1000 sf of building) $859.19
Source: City of Fresno Master Fee Schedule, Eﬀective July 2023

4.15.2.3 Schools
Senate Bill 50. Senate Bill (SB) 50 limits the power of cities and counties to require mitigation of school facilities impacts as a condition of approving new development and provides instead for a standardized developer fee. SB 50 generally provides for a 50/50 State and local school facilities funding match. SB 50 also provides for three levels of statutory impact fees. The application level depends on whether State funding is available, whether the school district is eligible for State funding, and whether the school district meets certain additional criteria involving bonding capacity, year-round school, and the percentage of moveable classrooms in use.

City of Fresno General Plan. The following objectives and policies from the General Plan are relevant to the provision of schools within the Planning Area.

POSS-8-b: Appropriate School Locations. Support school locations that facilitate safe and convenient access by pedestrian and bicycle routes, are compatible with surrounding land uses, and contribute to a positive neighborhood identity and Complete Neighborhoods. Commit to the following:
• Work with representatives of public and private schools during the preparation and amendment of plans and the processing of development proposals to ensure that General Plan policies are implemented.
• Require school districts to provide necessary street improvements, pedestrian facilities, public facilities, and public services at each new school site as authorized by law. • Continue to designate known school sites on the Land Use Diagram (Figure LU-1), and in community plans, Speciﬁc Plans, and other plans compatible with the locational criteria of each school district, and to facilitate safe and convenient walking and biking to schools in neighborhoods.
• Meet regularly with school district staﬀ and trustees to provide ongoing communication and coordination of plans, projects, and priorities.
• Collaborate with school districts to plan and implement new school sites in a manner that supports and reinforces objectives to develop walkable Complete Neighborhoods.

4.15-13

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

POSS-8-c: Park and School Site Coordination. Pursue the cooperative development and use of school sites with adjacent neighborhood parks for both school activities and non-school related recreational activities.

Fresno County General Plan. The following policies from the Fresno County General Plan are relevant to the provision of schools within the Planning Area.

Policy PF-I.2: The County shall encourage school facility siting that establishes schools as focal points within the neighborhoods and community in areas with safe pedestrian and bicycle access.

Policy PF-I.4: The County shall work cooperatively with school districts in monitoring housing, population, and school enrollment trends and in planning for future school facility needs and shall assist school districts in locating appropriate sites for new schools.

Policy PF-I.8: The County and school districts should work closely to secure adequate funding for new school facilities. The County shall support the school districts’ eﬀorts to obtain appropriate funding methods such as school impact fees.

4.15.2.4 Parks
City of Fresno General Plan. The following objectives and policies from the approved General Plan are relevant to the provision of parks within the Planning Area.

POSS-1-a: Parkland Standard. Implement a standard of at least three acres of public parkland per 1,000 residents for Pocket, Neighborhood, and Community parks throughout the city, while striving for ﬁve acres per 1,000 residents for all parks throughout the city, subject to identifying additional funding for Regional Parks, Open Space/Natural Areas, and Special Use Parks/Facilities.

POSS-2-b: Park and Recreation Priorities. Use the following priorities and guidelines in acquiring and developing parks and recreation facilities:
• Acquire and develop neighborhood park space in existing developed neighborhoods that are deﬁcient of such space and in areas along BRT corridors that are designated as priorities for encouraging new mixed-use transit-oriented development; • Provide accessible recreation facilities in established neighborhoods with emphasis on those neighborhoods currently underserved by recreation facilities; • Improve established neighborhood parks with emphasis on those neighborhoods with the greatest need;
• Acquire and develop neighborhood and community parks in new Development Areas;

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-14
• Recognize community parks as a special need in areas that lack these facilities or are planned for transit supportive urban densities, and explore all potential sources of revenue to secure and develop appropriate sites including joint use facilities; • Develop new special purpose parks, such as outdoor gym equipment, natural resource based trail parks, equestrian centers, dog parks, and amphitheaters, as well as alternative recreation facilities, such as community recreation centers, passive wildlife observation park, cultural heritage and diversity park, military veterans memorial park, and universal access open space park; and
• Acquire and develop park and open space in established neighborhoods and Development Areas, prioritizing existing neighborhoods with the greatest deﬁciencies, so that all residents have access to park or open space within one-half mile of their residence. Develop these facilities to be fully accessible to individuals with disabilities as required by law.

POSS-2-c: Review of Development Applications. Coordinate review of all development applications (i.e., site plans, conditional use permits, and subdivision maps) in order to implement the parks and open space standards of this Plan. • Assure the provision of adequate active and passive open spaces and facilities as appropriate within residential subdivisions through Development Code requirements for mandatory dedication and improvement of land and/or development fees. • Require the provision of appropriate outdoor living areas or private open space in multi- family residential developments not subject to the Subdivision Map Act. • Request open space easements where feasible and warranted to secure appropriate public use of sensitive areas with scenic or recreation values, and for buﬀering space for sensitive areas.
• Require provision of appropriate open space areas in private projects, in the form of trails, enhanced landscaped setbacks, parks, and water features. • Evaluate the merits of establishing a development bonus entitlement program in which development incentives (i.e., bonus densities, bonus ﬂoor area square footage) are provided for contributions to public recreational facilities on-site or in the vicinity of the development project.

POSS-2-d: Creation Opportunities near Freeway Corridors. Negotiate with Caltrans, other public agencies, and private property owners to develop remnant parcels along freeway corridors for appropriate recreational uses.

POSS-3-a: Centralized Park Locations. Site parks central and accessible to the population served, while preserving the integrity of the surrounding neighborhood.

4.15-15

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

POSS-3-b: Park Location and Walking Distance. Park Location and Walking Distance. Site Pocket and Neighborhood Parks within a half-mile walking distance of new residential development.

POSS-3-c: Link Parks with Walkways. Link public open space to adjacent, schools, and residential uses and Activity Centers through a series of landscaped linear walkways and bikeways that enhance and encourage pedestrian use.

POSS-3-e: Minimum Park Size for Active Recreation. Minimize City acquisition or acceptance of dedication of park sites less than two acres in size for active recreational uses, except where maintenance costs are secured through a CFD, HOA, or other such mechanism.

POSS-3-g: Park Security and Design. Park Security and Design. Promote safety, attractiveness, and compatibility between parks and adjacent residential areas through design, maintenance, and enforcement of park regulations
• Require the installation of security lighting for parking, points of access, and building areas at all public recreation and park sites.
• Keep neighborhood eyes on parks to increase security.

POSS-3-h: Coordination with School Districts. Continue to coordinate with school districts to explore opportunities for joint use of both outdoor and indoor recreation facilities, such as playgrounds, play ﬁelds, and gymnasiums, for City recreation programs.

City of Fresno Municipal Code
• Section 12-4.701 of the Municipal Code: In order to implement the Goals, objectives and policies of the City’s General Plan, and to mitigate the impacts caused by future development in the city, certain park facilities must be constructed. The City Council has determined that a Park Facilities Fee is needed in order to pay for (a) land acquisition for, and design, engineering, and construc- tion of the public facilities designated in the Council resolution and reasonable costs of outside consultant studies related thereto; (b) to reimburse the city for designated public facilities construction by the city with funds (other than gifts or grants) from other sources together with accrued interest; (c) to reimburse developers who have designed and constructed designated public facilities which are oversized and supplemental size, length, or capacity; and/or (d) to pay for and/or reimburse costs of program development and ongoing administration of the Park Facilities Fee program. Table 4.15.G below describes the Park Facilities Fees under diﬀerent fee programs by type of development, as established in the City’s Master Fee Schedule.

Table 4.15.G: Park Facilities Fee Program
Type Park Facility
Impact Fee
Quimby Parkland
Dedication Fee
Single-Family Residential/per unit $3,630.19 $1,569.76
Multi-Family Residential/per unit $2,736.38 $1,184.95
Source: City of Fresno Master Fee Schedule Eﬀective July 2023.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-16

4.15.2.5 Other Public Facilities
County of Fresno General Plan. The following policy policies from the County General Plan are relevant to the provision of library facilities within the Planning Area.

Policy PF-I.9: The County shall promote provision of library services throughout the county and create new facilities as appropriate or expand existing facilities to meet additional demand from new growth.

4.15.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to public services and recreation that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of signiﬁcance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is signiﬁcant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for signiﬁcant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less-than-signiﬁcant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.15.3.1 Signiﬁcance Criteria
The thresholds for impacts to public services and recreation facilities used in this analysis are consistent with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project may be deemed to have a signiﬁcant impact related to public services and recreation if it would:
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause signiﬁcant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for ﬁre protection services, police protection services, schools, parks and other public facilities. b. 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; c. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical eﬀect on the environment.

4.15.3.2 Project Impacts
PSR-1 The proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities.

A project would result in a potentially signiﬁcant impact if it would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause signiﬁcant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or

4.15-17

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

other performance objectives for ﬁre protection services, police protection services, schools, parks and other public facilities.

The program would identify, quantify, and prioritize applicable mitigation measures and relevant VMT-reducing projects within the City to be funded by the proposed mitigation bank. The proposed project would not result in any physical improvements or change the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area. As such, the proposed project would not result in increased demand for public services in the City, including ﬁre protection services, police protection services, schools, parks and other public facilities.

The adoption of the proposed VMT Reduction Program would support future multi-modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the VMT Reduction Program would be required to conduct project-speciﬁc environmental analyses to assess potential impacts to public services in Fresno. However, future VMT-reducing improvements would not include residential components that would result in increased demand for public services in Fresno.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the construction of new or physically altered ﬁre protection facilities, and the impact would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

PSR-2 The proposed project 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.

Refer to impact discussion PSR-2, above. The proposed project consists of the adoption of a VMT Reduction Program which aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank. The proposed project would not result in physical improvements or changes in the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in increased demand for park facilities in the City that could lead to the physical deterioration of existing recreational facilities. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in additional use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities or lead to the accelerated deterioration of such facilities. Therefore, the impact would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-18
PSR-3 The proposed project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical eﬀect on the environment.

Refer to impact discussions PSR-1 and PSR-2, above. The proposed project would not result in physical improvements that would increase demand for recreational facilities, such as neighborhood and regional parks, in the City, such that construction of new facilities or expansion of existing facilities, would be needed to meet demand. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the construction of new or physically altered recreational facilities, and the impact would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

4.15.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project would have a signiﬁcant eﬀect on the environment if it—in combination with other projects—would contribute to a signiﬁcant cumulative impact related to public services and recreation.

Fire Protection. The cumulative setting for ﬁre protection includes the City of Fresno and the Fresno Fire Department’s service area.

Buildout under the City’s General Plan would require additional ﬁre-related services and equipment to adequately serve the anticipated population and employment growth. As discussed above, proposed project consists of the adoption of a VMT Reduction Program which aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank.

The proposed project would not result in physical improvements or changes in the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area, and would not increase demand for ﬁre protection services or contribute to cumulative impacts related to ﬁre protection.

Police Protection. The cumulative setting for police protection includes the City of Fresno and the Fresno Police Department’s service area.

As discussed above, the proposed project would not result in physical improvements or changes in the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area, and would not increase demand for police protection services beyond what is projected in the General Plan, or contribute to cumulative impacts related to police protection.

Parks and Recreation. The cumulative setting for parks and recreation is the City of Fresno and Fresno County.

The proposed project consists of the adoption of a VMT Reduction Program which aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank, and it would not result in physical improvements or changes in the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area that would increase demand for park and recreational facilities

4.15-19

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

and result in the construction of, or alteration of existing facilities beyond what is planned in the City General Plan. Furthermore, future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed in the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction program would not include residential components that would result in additional use and accelerated deterioration of existing recreational facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in cumulatively considerable construction impacts related to parks and recreation in the City and Fresno County.

Other Public Facilities. The cumulative setting for other public facilities, such as hospitals and libraries, includes the Fresno Planning Area established by the City’s General Plan.

The proposed project would be consistent with planned growth under the Fresno General Plan and would not increase demand for, and construction of additional or altered public facilities beyond what is planned in the City’s General Plan.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an incremental cumulative demand for public facilities in Fresno.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.15-20
This page intentionally left blank

4.16-1

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.16 TRANSPORTATION
This section describes the environmental setting, including regulatory framework and existing conditions, and potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project on transportation.

4.16.1 Existing Environmental Setting

4.16.1.1 Roadway Network
The roadway network in Fresno is generally a traditional grid-based network of north/south and east/west streets, except for the Downtown area, where the grid-based network is northeast/southwest. Buildout of the street and roadway system within Fresno is not completed, and there is potential for expanding vehicle capacity on some roadways, which would increase opportunities for economic development, encourage a diversity of development types, and promote multi-modal mobility options.

The functionality of a street is related to traffic mobility and land access. Access to a roadway is correlated to the potential for conflicting vehicles and therefore the speed and capacity of the roadway. As such, higher-level facilities, such as freeways and expressways, have lower access and therefore fewer conflicting vehicles, which allows for higher speeds and capacities. Conversely, lower-level facilities, such as local streets, collectors, and minor arterials, have greater access and therefore greater potential for conflicting vehicles, which enforces lower speeds and capacities.

The following is a description of the functional classification groups of roadways according to the type of service they are intended to provide.

State Facilities. A State facility is a highway, or State Route (SR), upon which the rights of access are controlled and that provides separated grades at intersecting streets. The minimum right‐of‐way width and number of lanes are determined by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
• SR-99 is a northwest to southeast freeway that links Sacramento to Bakersfield, and the Central Valley to the Los Angeles area. SR-99 extends through Fresno from the southeastern city limits to the northwestern city limits. The freeway includes three lanes in each direction. Through Fresno, the southbound direction toward Downtown is generally the peak morning commute direction and northbound is the peak evening commute direction. • SR-41 is a north-south freeway in Fresno, connecting Kings County to the south and Madera County to the north, that extends from the southern city limits to the northern city limits. SR-41 is the main freeway that connects north Fresno with Downtown Fresno. The freeway includes three lanes in each direction. Through Fresno, the southbound direction toward Downtown is generally the peak morning commute direction and northbound is the peak evening commute direction.
• SR-168 is a north-south freeway that connects northeastern Fresno and Clovis with Downtown Fresno. SR-168 connects Downtown Fresno to its terminus at the SR-180 interchange. The

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.16-2
freeway includes three lanes in each direction. Through Fresno, the southbound direction is the peak morning commute direction and northbound is the peak evening commute direction. • SR-180 is an east-west freeway that connects southeast and southwest Fresno with Downtown Fresno. The freeway includes three lanes in each direction. The direction toward Downtown from both the eastern and western outer fringes of the City is the peak morning commute direction and the opposite direction is the peak evening commute direction.

Expressways. Expressways are generally four- or six-lane divided roadways primarily serving through and crosstown vehicle traffic, with major street intersections located at approximately 0.5 mile intervals and no driveways for direct motor vehicle access to abutting property. The posted speed limit along Expressways is generally 50 miles per hour (mph). Expressways typically experience high capacities and low accessibility. According to the Fresno General Plan Mobility and Transportation Element and Circulation Element, Expressways provided within Fresno are Friant Road and Herndon Avenue.

Super Arterials. Super Arterials are generally four- or six-lane divided roadways with a primary purpose of moving multiple modes of travel traffic to and from major traffic generators and among subregions. Super Arterials provide a select number of motor vehicle access points to adjacent properties or local streets between the major street intersections. The posted speed limit along Super Arterials is typically 50 mph. According to the Fresno General Plan Mobility and Transportation Element, Super Arterials include Herndon Avenue, Friant Road, Veterans Boulevard, Willow Avenue, Grantland Avenue, Copper Avenue, and Jensen Avenue.

Arterials. Arterials are generally two-, four-, or six-lane divided roadways, with the primary purpose of moving traffic within and between neighborhoods and to and from freeways and expressways.

The typical posted speed limit along an Arterial is generally 40 mph.

Collectors. Collectors are generally two- or four-lane undivided roadways, with the primary function of connecting local streets and arterials and neighborhood traffic generators and providing access to abutting properties. Collectors typically have a center two-way left-turn lane. The posted speed limit of a Collector is commonly 40 mph.

4.16.1.2 Public Transportation
The City’s Department of Transportation operates the Fresno Area Express (FAX), its primary transportation service provider. FAX’s role is to provide dependable public transit that runs smoothly and efficiently to serve the people of Fresno. FAX operates 18 fixed-routes, including the Bus Rapid Transit (known as the “Q”) and the FAX 15 routes, as well as paratransit services (Handy Ride), extended late-night services, and service to major regional destinations, including colleges, universities, shopping malls, medical facilities, and major employment centers. The FAX fixed-route system integrates with the City of Clovis’ fixed-route system and other incorporated cities within the County through the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency (FRCTA) to serve the region. The FAX fixed- route system is comprised of routes that typically follow many of Fresno’s major roadways, which are generally spaced with a one-half mile separation. Most of the FAX routes operate at 30-minute frequencies, with exception of the following:

4.16-3

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

• The Q providing 10-minute frequencies during peak periods and 15-minute frequencies during off-peak periods.
• Three routes providing 15-minute frequencies (the FAX 15 Routes 9, 34, and 38). • One route providing 20-minute frequencies all day (Route 28).

Additionally, the FAX bus system provides connections to the Amtrak passenger rail station and the Greyhound bus station, both of which are located in Downtown. The FAX bus system will establish future connections to the approved High-Speed Rail Fresno station also located in Downtown. Public transportation serving Fresno is shown in Figure 2.7 of the TIA.

Demand-Response Service. Serviced through FAX, the demand-response service (Handy Ride) provides transportation for persons with disabilities. It is responsible for meeting the needs of eligible persons with disabilities who cannot functionally use the FAX fixed-route bus system. The service area boundaries are generally Copper Avenue to the north, east to Willow Avenue, south to Ashlan Avenue, east to Temperance Avenue, south to Central Avenue, west to Polk Avenue, north to the Fresno County line, and east to Copper Avenue.

Bus Rapid Transit. A first‐phase Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system began operating in 2018 to run along the Ventura Street/Kings Canyon Road (now known as Cesar Chavez Boulevard) and the Blackstone Avenue corridors, meeting in Downtown Fresno at Courthouse Park. The General Plan supports the proposed BRT system through its designation of complementary land uses and higher densities along key portions of its routes, such as higher‐density development and mixed land uses that may gravitate toward use of BRT.

High-Speed Rail. The California High-Speed Rail (HSR) System will be a statewide system that will serve as a regional transportation system for Fresno and the surrounding communities. The HSR system would extend through the San Joaquin Valley, linking San Francisco with Los Angeles.

Construction began in March 2018 in Madera County just north of Fresno, with a station to be located in Fresno’s Downtown, along H Street at Mariposa Street. The HSR tracks through Fresno- Clovis Metropolitan Area would run generally parallel to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks.

Once implemented, the HSR system will increase the accessibility of Fresno to the major population and economic hubs of California. It will also provide an opportunity for redevelopment and infill development of the area around the HSR station that takes advantage of the proximity of the HSR station.

The City has proposed to accommodate the access and space requirements and the potential effects upon surrounding properties and land uses through Specific Plans in the Downtown Planning Area and a HSR Station Area Master Plan (incorporated into the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, adopted in October 2016). As stated in the General Plan, when the HSR system is fully built, the City ultimately plans to link the FAX and BRT systems with the HSR station.

4.16.1.3 Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation
Fresno has made a strong commitment to improving non-motorized travel. The City established a Bicycle-Pedestrian Advisory Committee in 2002 and subsequently completed the Bicycle, Pedestrian,

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.16-4
and Trails Master Plan (BMP), which was presented to the City Council in 2010. Although the BMP was a separate document and not a part of the General Plan, the General Plan supported the BMP’s aspirations for a comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian facilities network consisting of sidewalks, lanes, paths, and trails while recognizing that the BMP identified more facilities and programs than discussed in the General Plan.

Subsequent to the BMP (2010) and the General Plan (2014), the City Council adopted the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) in March 2017 as an update to the BMP. The ATP is a comprehensive guide outlining the vision for active transportation in Fresno and includes more robust planning for pedestrian travel and infrastructure than is presented in the BMP. The City has established the following goals as part of the ATP:
• To equitably improve the safety and perceived safety of walking and bicycling in the City; • To achieve an increased number of walking and bicycling trips by creating user-friendly facilities; • To improve the geographic equity of access to walking and bicycling facilities in the City; and • To fill key gaps in the City’s walking and bicycling networks.

Pedestrian Circulation. The presence of sidewalks and the quality of the pedestrian realm is a critical factor in the ability to walk around Fresno. Certain areas of Fresno lack continuous sidewalks, leaving pedestrians to share road space with cars. The City began addressing this problem with the “No Neighborhood Left Behind” program in 2005, which added new gutters, curbs, sidewalks, and streetlights to inner-city neighborhoods at a budget of $45 million over six years starting in fiscal year 2005, and has since been completed. With the integration of the ATP, the City has begun providing pedestrian treatments and supportive facilities. Strategies for a comprehensive pedestrian system include the implementation of interconnected sidewalks, continued addition of controlled crosswalks at traffic-controlled intersections, median refuge islands, bulb-outs, in-street and overhead pedestrian crossing signs, and rectangular rapid flashing beacons.

Accessible Design. Most of the city was built before the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which required streets to be accessible to persons in wheelchairs or with impaired mobility.

In accordance with the ADA (1990), the City has been committed to ongoing efforts to ensure accessibility for all. In 2016, the ADA Transition Plan for the Right of Way (ROW) and the ADA Facilities Transition Plan were adopted, which set action plans and standards for ADA facilities within Fresno. Additional details on sidewalks and pedestrian treatments and support facilities in Fresno are provided in the ATP.

Bicycle Circulation. Bicycle facilities consist of the following four classifications:
• Bike Paths (Class I) are often referred to as shared-use paths or trails, or multiuse paths, which are off-street facilities that provide exclusive use for non-motorized travel, including bicyclists and pedestrians. Class I facilities are typically 10- to 12-foot wide concrete/asphalt paved surfaces with 2-foot wide shoulders. Bike paths have minimal cross flow with motorists and are typically located along landscaped corridors. Bike paths can be utilized for both recreational and commute trips. These paths provide an important recreational amenity for bicyclists,

4.16-5

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

pedestrians, dog walkers, runners, skaters, and all residents using other non-motorized forms of travel.
• Bike Lanes (Class II) are designated on-street facilities that use striping, stencils, and signage to denote preferential or exclusive use by bicyclists. On-street bikes lanes are typically 5 feet wide and are adjacent to motor vehicle traffic. Bike lanes are intended to alert drivers about the predictable movements of bicyclists and provide adequate space for comfortable bicycle riding.

Current City standards require Class II bike lanes on all new Collectors and Arterials; many existing Collectors are already constructed with Class II bike lanes. • Bike Routes (Class III) are on-street pavement markings or signage that connect the bicycle roadway network. Class III bike routes can be utilized to connect bicycle lanes or paths along corridors that do not provide enough space for dedicated lanes on low-speed and low-volume streets.
• Separated Bikeways (Class IV) are designated on-street bicycle facilities separated by a physical boundary such as a vertical curb, a painted buffer with flexible posts, parked cars, a landscape area, or a fixed barrier. Cycle tracks are typically 7 feet wide with 3-foot wide shoulders and can include one-way or two-way lanes, accommodating a single direction of travel or both. Cycle tracks can be utilized along streets with high vehicular volumes and speeds, and located in areas with fewer driveways.

The ATP includes existing (2016) and 2010 citywide bicycle lane mile coverage identified for all bicycle classifications. As illustrated, Bike Paths (Class I) include 38 miles of coverage in 2016, compared to 14 miles during 2010. Bike Lanes (Class II) include 431 miles of coverage in 2016 compared to 226 miles in 2010. Bike Routes (Class III) include 22 miles of coverage in 2016 compared to 14 miles in 2010. Three Cycle Tracks (Class IV) projects have been constructed in Fresno and several others are planned but not yet constructed. Additional details on bicycle facilities in the City are provided in the ATP.

Rail/Highway Freight. Fresno is served by The San Joaquin Line, one of Amtrak’s passenger rail services with connections between the San Joaquin Valley, the Sacramento Valley, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Los Angeles. Greyhound provides similar (more frequent) bus service to these regions.

In 2024, the San Joaquins Line carried approximately 910,000 passengers.1 Fresno is served by two freight lines:
• Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF). This rail corridor has one track and travels through northwest Fresno and the middle of Downtown. • Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). This corridor has two tracks and generally runs parallel to SR‐99.

1 Amtrak, Amtrak FY24 Ridership, Amtrak Route Ridership FY24 vs FY23. 2024. Available online at:
https://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/FY24-Year-End-Ridership-Fact-Sheet.pdf (accessed May 2025).

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.16-6
Aviation. Fresno is served by three airports: Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FYI), Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, and Sierra Sky Park. Each of the three airports is described below. • Fresno Yosemite International Airport. The City manages Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FYI) which is located in the eastern portion of the city along East Clinton Way, and is a joint use civilian/military airport. It is used by commercial air carriers, air cargo operators, charter operators, the State of California, general aviation, and the United States military. In 2024, the airport served approximately 1.1 million passengers.2
• Fresno Chandler Executive Airport. Fresno Chandler Executive Airport is located in the southwestern portion of the city, northwest of the intersection of West Kearny Boulevard and South Thorne Avenue. The airport is designated as a general aviation reliever airport for FYI. One small cargo carrier operates out of the facility, and nine general aviation businesses operate out of the airport. Approximately 180 general aviation aircraft are based at Fresno Chandler Executive Airport.
• Sierra Sky Park. Sierra Sky Park airport is located in the northern portion of the city adjacent to the San Joaquin River north of Herndon Avenue. The facility is a privately owned public use general aviation airport. Sierra Sky Park functions as a reliever airport for small general aviation aircraft, and includes a hangar and office complex.

4.16.2 Regulatory Setting

4.16.2.1 Federal Regulatory Setting
Federal Highway Administration. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is a major agency of the United States Department of Transportation. In partnership with State and local agencies, the FHWA carries out federal highway programs to meet the nation’s transportation needs. The FHWA administers and oversees federal highway programs to ensure that federal funds are used efficiently.

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Titles I, II, III, IV, and V of the ADA have been codified in Title 42 of the United States Code, beginning at Section 12101. Title III prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in “places of public accommodation” (businesses and nonprofit agencies that serve the public) and “commercial facilities” (other businesses). The regulation includes Standards for Accessible Design, which establish minimum standards for ensuring accessibility when designing and constructing a new facility or altering an existing facility.

Federal Transit Administration. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is an authority that provides financial and technical assistance to local public transit systems, including buses, subways, light rail, commuter rail, trolleys, and ferries. The FTA is funded by Title 49 of the United States Code, which states the FTA’s interest in fostering the development and revitalization of public

2 Fresno Yosemite International Airport. 2024. Website: https://flyfresno.com/wp-content/uploads/ 2025/02/2024-12.pdf (accessed May 2025).

4.16-7

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

transportation systems. The FTA invests approximately $12 billion annually to support and expand public transit.

4.16.2.2 State Regulatory Setting
Assembly Bill 32 (Global Warming Act of 2006) and Senate Bill 375. Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, requires California to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to levels presented in the year 1990 by 2020. In response, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for creating guidelines for this act. In 2008, CARB adopted its proposed Scoping Plan, which included the approval of Senate Bill (SB) 375 as a means of achieving regional transportation-related GHG targets. SB 375 provides guidance on how curbing emissions from cars and light trucks helps the State comply with AB 32.

Established through CARB, SB 375 lists four major components and requirements: (1) it requires regional GHG emissions targets; (2) it requires creating a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that provides a plan for meeting the regional targets; (3) it requires that regional housing elements and transportation plans be synchronized on 8-year schedules; and (4) it requires transportation and air pollutant emissions modeling techniques consistent with guidelines prepared by the California Transportation Commission (CTC).

Assembly Bill 1358 (Complete Streets). The California Complete Streets Act requires general plans updated after January 30, 2011, to include Complete Streets policies so that roadways are designed to safely accommodate all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit riders, children, the elderly, and persons with disabilities, as well as motorists. The goal of this act is to encourage cities to rethink policies that emphasize automobile circulation and prioritize motor vehicle improvements and come up with creative solutions that emphasize all modes of transportation. Complete Streets roadways allow for more transportation options, more non-single-occupancy vehicles, and less traffic congestion. Additionally, increased transit ridership, walking, and biking can reduce air pollution while improving the overall travel experience for road users.

While there is no standard for a Complete Streets design, it generally includes one or more of the following features: bicycle lanes, wide shoulders, well-designed and well-placed crosswalks, crossing islands in appropriate mid-block locations, bus pullouts or special bus lanes, audible and accessible pedestrian signals, sidewalk bulb-outs, center medians, street trees, planter strips, and groundcover.

Senate Bill (SB) 743. On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 743 into law and codified a process that changed transportation impact analysis as part of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance. SB 743 directs the California Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to administer new CEQA guidance for jurisdictions that removes automobile vehicle delay and level of service (LOS) or other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestions from CEQA transportation analysis. Rather, it requires the analysis of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or other measures that “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multi- modal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses,” to be used as a basis for determining significant impacts to circulation in California. The goal of SB 743 is to appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with statewide goals related to reducing GHG emissions, encourage infill development, and promote public health through active transportation.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.16-8
Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Caltrans’ “Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies”3 provides general guidance regarding the preparation of traffic impact studies for projects that may have an impact on the State Highway System. The guidance includes when a traffic study should be prepared and the methodology to use when evaluating operating conditions on the State highway system.

The “Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies” states, “Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS “C” and LOS “D” on state highway facilities, however, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS.” In accordance with this recommendation, consultation with Caltrans staff indicated that Caltrans would be willing to consider LOS D at the LOS D/E threshold when improvements become infeasible for State facilities.

The Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies also states that where “an existing State highway facility is operating at less than the appropriate target LOS, the existing [measure of effectiveness (MOE)] should be maintained.”

4.16.2.3 Regional Regulatory Setting
Fresno County Council of Governments. The Fresno Council of Governments (COG) is a voluntary association of local governments and a regional planning agency comprising 16 member jurisdictions, including the City of Fresno. The members are represented by a Policy Board consisting of mayors of each incorporated city and the Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors, or their designated elected official. The Policy Advisory Committee (PAC), composed of the Chief Administrative Officer of each member agency, assists the Board in its decision-making process.

Others involved in the decision process include expert staff from member agencies, citizen and interest groups, and other stakeholders. The Fresno COG’s purpose is to establish a consensus on the needs of the Fresno County area and further action plans for issues related to the Fresno County region. The current regional transportation plan, known as the Fresno County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) (2046), was adopted in 2022. The RTP addresses GHG emissions reductions and other air emissions related to transportation, with the goal of preparing for future growth in a sustainable way. The plan specifies how funding will be sourced and financed for the region’s planned transportation investments, ongoing operations, and maintenance. The goals, objectives, and policies of the RTP are established to direct the courses of action that will provide efficient, integrated multi-modal transportation systems to serve the mobility needs of people, including accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and freight, while fostering economic prosperity and development, and minimizing mobile sources of air pollution. They are organized into six broad transportation mode-based categories: general transportation; highways, streets, and roads; mass transportation; aviation; active transportation; and rail.

4.16.2.4 Local Regulatory Setting
City of Fresno CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds (VMT Guidelines). In June 2020, the City adopted VMT thresholds and guidelines to address VMT to be effective on July 1, 2020, as required by SB 743. The City’s document serves as a detailed guideline for preparing VMT

3 California Department of Transportation. 2002. Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies.

December.

4.16-9

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

analyses consistent with SB 743 requirements for development projects, transportation projects, and plans. Project applicants are required to follow the guidance provided in the City’s document for preparation of CEQA VMT analysis. The document includes the following:
• Definition of region for VMT analysis;
• Standardized screening methods for VMT threshold compliance data; • Recommendations for appropriate VMT significance thresholds for development projects, transportation projects, and plans; and
• Feasible mitigation strategies applicable for development projects, transportation projects, and plans.

City of Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines. The City of Fresno adopted Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines in October 2006, which were updated in February 2009. The Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines establish general procedures and requirements for the preparation of traffic impact studies associated with development within the City of Fresno. The guidelines are intended as a checklist for study preparers to be sure they have not missed any regular study items.

City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan. The City’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP), adopted in March 2017, provides a comprehensive guide outlining the vision for active transportation in Fresno.

The ATP supersedes the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan that was adopted in 2010. The ATP envisions a complete, safe, and comfortable network of trails, sidewalks, and bikeways that serves all residents of Fresno. This plan lays out specific goals to improve bicycle and pedestrian access and connectivity in Fresno. These goals include the following:
• Equitably improve the safety and perceived safety of walking and bicycling in Fresno; • Increase walking and bicycling trips in Fresno by creating user-friendly facilities; • Improve the geographical equity of access to walking and bicycling facilities in Fresno; and • Fill key gaps in Fresno’s walking and bicycling networks.

City of Fresno Complete Streets Policy. In 2019 the City of Fresno adopted Policy 240.3 as policy and procedure to be implemented by the City’s Public Works Department. The policy was adopted to solidify City practices and ensure consistency in the application of complete streets. As a result the Department of Public Works is required to lead implementation across all City Departments to aid in of planning, design, and construction of transportation facilities that balance safety, access, and mobility for users of all abilities and ages.

City of Fresno General Plan. The City of Fresno’s General Plan Mobility and Transportation Element includes objectives and policies that work to create and maintain a transportation system that is safe, efficient, provides access in an equitable manner, and optimizes travel by all modes. The following policies related to transportation are applicable to the proposed project:
• Policy MT-1-d: Integrate Land Use and Transportation Planning. Plan for and maintain a coordinated and well integrated land use pattern, local circulation network and transportation system that accommodates planned growth, reduces impacts on adjacent land uses, and preserves the integrity of established neighborhoods.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.16-10
• 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-g: Transportation Demand Management and Transportation System Management. Pursue implementation of Transportation Demand Management and Transportation System Management strategies to reduce peak hour vehicle traffic and supplement the capacity of the transportation system.
• Policy MT-2-i: Transportation Impact Studies. Require a Transportation Impact Study (currently named Traffic Impact Study) to assess the impacts of new development projects on existing and planned streets for projects meeting one or more of the following criteria, unless it is determined by the City Traffic Engineer that the project site and surrounding area already has appropriate multi-modal infrastructure improvements.
• Policy MT-5-d Pedestrian Safety: Minimize vehicular and pedestrian conflicts on both major and non-roadways through implementation of traffic access design and control standards addressing street intersections, median island openings and access driveways to facilitate accessibility while reducing congestion and increasing safety. Increase safety and accessibility for pedestrians with vision disabilities through the installation of Accessible Pedestrian Signals at signalized intersections.
• Policy MT-8-d: Coordination of Transportation Modes. Plan, design, and implement transportation system improvements promoting coordination and continuity of transportation modes and facilities, such as shared parking or park and ride facilities at Activity Centers.

4.16.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to transportation that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of significance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is significant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for significant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less than significant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.16.3.1 Significance Criteria
The thresholds for impacts related to transportation used in this analysis are consistent with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Development of the proposed project would result in a significant impact related to transportation if it would:

4.16-11

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities;
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b); c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or d. Result in inadequate emergency access.

4.16.3.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to transportation that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

TRA-1 The project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

The proposed VMT Reduction Program aims to establish mitigation for projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a VMT Urban Design Calculator and mitigation impact fee. The proposed program identifies relevant Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies and VMT-reducing projects within Fresno to be funded by the proposed impact fee. These TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects were identified in the following existing City documents that could contribute towards reducing Citywide VMT:
• Fresno Council of Governments (COG) Short Range Transit Plan • Fresno Council of Governments (COG) Long Range Transit Plan • Fresno Council of Governments (COG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) • Fresno Safe Routes to School Action Plan
• Fresno Active Transportation Plan
• Southern Blackstone Avenue Smart Mobility Plan
Table 3.A, Potential VMT-Reducing Improvements, provides a summary of VMT-reducing infrastructure improvements that could be funded and implemented with the support of the proposed VMT Reduction Program. Potential improvements include, but are not limited to, development and implementation of a mobile ticketing trip planning application, a TDM coordinator, new buses for increased frequency, pedestrian safety enhancement corridors, and assorted pedestrian improvements. As such, the proposed program would help implement many of the City’s planned infrastructure improvement projects that have yet to be funded. As a result, the proposed program would be consistent with adopted transportation-related plans and programs and help fund existing planned and unfunded infrastructure improvement projects, and would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required beyond the VMT-reducing components identified by the proposed VMT Reduction Program.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.16-12
Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

TRA-2 The project would conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

The intent of the proposed VMT Reduction Program is to support reductions in Citywide VMT. If a future development project screens out of VMT analysis or is located in a VMT efficient zone, the impact fee would not be applicable. VMT efficient zones are areas of the City where the VMT is already below the adopted thresholds. Therefore, the proposed program incentivizes future development to occur within VMT efficient zones of Fresno.

However, should future projects be developed in areas outside of the City’s VMT efficient zones and result in potentially significant VMT impact, the future projects would be required to pay the mitigation impact fee. Payment of the impact fee is intended to serve as mitigation for future development projects that exceed the City’s established VMT threshold. However, while the proposed program would fund and help implement TDM measures and VMT-reducing projects within the City at a program level, potentially significant VMT impacts could still occur on a project- level. For example, a future development project outside of the City’s VMT efficient zones could pay the required impact fee, but their required fee may not fund the full cost of what is necessary to construct/complete an identified infrastructure improvement project. Therefore, it cannot be determined with certainty whether improvements would be implemented at the time a future development project’s VMT impacts occur (e.g., at project opening), and whether those impacts would be mitigated to less-than-significant levels. Additionally, the impact fee would only apply to VMT generated above the City’s established VMT threshold and thus, would not be able to fully fund all the identified TDM improvements.

Given the speculative timing of when the TDM measures and VMT-reducing transportation improvements would be implemented, and the fact that the proposed VMT Reduction program cannot fully fund all identified improvements, the timing of VMT reductions may not exactly correspond to project level openings. Furthermore data is still being collected on effectiveness of VMT reduction methods and it is unknown if the VMT-reducing projects funded by the proposed project would reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. As such, impacts in this regard would be significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: No feasible mitigation measures are available.

Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact.

TRA-3 The project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

The proposed VMT Reduction Program does not propose any specific changes to roadways.

However, transportation improvements would be funded and eventually implemented as a result of the proposed program. Nevertheless, future funded VMT-reducing transportation improvements would undergo separate environmental review under CEQA to evaluate project-specific impacts

4.16-13

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

regarding potential hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. Additionally, future roadway improvements would be required to comply with existing City standards related to street improvements. In addition, the proposed program is anticipated to result in beneficial impacts with respect to future projects implementing improvements for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. As a result, future improvements funded and implemented in accordance with the proposed program would result in less than significant impacts.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

TRA-4 The project would not result in inadequate emergency access.

Future infrastructure improvements implemented in accordance with the proposed program would be required to comply with all applicable City codes and policies related to emergency access, including the California Fire Code and the City’s Development Code. Future improvement projects would also be required to undergo separate environmental review to evaluate project-level impacts with regards to emergency access. Thus, the proposed program’s impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.16.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 requires an analysis of cumulative impacts, which are defined as, “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The cumulative analysis below considers the proposed project’s impacts in conjunction with future buildout of the General Plan.

TRA-5 The project, in combination with other projects, would contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to transportation.

The proposed project would fund TDM measures and VMT-reducing projects identified in existing City planning documents related to transportation. Thus, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would help improve roadway, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities within Fresno. The proposed project would be consistent with existing transportation programs and plans and result in less than significant impacts. Thus, the project’s contribution towards cumulative impacts in conjunction with development associated with the General Plan buildout are not cumulatively considerable. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

The proposed program’s intent is to reduce Citywide VMT by establishing a mitigation impact fee and funding TDM measures and VMT-reducing projects. However, as stated above, it cannot be determined with certainty whether the identified transportation improvements would be implemented at the time a future project’s VMT impacts occur, and whether those potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Additionally, the impact fee would only

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.16-14
apply to VMT generated above the established threshold and thus, would not be able to fully fund all the identified improvements. As such, VMT impacts associated with the proposed program could be significant and unavoidable. Given that, the project could also cumulatively contribute towards significant impacts when considered in conjunction with impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan. No feasible mitigation is available given the speculative timing of when the TDM measures and VMT-reducing transportation improvements would be implemented and the fact that the proposed VMT Reduction Program cannot fully fund all identified improvements. Thus, cumulative impacts in this regard would remain significant and unavoidable.

Similar to future roadway improvements funded by the program, future cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be required to comply with existing City standards related to street improvements. Future cumulative projects would also be required to undergo separate environmental review to evaluate project-specific impacts.

Future roadway improvement projects funded by the proposed program would be required to comply with existing City standards related to street improvements and thus, would result in less than significant impacts. In addition, the prosed program is anticipated to result in beneficial impacts in this regard, as a range of the identified future improvements (crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands, neighborhood traffic circles, widened sidewalks, and multi-purpose paths) would improve safety for alternate modes of transportation. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute towards cumulatively considerable impacts with regards to increasing hazards due to geometric design features or introducing incompatible uses. Impacts would be less than significant.

Similarly, future infrastructure improvements funded by the proposed program would not result in inadequate emergency access given that the improvements are intended to provide enhanced and safer multimodal amenities within the City. Additionally, all improvements would be required to comply with existing codes and standards and thus, would result in less than significant impacts.

Therefore, the project would not contribute towards cumulatively considerable impacts with regards to emergency access. Impacts would be less than significant.

Although, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would not contribute to cumulative considerable impacts related to consistency with existing transportation plans, design standards, and emergency access, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would implement VMT-reducing projects that may not fully reduce VMT impacts due to timing, funding and effectiveness.

Mitigation Measures: No feasible mitigation measures are available beyond the VMT-reducing components identified by the proposed VMT Reduction Program.

Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact.

4.17-1

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
This section addresses potential impacts to utilities and service systems including water supply, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste resulting from implementation of the proposed project.

4.17.1 Existing Environmental Setting
The following outlines the utilities and service systems in the Fresno area and in the vicinity of the project site.

4.17.1.1 Water Supply
The City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities (DPU) relies on groundwater from the North Kings Subbasin; surface water from Central Valley Project (CVP), through a contract with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR); Kings River water, through a contract with Fresno Irrigation District (FID); and recycled water.

DPU provides potable water to the majority of the City, and some users within the portion of the Planning Area outside of the City limits. Fresno’s primary source of potable water comes from groundwater. Water production in the City had consisted of 100% groundwater prior to the commissioning of its first surface water treatment facility in 2004. The City’s first surface water treatment facility (Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility [NESWTF]) came online and began delivering approximately 4,060 acre‐feet (AF) in 2004 to residents in northeast Fresno. By 2015, the NESWTF in combination with the T‐3 Surface Water Treatment Facility (T‐3 SWTF) delivered approximately 28,347 AF of treated surface water to the residents of Fresno. In 2018, the City completed construction of its new 54 millions of gallons per day (mgd) surface water treatment facility in southeast Fresno (SESWTF) and large diameter water mains that serve nearly one‐half of the City. With the SESWTF operational, along with the NESWTF and T‐3 SWTF, the City provided greater than 50 percent of its potable supply through using surface water.

The 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) was adopted by the City Council in July 2021. It describes the current and planned water conservation programs, provides a water shortage contingency plan should it need to be implemented in the event of a severe water shortage or water supply emergency, and a future water supply plan for a variety of water sources including treated surface water, groundwater and recycled water. Also included in the 2020 UWMP is an aggressive water conservation plan to reduce demand throughout the City’s service area. The 2020 UWMP is in accordance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act that stipulates that every urban water supplier in California supplying water directly or indirectly to 3,000 or more customers or supplying more than 3,000 AF of water annually shall adopt and submit an Urban Water Management Plan to the California Department of Water Resources every five years. Failure to submit a plan, as required, could result in ineligibility to receive certain grants or receive drought assistance from the State.

Groundwater Supply. The City overlies the Kings Subbasin, which is part of the greater San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. Historically, water demand within the city has been met by extracting groundwater from the Kings Subbasin. Like much of the Kings Subbasin, groundwater levels beneath Fresno were relatively shallow at 25 feet below ground surface in 1940, prior to the start of World War II. After the war, the State, including Fresno, began growing at a rapid rate. For the period from

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.17-2
1959 to 1968, it was reported groundwater levels declined at a rate of 2.8 feet per year.

Groundwater levels since 1990 have declined at a lower rate than previously, from less than 0.5 feet per year in the southwest portion of the downtown area, to a rate of 1.5 feet per year for northern and southern areas of town, to a maximum of 3 feet per year in the northeastern area.

Groundwater used by the City to meet its demands is replenished by three different methods:
• Natural recharge
• Subsurface inflow
• Intentional recharge
Based on the natural groundwater recharge (24,970 AF), subsurface inflow (47,510 AF), and intentional normal precipitation year recharge (60,000 AF), the total groundwater yield anticipated for 2020 for a normal year supply is approximately 132,480 AF. By 2045, the City anticipates that the natural groundwater recharge will increase to 26,760 AF/year, subsurface inflow will be 59,530 AF/year, and intentional groundwater recharge will increase to 73,500 AF/year due to an increase in the capacity of surface water treatment. The total groundwater yield in 2045 is expected to be approximately 159,820 AF/year.

The City has a network of 285 municipal wells, approximately 200 of which are currently active pump stations that pump an average of 74 mgd. Groundwater pumping data provided by the City indicates that approximately 55,000 AF was pumped in 2020. Groundwater pumping has significantly dropped since 2003, the City’s peak year for groundwater production (i.e., 165,200 AF).

Groundwater will continue to be an important part of the City’s water supply but will not be heavily relied upon as it has been in the past. With the recent investments in surface water infrastructures, the City has been able to drastically reduce its reliance on groundwater pumping. The City will continue expanding their delivery and treatment of surface water supplies and groundwater recharge activities to maximize water usage.

4.17.1.2 Wastewater
Wastewater Collection System. The City of Fresno owns and operates the Fresno‐Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), and the smaller North Fresno Water Reclamation Facility (NFWRF). In addition, the City owns and maintains a wastewater collection system that serves the City and other participating agencies: County of Fresno, the majority of the City of Clovis, Pinedale Public Utility District, and Pinedale County Water District. The City’s wastewater collection system consists of about 1,630 miles of gravity sewer lines, ranging in size from 4 inches in diameter to 84 inches in diameter, force mains, over 25,000 manholes, and 18 lift stations throughout Fresno, ranging in pumping capacity from 0.25 mgd to 2.2 mgd.

The City of Fresno commissioned a team of engineering consultants to prepare the initial 2006 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan. The master plan effort included hydraulic modeling of the wastewater collection system to evaluate system capacity for both then‐existing conditions and full build‐out conditions under the City's General Plan. Building on the 2006 master plan, an updated version was adopted in 2015. In these master plans, a number of capacity‐deficient sewers were

4.17-3

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

identified, and recommendations for capacity relief projects were developed, including point repairs, pipe rehabilitations, upgrading existing facilities to mitigate current capacity deficiencies and serve future users, as well as build‐out improvements necessary to accommodate future demand.

Both versions of the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (2006 and 2015) incorporated the results of a number of prior sewer inspection and evaluation efforts, including recommendations for prioritized sewer rehabilitation projects ‐ most or all of which were necessary as a result of microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) activity. The master plans also identified several trunk sewer projects and infill projects identified by the City of Fresno. These recommended sewer projects were included as part of the recommended Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for future implementation, covering a period from 2006 through 2025. Since the adoption of the master plans, the City of Fresno has been regularly implementing various elements of the CIP.

As required by the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems, the City of Fresno prepared the 2009 Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) for the Wastewater Collection System. The SSMP was revised and updated in 2014 and 2019 to reflect changes and revisions from former versions of the document.

The SSMP provides a framework for the proper management, operation, and maintenance of all elements of the wastewater collection system, with the objectives of reducing and preventing sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) and mitigating any SSOs that may occur. An SSO is a release of untreated or partially treated wastewater resulting in public exposure, regardless of whether the wastewater reaches waters of the United States. SSOs also include wastewater backups into buildings and onto private property that are caused by blockages in the City’s portion of the sanitary sewer system.

All of the mandatory elements of the SSMP were already in place and in use by the City of Fresno through other programs and ordinances, such as the Fresno Municipal Code, the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, the Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) Control Program, the Sanitary System Overflow Prevention and Response Plan, Performance Measures and Public Information/Education opportunities. The City of Fresno operates the wastewater collection system under the SSMP and related programs and ordinances to accomplish the SSMP objectives.

Wastewater Treatment and Disposal. The City Fresno/Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF) is located southwest of the City in the area generally bounded by Jensen, Cornelia, Central and Chateau Fresno Avenues. It provides wastewater treatment for a service area that includes most of the Cities of Fresno and Clovis, and some unincorporated areas of Fresno County.

Flows received at this facility peaked at 81,100 AFY in 2006 and have been steadily decreasing since, with the average influent flow about 63,000 AFY over the last 5 years. The RWRF includes preliminary, primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment units with disinfection. Secondary treatment consists of three treatment trains with an annual average capacity of 87 mgd, consisting of 30 mgd for Train A and 57 mgd for Trains B and C combined. In 2017, a 5 mgd tertiary treatment system—the

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.17-4
Tertiary Treatment and Disinfection Facility (TTDF)—was completed. The system can be expanded to 15 mgd and ultimately to 30 mgd.

The City’s RWRF diverts a portion of the undisinfected secondary effluent to irrigate non‐food crops grown adjacent to this facility. The practice of using the secondary effluent to irrigate non‐food crops has been carried out for decades and is expected to continue for the foreseeable future. The City owns nearly 3,300 acres of land for and around the RWRF, consisting of percolation ponds (1,750 acres) and other land available to farm non‐food crops.

Additionally, the RWRF produces Title 22 disinfected tertiary‐treated effluent through the TTDF completed in 2017 and through tertiary‐equivalent soil aquifer‐treated recycled water recovered from the percolated secondary effluent. A series of 15 groundwater wells located at the RWRF are used to extract previously percolated effluent groundwater from beneath the facility. The tertiary‐ equivalent soil aquifer‐treated recycled water (recovered groundwater) is used for on‐site irrigation and transport to FID canals for delivery to customers during the irrigation season, as facilitated through an exchange agreement with FID.

Since the completion of the 2010 Recycled Water Master Plan (RWMP), the City has constructed most of the southwest recycled water system. The southwest recycled water system consists of a

3.2‐million‐gallon recycled water reservoir located at the RWRF, a 6,000 gallons per minute (gpm) (8.64 mgd) recycled water pump station located at the RWRF, a 640 gpm booster pump station (Roeding Park Booster), and 15.7 miles of 10‐inch to 54‐inch recycled water pipeline. Roughly 7.5 miles of pipeline remain to be constructed. The City also updated the demand and distribution system from the 2010 RWMP with the 2019 Citywide Recycled Water Demand and Southwest Recycled Water System Analysis to identify potential recycled water customers.

4.17.1.3 Stormwater
Stormwater collection and disposal, and flood control for the City of Fresno, City of Clovis, and the unincorporated areas within the City of Fresno’s sphere of influence are provided by the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD). The FMFCD is a special district created by the State of California Legislature and ratified by the voters of the district in 1956. FMFCD has more than 170 urban watersheds that collect stormwater runoff and dispose of the runoff in retention basins, local canals, or the San Joaquin River. Each urban watershed, called a drainage area by FMFCD, consists of a collection system and, in most cases, a retention basin to store and dispose of the runoff. Pipeline collection systems have diameters that range from 15 inches to 18 inches. Retention basins range in size from 5 acres to 25 acres, with most being 8 to 10 acres in size. The FMFCD drainage area for stormwater from the project site is basin “AS”, located southwest from the site.1 Stormwater Collection and Disposal. FMFCD provides drainage service to the Fresno metropolitan area. In order to provide this service, the FMFCD has organized the metropolitan area into over 170 urban drainage areas or watersheds. Watersheds are delineated along topographic boundaries and

1 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District. Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan. Exhibit A.

Website: http://www.fresnofloodcontrol.org/wp‐content/uploads/2022/09/District‐Wall‐Map.png (accessed March 25, 2025).

4.17-5

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

are limited in size to between 200 acres to 600 acres. The area limitation reduces the size of the required collection facilities and disposal facilities. Service is provided through the combination of surface drainage improvements, chiefly curbs and gutters, that direct runoff to storm drainage inlets which collect the runoff and convey the runoff to underground pipeline collection systems. The collection systems convey the stormwater to disposal facilities, which in the majority of cases are excavated, unlined basins. In three cases, the collection systems discharge to pump wet wells from which the stormwater is lifted into an adjacent canal, and in six cases, the stormwater is discharged into the San Joaquin River. Two of these systems discharge directly to the San Joaquin River and four discharge to a water quality basin before discharge to the river occurs.

The collection systems are designed to provide one foot of freeboard in the pipeline collection system designed to convey runoff rates generated by rainfall intensity up to and including a 50 percent probability of occurrence (a 2‐year return frequency). There are exceptions to this design standard in areas of the City where older drainage systems were installed prior to the formation of the FMFCD, or constructed in the very early years of the FMFCD, and shifts in land use densities have eroded the level of service. FMFCD documents the deficiencies and develops master planned solutions to these deficiencies as they are identified. The proposed project would include construction of a new curb and gutter along North Marks Avenue, West Nielsen Avenue, and North Hughes Avenue to connect to the City’s existing stormwater system.

Retention basins are designed to provide storage for up to 6 inches of rainfall on the drainage area watershed given typical runoff to rainfall ratios used for urban drainage design. There are exceptions to this design standard, notably in those retention basins constructed prior to 1969 when the design criteria were changed to increase the storage volume. The change resulted from the extreme rainfall events of the spring of 1969 and the resulting flooding at the then‐existing basins. Water quality basins are designed in accordance with the US Environmental Protection Agency’s design standards to remove sediments and trash prior to discharge of stormwater to the San Joaquin River. They provide quiescent conditions for settling of suspended solids within a holding basin prior to discharge from the basin via an overflow weir. The water quality basins alternate between wet and dry, depending on the season and amount of rainfall that has occurred within the drainage area.

FMFCD has utilized three means to implement drainage systems for the metropolitan area. One method has been to use Community Block Grants and low interest infrastructure loans from the State of California to construct drainage facilities in the older, previously developed areas of the City.

A second method has been to form assessment districts under the provisions of the 1915 Bond Act.

Assessment districts were formed based on drainage area boundaries, the parcels within the assessment districts were assessed a proportional share of the cost of the collection and disposal system, and the drainage system for the drainage area was constructed. The third and currently employed method is to collect drainage fees from parcels as they develop based on their prorated share of the cost of the drainage area collection and disposal systems. The implementing ordinance for the drainage fee structure is adopted by the City of Fresno, and the drainage fees are collected by the City when entitlements are granted or building permits are issued.

FMFCD is a primary participant in groundwater recharge for the City of Fresno. Unlined retention basins provide recharge of both stormwater runoff and imported water from the San Joaquin River and Kings River. It is estimated that 80‐percent of the stormwater that falls within the metropolitan

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.17-6
area is recharged via FMFCD’s retention basins. FMFCD has identified retention basins within the metropolitan area that have significant recharge capability. The City of Fresno, through a cooperative agreement, utilizes the Fresno Irrigation District (FID) canal system to deliver allocated water from the San Joaquin River and the Kings River to these basins where the water infiltrates through the underlying soil strata and into the groundwater beneath the basins. FMFCD retention basins, largely in part through a cooperative agreement with the City, provide groundwater recharge for an estimated annual average of 30,000 AF of water.

Flood Control. The City of Fresno is located in the alluvial fans of numerous foothill streams and creeks that drain the western slope of the Sierra Nevada foothills. These streams include Big Dry Creek, Alluvial Drain, Pup Creek, Dog Creek, Redbank Creek, Mud Creek, and Fancher Creek.

Numerous smaller, unnamed drainage courses also drain into the City from the rural areas east of the City. FMFCD provides flood control measures on the major creeks for the 0.5‐percent exceedance interval (200‐year return frequency) flood flow event with a series of dams and detention basins located east of the City. These dams include Big Dry Creek Dam, Fancher Creek Dam, and Redbank Dam. The detention basins include the Alluvial Drain Detention Basin, Pup Creek Detention Basin, Redbank Creek Detention Basin, Fancher Creek Detention Basin, and Big Dry Creek Detention Basin.

The Big Dry Creek Dam was originally constructed in 1948 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It was subsequently raised and enlarged by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as part of the Redbank and Fancher Creek Flood Control Project in 1993 to provide a flood pool with 30,200 AF of storage.

Redbank Creek Dam was constructed by FMFCD in 1961. It provides a gross pool storage of 1,030 AF.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also constructed the Alluvial Drain Detention Basin in 1993, the Pup Creek Detention Basin in 1993, the Redbank Detention Basin in 1990 and the Fancher Creek Dam in 1991. The Redbank and Fancher Creek Flood Control Project was a jointly funded Federal, State, and local project. FMFCD constructed the Fancher Creek Detention Basin in 2003 and recently completed the Big Dry Creek Detention Basin.

FMFCD has master planned the Dog Creek, Pup Creek, and a portion of Redbank Creek channels to convey the 0.5‐percent exceedance level flood flows within bank. The improvement of these channels will occur as funding and legal authority to proceed with the improvements are provided either through grants and purchase of right of way or through the entitlement process. Each of these channels are ephemeral streams that flow only during the latter parts of the wet season.

4.17.1.4 Solid Waste
Fresno diverts a majority of its solid waste away from landfills and into recycling and composting programs. Diversion conserves limited landfill space, keeps toxic chemicals and materials from contaminating landfills, and enhances the reuse of materials. Recycling of construction & demolition

4.17-7

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

is required for any City‐issued building, relocation or demolition permitted project that generates at least 8 cubic yards of material by volume and all waste must be hauled to a City‐approved facility.2 The Solid Waste Management Division (SWMD) of the City of Fresno provides waste management services for about 119,000 participating residential customers. This includes weekly collection of solid waste, recycling, and green waste via a three‐cart system. These residents also have access to community services like waste and oil filter collection. Other key community services provided include: Operation Clean Up, Free Dump Days, Citywide Litter Control, Recycling Education and Outreach, and Free Shred Events. In 2011, the City of Fresno granted franchises for non‐exclusive roll off services to 16 roll off companies for bins which were 10 cubic yards or greater. The City also granted exclusive franchise agreements for the collection of commercial solid waste, recyclables and green waste to two franchises. Allied Waste Services (formally Republic) is responsible for all commercial services north of Ashlan Avenue. Mid Valley Disposal has all commercial locations south of Ashlan. Both City and (non‐exclusive) / exclusive franchise haulers provide and maintain containers; respond to customer complaints/concerns and provide roll‐off and compactor services to residential, multi‐family and commercial customers respective to their agreements. The proposed project would be serviced by Mid Valley Disposal.

Garbage disposed of in the City of Fresno is taken to Cedar Avenue Recycling and Transfer Station (CARTS). Once trash has been off‐loaded at the transfer station, it is sorted and non‐recyclable solid waste is loaded onto large trucks and taken to the American Avenue Landfill (i.e., American Avenue Disposal Site, Site Solid Waste Information System [SWIS] Number 10‐AA‐0009) located approximately six miles southwest of Kerman. American Avenue Landfill is owned and operated by Fresno County and began operations in 1992 for both public and commercial solid waste haulers.

The American Avenue Landfill is a sanitary landfill, meaning that it is a disposal site for non‐ hazardous solid waste spread in layers, compacted to the smallest practical volume, and covered by material applied at the end of each operating day.3
The American Avenue Landfill has a maximum permitted capacity of 32,700,000 cubic yards and a remaining capacity of 29,358,535 cubic yards, with an estimated closure date of August 31, 2031.

The maximum permitted throughput is 2,200 tons per day.4 One other active disposal site is located in Fresno County. The City of Clovis Landfill (SWIS Number 10‐AA‐0004) has a maximum permitted capacity of 7,800,000 cubic yards and a remaining capacity

2 Fresno, City of. Department of Public Utilities, Trash Disposal & Recycling, Multi‐Family & Commercial Services, Construction & Demolition Waste. Website: www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/trash‐disposal‐ recycling/multi‐family‐commercial‐services/#tab‐3 (accessed March 25, 2025). 3 Fresno, City of. Department of Public Utilities, Facilities & Infrastructure, American Avenue Landfill.

Website: https://www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/trash‐disposal‐recycling/solid‐waste‐facilities/ (accessed March 25, 2025).
4 CalRecycle. SWIS Facility/Site Summary. American Avenue Disposal Site (10‐AA‐0009). Website:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/Summary/352, (accessed March 25, 2025).

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.17-8
of 7,740,000 cubic yards, with an estimated closure date of April 30, 2047. The maximum permitted throughput is 2,000 tons per day.5
Commercial green waste and organics delivered to Elm Avenue Recycling by Mid Valley are then transferred to the Kerman facility and composted with organic compost, which is then used by organic farms in the region. Commercial green waste and organics being delivered by Allied Waste are taken to Rice Road Transfer Station, which are then trans‐loaded into trucks, which are delivered to Kochergen Farms for composting and land application.

4.17.1.5 Electric Power, Natural Gas and Telecommunications Electricity. The City of Fresno receives its electricity from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). PG&E provides electrical service to business and residents throughout the City via underground and above‐ ground service lines. PG&E owns and maintains all service and transmission lines in the City and operates several electrical substations throughout Fresno. According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), total electricity consumption in the PG&E service area in 2022 was 77,887 gigawatt hours (GWh) (77,886,999,998 kilowatt‐hours [kWh]).6 Total electricity consumption in Fresno County in 2022 was 8,3484.4 GWh (83,484,400,000 KWh).7 Natural Gas. PG&E is the natural gas service provider in the City of Fresno. PG&E owns and maintain several natural gas transmission lines in the City that feed local distribution lines that connect to individual service lines. PG&E is the natural gas service provider for the City of Fresno. According to the CEC, total natural gas consumption in the PG&E service area in 2022 was 4,421.6 million therms.8 Total natural gas consumption in Fresno County in 2022 was 319.4 million therms.9 Telecommunications. Several providers provide telecommunication services to the City of Fresno.

AT&T is the largest provider of cellular and fixed telephone services. Telephone lines are located throughout the City.

5 CalRecycle. SWIS Facility/Site Summary. City Of Clovis Landfill (10‐AA‐0004). Website:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4529?siteID=347 (accessed March 25, 2025).
6 CEC. 2022a. Electricity Consumption by Entity. Website: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx (accessed March 25, 2025).
7 CEC. 2022b. Electricity Consumption by County. Website: https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx (accessed March 25, 2025).
8 CEC. 2022c. Gas Consumption by Entity. Website: https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx (accessed June 2025).
9 CEC. 2022d Gas Consumption by County. Website: https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx (accessed June 2025).

4.17-9

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.17.2 Regulatory Setting

4.17.2.1 Federal Policies and Regulations
Clean Water Act. The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes regulatory requirements for potable water supplies including raw and treated water quality criteria. The County would be required to monitor water quality and conform to the regulatory requirements of the CWA.

Safe Drinking Water Act. The Federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) is enforced by the EPA and sets standards for drinking water quality and oversees the states, localities, and water suppliers who implement those standards. SDWA requires many actions to protect drinking water and its sources including rivers, lakes, and groundwater.

4.17.2.2 State Policies and Regulations
Urban Water Management Planning Act. The Urban Water Management Planning Act of 1983, California Water Code Sections 10610 et seq., requires publicly or privately owned water suppliers that provide more than 3,000 acre‐feet (AF) of water annually or supply more than 3,000 customers to prepare a plan that:
• Plans for water supply and assesses reliability of each source of water over a 20‐year period in 5‐ year increments.
• Identifies and quantifies adequate water supplies, including recycled water, for existing and future demands, in normal, single‐dry, and multiple‐dry years. • Implements conservation and the efficient use of urban water supplies. Significant new requirements for quantified demand reductions have been added by the Water Conservation Act of 2009 (Senate Bill 7 of Special Extended Session 7 [SBX7‐7]), which amends the act and adds new water conservation provisions to the Water Code
Senate Bills 610 and 221, Water Supply Planning. To assist water suppliers, cities, and counties in integrated water and land use planning, the state passed Senate Bill (SB) 610 (Chapter 643, Statutes of 2001) and SB 221 (Chapter 642, Statutes of 2001), effective January 1, 2002. SB 610 and SB 221 improve the link between information of water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610 and SB 221 are companion measures that promote more collaborative planning between local water suppliers and cities and counties. Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to city and county decision makers prior to approval of specified large development projects. This detailed information must be included in the administrative record as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the city or county on such projects. The statutes recognize local control and decision making regarding the availability of water for projects and the approval of projects. Under SB 610, water supply assessments (WSA) must be furnished to local governments for inclusion in any environmental documentation for certain projects subject to CEQA, as defined in Water Code Section 10912[a].

Under SB 221, approval by a city or county of certain residential subdivisions requires an affirmative verification of sufficient water supply. SB 221 is intended as a fail‐safe mechanism to ensure that

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.17-10
collaboration on finding the needed water supplies to serve a new large subdivision occurs before construction begins.

The Urban Water Management Planning Act states that every urban water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers or provides over 3,000 AF of water annually should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Both SB 610 and SB 221 identify the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) as a planning document that can be used by a water supplier to meet the standards in both statutes. Thorough and complete UWMPs are foundations for water suppliers to fulfill the specific requirements of these two statutes, and they are important source documents for cities and counties as they update their general plans.

Conversely, general plans are source documents as water suppliers update the UWMPs. These planning documents are linked, and their accuracy and usefulness are interdependent.

Additionally, pursuant to the California Water Code Section 10632, urban water suppliers that serve more than 3,000 AF per year or have more than 3,000 connections are required to prepare and adopt a standalone Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) as part of its Urban Water Management Plan. A WSCP is a detailed plan on how an urban water supplier intends to respond to foreseeable and unforeseeable water shortages. A water shortage occurs when the water supply is reduced to a level that cannot support typical demand at any given time. The WSCP is used to provide guidance by identifying response actions to allow for responsible management of any water shortage with predictability and accountability. Preparation provides the tools to maintain reliable supplies and reduce the impacts of supply interruptions due to extended drought and catastrophic supply interruptions.

AB 3030, California Groundwater Management Act. The Groundwater Management Act of the California Water Code (AB 3030) provides guidance for applicable local agencies to develop a voluntary Groundwater Management Plan in state‐designated groundwater basins.

Senate Bill 1383, Short-lived Climate Pollutants. In September 2016, Governor Edmund Brown Jr. set methane emissions reduction targets for California (SB 1383 Lara, Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016) in a statewide effort to reduce emissions of short‐lived climate pollutants (SLCP). The targets must:
• Reduce organic waste disposal 50% by 2020 and 75% by 2025. • Rescue for people to eat at least 20% of currently disposed surplus food by 2025.

SB 1383 requires counties to take the lead collaborating with the jurisdictions located within the county in planning for the necessary organic waste recycling and food recovery capacity needed to divert organic waste from landfills into recycling activities and food recovery organizations.

California Green Building Standards Code—Part 11, Title 24 (CALGreen). CALGreen requires covered projects to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste or meet a local construction and demolition waste management ordinance, whichever is more stringent.

4.17-11

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Assembly Bill 939, California Integrated Waste Management Act. California's Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 requires cities and counties to reduce the amount of waste disposed of in landfills. The Local Government Construction and Demolition (C&D) Guide of 2002 (SB 1374) amended this act to include construction and demolition material. Fresno County created the County of Fresno's Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris Recycling Program to fulfill requirements under these bills.

Beginning January 1, 2014, the County of Fresno required permit applicants to submit a Waste Management Plan for approval prior to issuance of permit for projects. The Waste Management Plan required as part of Fresno County’s C&D Debris Recycling Program is designed to assist County compliance with State mandates, and to provide builders with a means of documenting the waste reduction requirements included in the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen).

California Green Building Standards Code. Section 5.408, Construction Waste Reduction, Disposal, and Recycling, of CALGreen (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 11) requires at least 50 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste from non‐residential construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse. CALGreen is updated on a three‐year cycle; the 2019 CALGreen took effect on January 1, 2020.

Assembly Bill 1826. Assembly Bill 1826 (AB 1826) (California Public Resources Code Sections 42649.8 et seq.) requires recycling of organic matter by businesses generating such wastes in amounts over certain thresholds. AB 1826 also requires that local jurisdictions implement an organic waste recycling program to divert organic waste generated by businesses and multi‐family developments that consist of five or more units.

Water Discharge Requirements. The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) typically requires a Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) permit for any facility or person discharging or proposing to discharge waste that could affect the quality of the waters of the state, other than into a community sewer system. Those discharging pollutants (or proposing to discharge pollutants) into surface waters must obtain an National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the Central Valley RWQCB.

The NPDES serves as the WDR. For other types of discharges, such as those affecting groundwater or in a diffused manner (e.g., erosion from soil disturbance or waste discharges to land), a Report of Waste Discharge must be filed with the Central Valley RWQCB in order to obtain a WDR. For specific situations, the Central Valley RWQCB may waive the requirement to obtain a WDR for discharges to land or may determine that a proposed discharge can be permitted more effectively through enrollment in a general NPDES permit or general WDR.

4.17.2.3 Local Policies and Regulations
City of Fresno General Plan. The City of Fresno’s General Plan Public Utilities and Services Element includes objectives and policies that relate to public services. The following policies are applicable to the proposed project:

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.17-12
• Policy PU-8-b: Potable Water Supply and Cost Recovery. Prepare for provision of increased potable water capacity (including surface water treatment capacity) in a timely manner to facilitate planned urban development consistent with the General Plan. Accommodate increase in water demand from the existing community with the capital costs and benefits allocated equitably and fairly between existing users and new users, as authorized by law, and recognizing the differences in terms of quantity, quality and reliability of the various types of water in the City’s portfolio.
• Policy PU-8-c: Conditions of Approval. Set appropriate conditions of approval for each new development proposal to ensure that the necessary potable water production and supply facilities and water resources are in place prior to occupancy. • Policy PU-8-g: Review Project Impact on Supply. Mitigate the effects of development and capital improvement projects on the long‐range water budget to ensure an adequate water supply for current and future uses.
• Policy PU-7-a: Reduce Wastewater. Identify and consider implementing water conservation standards and other programs and policies, as determined appropriate, to reduce wastewater flows.
• Policy PU-7-b: Reduce Stormwater Leakage. Reduce storm water infiltration into the sewer collection system, where feasible, through a program of replacing old and deteriorated sewer collection pipeline; eliminating existing stormwater sewer cut‐ins to the sanitary sewer system; and avoiding any new sewer cut‐ins except when required to protect health and safety. • Policy PU-9-a: New Techniques. Continue to collaborate with affected stakeholders and partners to identify and support programs and new techniques of solid waste disposal, such as recycling, composting, waste to energy technology, and waste separation, to reduce the volume and toxicity of solid wastes that must be sent to landfill facilities. • Policy PU-9-b: Compliance with State Law. Continue to pursue programs to maintain conformance with the Solid Waste Management Act of 1989 or as otherwise required by law and mandated diversion goals.

4.17.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to utilities and service systems that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of significance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is significant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for significant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less‐than‐significant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

4.17-13

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

4.17.3.1 Significance Criteria
The thresholds for impacts related to utilities and service systems used in this analysis are consistent with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Development of the proposed project would result in a significant impact related to utilities and service systems if it would:
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effect; b. Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years;
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments;
d. Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals; or e. Fail to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

4.17.3.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to utilities and service systems that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

UTL-1 The project would not require nor result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.

The proposed project would provide a funding mechanism for future VMT‐reducing improvement projects in the City. These improvements would primarily be transportation‐related improvements, and would not involve land use development (e.g., new residential or non‐residential development).

For example, development of widened sidewalks, multi‐purpose paths, and pedestrian refuge islands, would not result in increased demand for water, or increase the generation of wastewater or stormwater drainage. Furthermore, increases in demand for electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications are expected to be nominal based on the proposed improvements. Overall, the proposed program itself would not result in increased demand and thus, would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded infrastructure. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.17-14
UTL-2 The project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years.

The proposed project would provide a funding mechanism for future VMT‐reducing improvement projects in Fresno. These improvements would primarily be transportation‐related improvements, and would not involve land use development (e.g., new residential or non‐residential development).

For example, development of widened sidewalks, multi‐purpose paths, and pedestrian refuge islands, would not result in increased water demand upon project completion. Nominal water usage would be required during construction of the identified improvements. However, no operational water usage would occur. Overall, the proposed program itself would not result in any water demand and thus, would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water infrastructure. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

UTL-3 The project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

Potential VMT‐reducing improvements funded by the proposed program would primarily consist of individual transportation‐related improvement projects, bus routes, and other improvements that do not involve land development. For example, potential improvements may include development of pedestrian safety enhancements, new bus routes, intermodal signage and Class IV bikeways. Such improvements would not generate wastewater. Thus, the program and associated physical improvements would not generate wastewater or require construction of new or expanded wastewater collection or treatment facilities. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

UTL-4 The project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Future transportation improvements accommodated by the proposed program would not generate solid waste through implementation of the proposed program. Construction activities may generate nominal amounts of construction waste from demolition, excavation, and/or grading activities and thus, would result in one‐time construction‐related solid waste. However, these activities would be nominal and short‐term, and would not exceed the maximum daily throughput or remaining capacities of either the American Avenue Landfill or the Clovis Landfill. Thus, as proposed, the VMT Reduction Program itself would not result in an increase in the overall amount of solid waste generated by the City and impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

4.17-15

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

UTL-5 The project would comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

As stated above, future transportation improvements accommodated by the proposed program would not generate solid waste upon project completion. Construction activities may generate nominal amounts of construction waste from demolition, excavation, and/or grading activities and thus, would result in one‐time construction‐related solid waste. However, these activities would be nominal and short‐term, and would not exceed the maximum daily throughput or remaining capacities of either the American Avenue Landfill or the Clovis Landfill. Thus, as proposed, the VMT Reduction Program itself would not result in an increase in the overall amount of solid waste generated by in Fresno and impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.17.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
UTL-6 The project, in combination with other projects, would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to utilities and service systems.

Water. Cumulative projects developed in accordance with General Plan buildout would increase demand for water and could adversely impact existing water supply and facilities. However, cumulative projects would be required to comply with existing regulations pertaining to water supply and conveyance. If applicable, cumulative projects may be required to prepare a Water Supply Assessment to estimate project‐specific water demands and to determine whether the applicable water purveyor can accommodate the project’s demands. Similar to the potential transportation improvements associated with the VMT Reduction Program, cumulative projects would also be required to undergo project‐specific environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process. As concluded above, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact in this regard and thus, would not cumulatively contribute towards potentially significant impacts in conjunction with related projects.

Wastewater. Future cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo project‐specific environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process to determine potential effects to wastewater treatment facilities. Additionally, similar to future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program, cumulative projects would be required to comply with Federal and local regulations regarding wastewater treatment. As stated, future transportation improvement projects would result in less than significant impacts to wastewater services and infrastructure, and would be required to undergo separate environmental review and conform with established regulatory requirements. Thus, cumulative impacts in this regard would be less than significant.Stormwater.Future cumulative projects developed in

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

4.17-16
accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo project‐specific environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process to determine project‐specific impacts to existing storm drainage facilities. Similar to future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program, cumulative projects would be required to comply with Federal, State, and local regulations and policies. As stated, future transportation improvement projects would result in less than significant impacts to storm drainage facilities, and would be required to undergo separate environmental review and conform with established regulatory requirements. Thus, cumulative impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Solid Waste. Future cumulative development projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo project‐specific environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process to determine project‐specific impacts related to solid waste generation.

Similar to future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program, cumulative projects would be required to comply with existing regulations and policies, including AB 939 and AB 341 (related to diverting solid waste from landfills), AB 1826 (related to recycling organic matter), CALGreen Section 5.408, Construction Waste Reduction, Disposal, and Recycling (related to recycling construction and demolition waste). As stated, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA and comply with existing regulations regarding solid waste. Thus, cumulative impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Electric Power, Natural Gas and Telecommunications. Future cumulative projects developed in accordance with the General Plan would be required to undergo project‐specific environmental review under CEQA and the City’s discretionary review process to determine project‐specific impacts to existing dry utilities. Similar to future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program, cumulative developments may increase demand for electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication services. However, cumulative projects would be required to undergo environmental review under CEQA to determine project‐level impacts to dry utilities and to identify any required mitigation. Additionally, cumulative developments would be required to pay connection fees to service providers receive electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication services, respectively.

As stated, all future transportation improvements funded by the proposed program would be required to undergo separate environmental review under CEQA and comply with existing regulations regarding electricity. Thus, cumulative impacts in this regard would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

4.18-1

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

WILDFIRE
This section provides a discussion of the existing environmental setting of potential wildﬁre areas in Fresno and in the surrounding area, and evaluates the potential impacts that could result from implementation of the proposed Fresno VMT Reduction Program.

4.18.1 Existing Environmental Setting
The study area for project impacts regarding wildﬁre is the Planning Area because potential development under the proposed project is limited to areas within the Planning Area. The Planning Area established by the City includes all areas within the City’s current city limits, including the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), the areas within the current Sphere of Inﬂuence (SOI), and an area north of the most northeasterly portion of the city (referred to as the North Area). The Planning Area is located within the Central Valley, and is relatively ﬂat. The majority of the Planning Area occurs as developed properties or agricultural lands. Similar uses surround the Planning Area within the city of Clovis to the east, and mostly agricultural properties to the north, west, and south. The Sierra Nevada foothills to the north and east of the Planning Area and the city of Clovis provide the nearest areas where large expanses of undeveloped properties occur. Because of the topography and the distance between the developed portions of the Planning Area and undeveloped areas, the primary ﬁre hazard concern within the Planning Area consists of the potential for structure ﬁres in developed areas.

According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s (CAL FIRE) Fire and Resource Assessment Program, the Planning Area does not contain any lands within the State Responsibility Area (SRA) or lands classiﬁed as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) within the Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Some areas along the San Joaquin River Bluﬀ area at the northern boundary of the Planning Area are prone to wildﬁres due to relatively steep terrain and vegetation; CAL FIRE classiﬁes these areas as Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone within the LRA.

4.18.2 Regulatory Setting

4.18.2.1 Federal Policies and Regulations
No federal policies or regulations pertaining to wildﬁre are applicable to the proposed project.

4.18.2.2 State Policies and Regulations
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) publishes maps that predict the threat of ﬁre for each county within the State. Local Responsibility Areas and State or Federal Responsibility Areas are classiﬁed as either very high ﬁre hazard severity zones (VHFHSZ) or non-VHFHSZ based on factors including fuel availability, topography, ﬁre history, and climate. The 2012 Strategic Fire Plan for California was generated by CAL FIRE to provide guidelines and objectives in order to account for associated ﬁre impacts.

California Fire Code. Section 10-50100 of the City’s Municipal Code adopts the California Fire Code by reference. The California Fire Code includes regulations for emergency planning, ﬁre service features, ﬁre protection systems, hazardous materials, ﬁre ﬂow requirements, and ﬁre hydrant locations and distribution. Several ﬁre safety requirements include: installation of sprinklers in all

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.18-2
high-rise buildings; the establishment of ﬁre resistance standards for ﬁre doors, building materials, and particular types of construction; and the clearance of debris and vegetation within a prescribed distance from occupied structures in wildlife hazard areas.

California Building Code.Section 11-101 of the City’s Municipal Code adopts the California Building Code (CBC) by reference. The California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Part 2, of the CBC, provides California Building Code minimum standards for building design in the state. Local codes are permitted to be more restrictive than Title 24, but not less restrictive. The procedures and limitations for the design of structures are based on site characteristics, occupancy type, conﬁguration, structural system height, and seismic zoning. Construction activities are subject to occupational safety standards for excavation, shoring, and trenching and speciﬁed in California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) regulations (CCR, Title 8).

California Health and Safety Code §13000 et seq. and California Building Code (CBC).State ﬁre regulations are set forth in §13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, which is divided into “Fires and Fire Protection” and “Buildings Used by the Public.” The regulations provide for the enforcement of the CBC and mandate the abatement of ﬁre hazards.

Executive Order N-05-19. On January 9, 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom announced an Executive Order (EO) that requires CAL FIRE and other State agencies to compile policy and regulatory recommendations concerning wildﬁre mitigation, emphasizing environmental sustainability and public health. The EO requires the incorporation of socioeconomic analysis when conducting risk management of wildﬁres and mandates that agencies identify geographic areas with populations that are more vulnerable to the impacts of wildﬁres.

4.18.2.3 Local Policies and Regulations
City of Fresno General Plan. The General Plan is a set of policies and programs that form a blueprint for the physical development of the city. The following General Plan policies related to wildﬁre are applicable to the proposed project:

Policy NS-6-a: County Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan. Adopt and implement the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex.

Policy NS-6-e: Critical Use Facilities. Ensure critical use facilities (e.g., City Hall, police and ﬁre stations, schools, hospitals, public assembly facilities, transportation services) and other structures that are important to protecting health and safety in the community remain operational during an emergency.
• Site and design these facilities to minimize their exposure and susceptibility to ﬂooding, seismic and geological eﬀects, ﬁre, and explosions.
• Work with the owners and operators of critical use facilities to ensure they can provide alternate sources of electricity, water, and sewerage in the event that regular utilities are interrupted in a disaster.

4.18-3

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Policy NS-6-f: Emergency Vehicle Access. Require adequate access for emergency vehicles in all new development, including adequate widths, turning radii, hard standing areas, and vertical clearance.

Policy PU-2-e: Service Standards. Strive to achieve a community wide risk management plan that include the following service level objectives 90 percent of the time:
• First Unit on Scene – First ﬁre unit arriving with minimum of three ﬁreﬁghters within 5 minutes and 20 seconds from the time the unit was alerted to the emergency incident. • Eﬀective Response Force – Provide suﬃcient number of ﬁreﬁghters on the scene of an emergency within 9 minutes and 20 seconds from the time of unit alert to arrival. The eﬀective response force is measured as 15 ﬁreﬁghters for low risk ﬁre incidents and 21 ﬁreﬁghters for high risk ﬁre incidents and is the number of personnel necessary to complete speciﬁc tasks required to contain and control ﬁre minimizing loss of life and property.

Policy PU-3-d: Review All Development Applications. Continue Fire Department review of development applications, provide comments and recommend conditions of approval that will ensure adequate on-site and oﬀ-site ﬁre protection systems and features are provided.

City of Fresno Emergency Operation Plan.The California Emergency Services Act requires cities to prepare and maintain an emergency plan for emergencies that are natural or caused by man. The City’s adopted Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) plans for emergencies including natural hazards.

The EOP does not designate any evacuation routes within the Planning Area.

County of Fresno Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.The purpose of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to human life and property resulting from hazards. A local hazard mitigation plan recognizes risks before they occur, as well as identiﬁes resources, information, and strategies for emergency response. Fresno County, with participation from 17 jurisdictions, is the lead agency on the Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MHMP). In 2018, the Fresno County Board of Supervisors adopted the MHMP , which includes a portion listing information most relevant to the City in the areas of health, infrastructure, housing, government, environment, and land use.

4.18.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following section presents a discussion of the impacts related to wildﬁre that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The section begins with the criteria of signiﬁcance, which establish the thresholds to determine if an impact is signiﬁcant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and the recommended mitigation measures, if required. Mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate, for signiﬁcant impacts to eliminate or reduce them to a less-than-signiﬁcant level.

Cumulative impacts are also addressed.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.18-4

4.18.3.1 Signiﬁcance Criteria
The thresholds for impacts related to utilities and service systems used in this analysis are consistent with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Development of the proposed project would result in a signiﬁcant impact related to wildﬁre if it would:
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildﬁre risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildﬁre or the uncontrolled spread of a wildﬁre.
c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate ﬁre risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. d. Expose people or structures to signiﬁcant risks, including downslope or downstream ﬂooding or landslides, as a result of runoﬀ, post-ﬁre slope instability, or drainage changes.

4.18.3.2 Project Impacts
The following discussion describes the potential impacts related to wildﬁre that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

WF-1 The proposed project would not impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

The program would identify, quantify, and prioritize applicable mitigation measures and relevant VMT-reducing projects within Fresno to be funded by the proposed mitigation bank.

The California Emergency Services Act (Government Code Section 8550-8668) requires cities to prepare and maintain an Emergency Plan for natural, manmade, or war-caused emergencies that result in conditions of disaster or extreme peril to life. While the City does have an adopted Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), the EOP does not designate speciﬁc evacuation routes.

The proposed project would not result in any physical improvements or change the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area. As such, the proposed project would not impact any existing roadways in Fresno that could be used as evacuation routes.

The adoption of the proposed VMT Reduction Program would support future multi-modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the VMT Reduction Program would be required to conduct project-speciﬁc environmental analyses to assess potential impacts to evacuation in Fresno. However, although construction of these future improvements could result in temporary eﬀects to circulation in

4.18-5

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Planning Area, VMT-reducing improvements associated with the project would improve vehicle circulation within the Planning Area once built.

Therefore, the proposed project would not impair implementation of an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and the impact would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

WF-2 The proposed project would not, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildﬁre risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildﬁre or the uncontrolled spread of a wildﬁre.

According to CAL FIRE’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program, the Planning Area does not contain any lands within Fresno County’s State Responsibility Area (SRA) or lands classiﬁed as VHFHSZ within the City’s Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Some small areas along the San Joaquin River Bluﬀ area in northern Fresno are classiﬁed as Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zones within the LRA.1 The proposed project consists of the adoption of a VMT Reduction Program which aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank.

The proposed project would not result in physical improvements or changes in the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area. Additionally, the Planning Area does not contain any lands within the SRA or lands classiﬁed as VHFHSZ within the LRA. As such, the proposed project would not exacerbate wildﬁre risks or expose people to wildﬁres.

However, the adoption of the proposed VMT Reduction Program would support future multi-modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the VMT Reduction Program would be required to conduct project-speciﬁc environmental analyses to assess potential impacts related to wildﬁres at the time they are proposed. Future projects would also be required to comply with all of the City’s requirements for ﬁre safety, including compliance with the Fresno Fire Department’s project application review process and the City’s General Plan Policies PU-3-a, Policy PU-3-b, Policy PU-3-d, Policy PU-3-e, Policy PU-3-f and Policy PU-3-g, as applicable. With compliance with the City’s ﬁre safety policies, potential impacts would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

WF-3 The proposed project would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other

1 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2025. Fire Hazard Severity Zones.

Website: https://osfm.ﬁre.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildﬁre-preparedness-and-mitigation/ﬁre- hazard-severity-zones (accessed June 2025).

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.18-6
utilities) that may exacerbate ﬁre risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment.

See impacts WF-1 and WF-2, above. The proposed project does not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (including roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that would exacerbate ﬁre risk or that would result in impacts to the environment. Additionally, the Planning Area does not contain any lands within the SRA or lands classiﬁed as VHFHSZ within the LRA.

Future projects identiﬁed by the proposed VMT Reduction Program would be required to prepare project-speciﬁc environmental analyses to assess potential ﬁre risk and environmental impacts related to installation or maintenance of infrastructure. As such, project impacts would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

WF-4 The proposed project would not expose people or structures to signiﬁcant risks, including downslope or downstream ﬂooding or landslides, as a result of runoﬀ, post-ﬁre slope instability, or drainage changes.

See impact WF-1, WF-2, and WF-3, above. According to CAL FIRE’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program, the Planning Area does not contain any lands within the SRA or lands classiﬁed as VHFHSZ within the LRA. Additionally, the proposed project would not result in physical improvements or changes in the distribution or intensity of the land uses within the Planning Area. As such, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to signiﬁcant risks as a result of runoﬀ, post- ﬁre slope instability, or drainage changes.

However, the adoption of the proposed VMT Reduction Program would support future multi-modal or transportation improvements in accordance with the program. These future VMT-reducing projects identiﬁed by the VMT Reduction Program would be required to conduct project-speciﬁc environmental analyses to assess potential impacts related to wildﬁres at the time they are proposed. Further, future projects would also be required to comply with all of the City’s requirements for ﬁre safety, including compliance with the Fresno Fire Department’s project application review process and the City’s General Plan Policies PU-3-a, Policy PU-3-b, Policy PU-3-d, Policy PU-3-e, Policy PU-3-f and Policy PU-3-g, as applicable.

Therefore, project impacts associated with the exposure of people or structures to signiﬁcant risks as a result of runoﬀ, post-ﬁre slope instability, or drainage changes are less than signiﬁcant. No mitigation would be required.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

4.18-7

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

4.18.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
The study area for the analysis of cumulative wildﬁre impacts is the Planning Area as established by the City’s General Plan and the portions of Fresno county located outside the Planning Area as well as portions of the city of Clovis and Madera County that are near the Planning Area and could contribute to wildﬁre risks.

According to CAL FIRE’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program, the Planning Area does not contain any lands within the SRA or lands classiﬁed as VHFHSZ within the LRA. The County of Fresno SRA lands closest to the Planning Area that are classiﬁed as VHFHSZ are located approximately 20 miles to the northeast near Pine Flat Lake; the County of Fresno LRA lands closest to the Planning Area that are classiﬁed as VHFHSZ are located approximately 30 miles to the south near the city of Huron.

The County of Madera SRA lands closest to the Planning Area that are classiﬁed as VHFHSZ are located approximately 25 miles north near the community of Coarsegold; the County of Madera LRA does not contain any land classiﬁed as VHFHSZ. The city of Clovis, which is entirely in the LRA, does not contain any land classiﬁed as VHFHSZ.

Since the Planning Area and surrounding areas do not contain any lands classiﬁed as VHFHSZ, and because no potentially signiﬁcant impacts related to wildﬁres have been identiﬁed, cumulative impacts would be less than signiﬁcant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Signiﬁcance: Less Than Signiﬁcant Impact.

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

4.18-8
This page intentionally left blank

5-1

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

5.0 CEQA-REQUIRED ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS
As required by CEQA, this chapter discusses the following types of impacts that could result from implementation of the proposed project: growth-inducing impacts; significant irreversible changes; effects found not to be significant; and significant unavoidable effects.

5.1 GROWTH INDUCEMENT
This section summarizes the proposed project’s potential growth-inducing impacts on the surrounding community. A project is considered growth-inducing if it would directly or indirectly foster substantial economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Examples of projects likely to have significant growth-inducing impacts include extensions or expansions of infrastructure systems beyond what is needed to serve project-specific demand, and development of new residential subdivisions or industrial parks in areas that are only sparsely developed or are underdeveloped. Typically, development projects on sites that are designated for development and surrounded by existing suburban uses are not considered adversely growth-inducing because growth in areas that already have development and infrastructure available to serve new development are generally considered environmentally beneficial.

Section 15126.2(e) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR evaluate the growth inducing impacts of a proposed action:

Discuss the way in which a proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects that would remove obstacles to population growth (a major expansion of a wastewater treatment plant might, for example, allow for more construction in service areas). Increases in the population may tax existing community service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. Also, discuss the characteristic of some projects, which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.

There are two types of growth inducing impacts: direct and indirect. To assess the potential for growth inducing impacts, the project characteristics that may encourage and facilitate activities that may individually or cumulatively affect the environment must be evaluated. Growth‐inducing impacts can occur when the development of a project imposes new burdens on a community by directly inducing population growth, or by leading to the construction of additional developments in the same area of the proposed project. Also included in this category are projects that would remove physical obstacles to population growth (such as a new road into an undeveloped area or a wastewater treatment plant with excess capacity that could allow additional new development in the service area). Construction of these types of infrastructure projects cannot be considered isolated from the development they facilitate and serve. Projects that physically remove obstacles to

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

5-2
growth or projects that indirectly induce growth are those that may provide a catalyst for future unrelated development in the area (such as a new residential community that requires additional commercial uses to support residents).

Based on the information provided in CEQA Section 15126.2(e) quoted above, two specific issues must be addressed when determining the growth‐inducing impacts of a project:
• Elimination of Obstacles to Population Growth. The extent to which additional infrastructure capacity (such as extension of roads, sewer, water infrastructure etc.) or change in regulatory structure (such as a change in policies) will allow additional development; and • Economic Growth. The extent to which a proposed project could result in increased activity in the local economy or the regional economy.

Each of the growth‐inducing impacts above are discussed in more detail below.

5.1.1 Elimination of Obstacles to Population Growth
Eliminating physical or regulatory obstacles to growth can result in a growth‐inducting impact because those obstacles are removed. An example of a physical obstacle to growth is the need for public service infrastructure (such as roadways, water mains, sewer lines etc.). Extending public service infrastructure into an area that lacks infrastructure would induce population growth because the infrastructure needed to serve the area would be available, and therefore, the area would then have the capacity to allow population growth. Also, the addition, deletion or alteration of a regulatory obstacle (such as a growth or development policy) could result in new growth because the regulatory obstacle would be altered such that new growth would subsequently not be hindered.

Given the nature of future transportation improvements funded by the VMT Reduction Program, such improvements would not significantly increase demands for public services (i.e., fire and police protection, schools, parks and recreational facilities, and libraries) or utility and service systems (i.e., water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste). Overall, the proposed project would not establish an essential public service that could remove an impediment to growth.

The VMT-reducing projects that would be implemented under the proposed project would involve additional bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and multi-purpose paths, which would increase multimodal access to areas within Fresno previously accessible to only vehicles (to a large extent). Specifically, transportation improvements implemented outside of areas with low VMT would provide new multimodal access to less urbanized areas.

While the proposed program streamlines Senate Bill (SB) 743 compliance for development projects within the City’s Planning Area, the proposed program establishes a mitigation fee for development projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds under CEQA. As a result, implementation of the VMT Reduction Program could remove a barrier to development within the City’s Planning Area. As such, implementation of the proposed project would remove an existing impediment to growth through 5-3

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

the provision of new access to an area and establishment of a mitigation mechanism for future development projects.

5.1.2 Promotion of Economic Growth
The promotion of economic growth is the extent to which a proposed project could cause increased activity in the local or regional economy. A “multiplier effect” is an economic phrase which pertains to the interrelationships between various sectors of the economy. The multiplier effect is a quantitative description and can be described as how an increase in some economic activity starts a chain reaction that generates more activity than the original increase.

The potential transportation improvements that could be implemented by funding from the proposed VMT Reduction Program would not directly result in economic growth within Fresno.

However, the proposed project could indirectly result in economic growth. As previously discussed, the proposed program streamlines SB 743 compliance for development projects within the City’s Planning Area that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds under CEQA. Future development projects triggering potentially significant VMT impacts would be able to pay an impact fee to reduce such impacts to less-than-significant levels, thereby facilitating and expediting the project entitlement process. As such, the proposed VMT Reduction Program could encourage economic growth and land use development within the City’s Planning Area by streamlining the SB 743 compliance process for future developers.

5.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES
As mandated by the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must address any significant irreversible environmental change that would result from project implementation. According to Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, such a change would occur if one of the following scenarios is involved:
• The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources; • Irreversible damage would result from environmental accidents associated with the project; or • The proposed consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project would result in the wasteful use of energy).

The environmental effects of the proposed project are thoroughly discussed in Section 4.0, Evaluation of Environmental Impacts, and summarized in the Executive Summary.

Future transportation improvements implemented as single projects or as part of larger development projects would consume limited, slowly renewable, and nonrenewable resources. This consumption would occur during each individual project’s construction phase and would continue throughout its operational lifetime. Future development would require a commitment of resources including building materials; fuel and operational materials/resources; and transportation of goods and people to and from individual project sites. Construction would require the consumption of resources that are not renewable, or which may renew so slowly as to be considered non- renewable. These resources include, but are not limited to, lumber and other forest products;

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

5-4
aggregate materials used in concrete and asphalt; metals; and water. Fossil fuels such as gasoline and oil would also be consumed in the use of construction vehicles and equipment.

Transportation improvements accommodated through the proposed project would consume resources similar to those currently consumed within Fresno (e.g., energy resources such as electricity and natural gas, petroleum-based fuels required for vehicle trips, fossil fuels, and water).

Fossil fuels would represent the primary energy source associated with construction activities, and the existing, finite supplies of these natural resources would be incrementally reduced. As stated, given the nature of the transportation improvements and the overall reduction of VMT through increases in multimodal transportation, operational activities requiring the substantial consumption of natural resources are not anticipated. While some pedestrian improvements, such as pedestrian crosswalk traffic signals or lighting, would require electricity for operations, the electricity use would be minimal. Nonetheless, the proposed project’s energy requirements under both construction and operations represent a long-term commitment of essentially non-renewable resources.

Future construction activities associated with future transportation improvements could release hazardous materials into the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions; refer to Section 5.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. All potential demolition, grading, and excavation activities would be subject to the established regulatory framework to ensure that hazardous materials are not released into the environment. Compliance with the established regulatory framework would protect against a significant and irreversible environmental change resulting from the accidental release of hazardous materials.

As a result, implementation of the proposed VMT Reduction Program would result in the irretrievable commitment of limited, slowly renewable, and nonrenewable resources, which would limit the availability of these resource quantities for future generations or for other uses. It is noted that the continued use of such resources would be on a relatively small scale in a regional context.

Although irreversible environmental changes would result from project implementation, such changes would not be considered significant given the limited scope and scale of the various VMT- reducing improvements that could be funded by the proposed VMT Reduction Program.

5.3 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The environmental effects of the proposed project, along with recommended mitigation measures, are discussed in detail in Section 4.0, Evaluation of Environmental Impacts, and summarized in the Executive Summary. The following environmental issues were determined to result in less-than- significant impacts, or can be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the incorporation of mitigation measures:
• Aesthetics
• Air Quality (mitigation required)
• Agricultural Resources
• Biological Resources (mitigation required)
• Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources (mitigation required) • Energy
• Geology and Soils (mitigation required)
5-5

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Noise (mitigation required)
• Mineral Resources
• Population and Housing
• Public Services and Recreation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
Section 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR describe any significant impacts, including those that can be mitigated but not reduced to less than significant levels, as a result of implementation of the project. The following environmental issues were determined to result in potential significant and unavoidable impacts:
• Transportation – potentially result in significant VMT impacts given the speculative timing of implementation of the proposed project, as well as lack of data regarding effectiveness of VMT reduction measures.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

5-6
This page intentionally left blank
6-1

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

6.1 INTRODUCTION
Section 15126.6(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statue & Guidelines (State CEQA Guidelines), Section 15126.6) requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) include a discussion of a reasonable range of project alternatives that would “feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.” CEQA does not require an EIR to consider every conceivable alternative to a project, but rather it must consider a range of feasible alternatives that would assist decision-makers and the public in evaluating the comparative merits of alternatives to a proposed project. Therefore, this chapter identifies potential alternatives to the proposed VMT Reduction Program (the proposed project) and evaluates them as required by CEQA.

Key provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines on alternatives (Section 15126.6[b] through [f]) are summarized below to explain the foundation and legal requirements for the alternatives analysis in the EIR:
• The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the Project Objectives or would be more costly (15126.6[b]).
• The specific alternative of “no project” shall also be evaluated along with its impact (15126.6[e][1]). The “no project” analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation is published and at the time the environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. If the environmentally superior alternative is the “no project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives (15126.6[e][2]).
• The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by the “rule of reason” that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. Of those alternatives, the EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project. The range of feasible alternatives shall be selected and discussed in a manner to foster meaningful public participation and informed decision-making. Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent) (15126.6[f]).

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

6-2
• For alternative locations, only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR (15126.6[f][2][A]). • If the lead agency concludes that no feasible alternative locations exist, it must disclose the reasons for this conclusion and should include the reasons in the EIR. For example, in some cases there may be no feasible alternative locations for a geothermal plant or mining project, which must be in close proximity to natural resources at a given location (15126.6[f][2][B]). • An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effect cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative (15126.6[f][3]).

6.2 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), an EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project and would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Only those impacts found significant and unavoidable are relevant in making the final determination of whether an alternative is environmentally superior or inferior to the proposed project. As detailed in Section 4.1 through Section 4.18 of this EIR, upon compliance with existing regulations and mitigation measures, implementation of the VMT Reduction Program would not result in any significant and unavoidable impacts with the exception of transportation impacts related to VMT, as analyzed in Section 4.16, Transportation.

6.2.1 Alternatives Considered but Rejected
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c), an EIR should identify any alternatives that were considered for analysis but rejected as infeasible and briefly explain the reasons for their rejection. According to CEQA Guidelines, among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration are the alternative’s failures to meet most of the basic project objectives, the alternative’s infeasibility, or the alternative’s inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
• VMT-Efficient Land Use Plan Alternative. The VMT-Efficient Land Use Plan Alternative involves updating the existing General Plan Land Use Map to redesignate areas within Fresno predominantly designated as residential areas to employment-based land uses (e.g., mixed-use, commercial, office/professional, and industrial). The intent of updating the Land Use Map to accommodate more employment-based land uses is to attract new job-generating developments within Fresno and thereby reduce Citywide VMT. • Additional VMT-Reducing Projects Alternative. This alternative involves enhancing and expanding the City’s list of VMT-reducing projects to be funded by the VMT Reduction Program.

The intent of this alternative is to fund more TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects than currently identified, and thereby further reduce Citywide VMT compared to the proposed project. This would require the City to prepare new planning documents that identify other TDM strategies and projects relevant and feasible to the existing and planned development patterns throughout Fresno. While this alternative could theoretically reduce Citywide VMT more than 6-3

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

the VMT Reduction Program as currently proposed, this alternative would still result in significant and unavoidable VMT impacts due to the fact that only non-exempt projects would be required to pay the mitigation fee and only for the VMT-generated above the established threshold (i.e., there would be insufficient funding to construct the additional VMT-reducing improvements identified under this alternative).

6.3 PROPOSED PROJECT

6.3.1 Project Characteristics
The proposed VMT Reduction Program aims to establish mitigation for future projects that exceed the City’s VMT thresholds in the form of a mitigation bank and an Urban Design Calculator (UDC) which could be applied individually or in combination. The mitigation bank would be used to fund VMT-reducing projects throughout Fresno and the UDC would recommend potential VMT reductions for development projects through incorporation of various design elements.

The fee program would identify, quantify, and prioritize applicable mitigation measures, and relevant VMT-reducing projects within Fresno to be funded by the proposed mitigation bank. These projects, which may include active transportation improvements, multi-modal transportation programs, and improved street connectivity, including bicycle, pedestrian and transit facilities, would be subject to future CEQA analysis on a project-by-project basis as they are proposed and as the extent of impacts become known through the design process.

The proposed mitigation fee would be determined through the development of a Nexus Study, which would include technical details on the estimation of various cost components for the proposed mitigation measures for the project and their efficacy on VMT reductions. The Nexus Study would provide justification and nexus between anticipated VMT growth and proposed mitigation measures, costs, and fees.

Additionally, the proposed project would include updating the City’s existing UDC for use by individual projects. Projects that would have a significant VMT impact can reduce the project’s impact by applying VMT-reducing project design features at the project site. The extent of VMT reduction could be calculated using the UDC as a first step of the VMT Reduction Program prior to participating in the VMT mitigation bank. After applying VMT reductions using UDC, the remaining excess VMT from the project would be used to calculate the project’s contribution into the mitigation bank.

6.3.2 Project Objectives
An EIR must only discuss in detail an alternative that is capable of feasibly attaining most of the basic objectives associated with the action, while at the same time avoiding or substantially lessening any of the significant effects associated with the proposed project. Below are the project objectives, as provided in Section 3.4, Project Objectives.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

6-4
• Streamline the Senate Bill (SB) 743 compliance process for development projects by providing feasible mitigation options to reduce potentially significant VMT impacts. • Identify funding for future TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects within Fresno to help reduce Citywide total VMT.
• Contribute towards making Fresno a pedestrian‐, bicycle‐, and transit‐oriented community with active, healthy, and livable spaces.

6.3.3 Significant Unavoidable Impacts of the Proposed Project As described further in Chapter 1.0, Executive Summary, the proposed project would result in either no impacts or less-than-significant impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, public services and recreation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire.

As described in Chapter 4.0, Evaluation of Environmental Impacts, the proposed project would result in less-than-significant impacts after implementation of mitigation related to biological resources, cultural resources and tribal resources, geology and soils, and noise. The proposed project would result in a significant unavoidable impact related to transportation.

For the purpose of this analysis, it is assumed that all mitigation measures for implementation of the proposed VMT Reduction Program would apply to the project alternatives and similar reductions in impacts would be achieved through such mitigation. Therefore, the following discussion focuses on the ability of the alternatives to reduce project impacts and the potential impacts of the project alternatives related to these issues.

6.4 ALTERNATIVE 1: NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE

6.4.1 Description
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would not be adopted.

VMT-reducing transportation improvements currently identified in existing City planning documents as planned but unfunded would continue to be unfunded under this alternative. The identified improvements would not be funded and implemented, and the City would be required to separately identify funding from another source. Additionally, given that the proposed VMT Reduction Program would not be adopted, a mitigation mechanism would not be established to assist future development with reducing potentially significant VMT impacts under CEQA. Similar to existing conditions, future developments that trigger significant VMT impacts under CEQA would be required to prepare Environmental Impact Reports and adopt statements of overriding consideration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093.

6.4.2 Environmental Analysis
The No Project Alternative would result in the proposed VMT-reducing projects not receiving funding through the mitigation fee. The VMT-reducing projects identified in the proposed VMT Reduction Program would still be constructed once funding is secured for each project. Similar to 6-5

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

the proposed project, the VMT-reducing projects would still be constructed and the potential impacts related to construction of individual projects may occur.

When compared to the proposed project, this alternative would result in similar environmental impacts because the VMT-reducing projects would still be constructed, just on a far more uncertain timeline. Accordingly, this alternative would result in potentially-significant impacts to biological resources, cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, and noise that would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of project-specific mitigation measures. With respect to impacts related to VMT, this alternative is far more speculative than the proposed VMT Reduction Program because it would not provide funding to VMT-reducing projects and VMT impacts would be similar, but greater when compared to the proposed VMT Reduction Program.

6.4.3 Overview of Potential Impact/Comparison to Proposed Project Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed VMT Reduction Program would not fund transportation improvements that could reduce VMT impacts in Fresno. The proposed project would assist in providing funding for future projects that would occur when funding becomes available. The proposed project would not directly result in physical impacts. Similarly, the No Project Alternative would not result in any direct physical impacts. Overall, impacts resulting from the No Project Alternative would be similar to the proposed project, as the significant unavoidable impact related to transportation would continue to occur.

6.4.4 Project Objectives
This alternative would not establish a fee to mitigate VMT impacts in Fresno. By not implementing any of the components included in the proposed VMT Reduction Program, this alternative would not streamline SB 743 compliance for future projects, would not identify funding for TDM strategies and VMT-reducing projects, and would not contribute towards making Fresno a pedestrian‐, bicycle‐ , and transit‐oriented community. As a result, this alternative would not achieve any of the project objectives.

6.5 ALTERNATIVE 2: ALL APPLICABLE FEE ALTERNATIVE

6.5.1 Description
All Applicable Fee Alternative would require all future development in Fresno to pay into the proposed VMT Reduction Program. Unlike the proposed project, this alternative would require development projects to pay into the proposed VMT Reduction Program even if the development projects are located in low VMT areas, or areas that would not result in VMT impacts. As a result, this alternative would require all future development projects that generate VMT responsible for addressing Citywide VMT. This alternative would increase funds collected for VMT-reducing projects and would allow for implementation of more VMT-reducing projects and TDM measures than the proposed project.

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

6-6

6.5.2 Environmental Analysis
When compared to the proposed project, this alternative would result in similar environmental impacts because this alternative would implement the proposed VMT Reduction Program.

Accordingly, this alternative would result in potentially-significant impacts to biological resources, cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, and noise that would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of project-specific mitigation measures.

Additionally, this alternative would be not incentivize infill development because it would not exempt projects located in low VMT zones from mitigation fees. As a result, this alternative would be inconsistent with the General Plan goal of encouraging infill development.

Similarly, this alternative would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to transportation with respect to VMT. Because this alternative would result in payment of mitigation fees to address VMT impacts, it is unknown when potential VMT impacts would be reduced because of the uncertainty of the timing. In addition, it is unknown whether the VMT-reducing improvements included under the proposed VMT Reduction Program would be effective.

6.5.3 Overview of Potential Impact/Comparison to Proposed Project Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would fund VMT-reducing projects in Fresno.

However, because this alternative would require contributions from development projects that would not be required to pay mitigation fees under the proposed project, this alternative could result in funding more VMT-reducing improvement projects. As a result, more VMT-reducing projects could be built in a shorter duration. Although the effectiveness of this alternative would be speculative, this alternative would not directly result in physical impacts. Overall, impacts resulting from the All Applicable Fee Alternative would be similar to the proposed project, as the significant unavoidable impact related to transportation would continue to occur.

6.5.4 Project Objectives
This alternative would implement the proposed VMT Reduction Program, but would result in additional funding for VMT-reducing projects. Because this alternative would result in more funding from more development projects, the VMT-reducing improvements identified by the VMT Reduction Program would continue to be funded, and all of the project objectives would be met.

6.6 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
CEQA requires the identification of an Environmentally Superior Alternative. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) states that if the No Project Alternative is the Environmentally Superior Alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other alternatives. Table 6-1 provides, in summary format, a comparison of the level of impacts for each alternative to the proposed project.

The All Applicable Fee Alternative has the least impact on the environment because this alternative would implement the proposed VMT Reduction Project, but would collect additional fees. In addition, the All Applicable Fee Alternative would meet all of the objectives to the same degree as the proposed VMT Reduction Program.
6-7

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

Table 6-1: Comparison of the Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project and the Project Alternatives
Environmental Topic
Proposed Project
Level of Impact After
Mitigation
Alternative 1:

No Project Alternative
Alternative 2:

All Applicable Fee
Alternative
Aesthetics Less Than Significant Similar Similar
Agriculture and Forestry
Resources Less Than Significant Similar Similar
Air Quality Less Than Significant Similar Similar
Biological Resources Less Than Significant Similar Similar Cultural Resources and Tribal
Cultural Resources Less Than Significant Similar Similar Energy Less Than Significant Similar Similar
Geology and Soils Less Than Significant Similar Similar Greenhouse Gas Emissions Less Than Significant Similar Similar Hazards and Hazardous
Materials Less Than Significant Similar Similar
Hydrology and Water Quality Less Than Significant Similar Similar Land Use and Planning Less Than Significant Similar Similar + Mineral Resources Less Than Significant Similar Similar Noise Less Than Significant Similar Similar
Population and Housing Less Than Significant Similar Similar Public Services and Recreation Less Than Significant Similar Similar Transportation Significant and Unavoidable Similar+ Similar Utilities and Service Systems Less Than Significant Similar Similar Wildfire Less Than Significant Similar Similar
Attainment of Project Objectives Meets all of the Project Objectives
Meets none of the Project
Objectives
Meets all of the Project
Objectives
Source: LSA (June 2025).

Similar + = Similar, although incrementally greater impacts as compared to the proposed project VMT = vehicle miles traveled

F R E S N O V M T R E D U C T I O N P R O G R A M

F R E S N O, C A L I F O R N I A

P U B L I C R E V I E W D R A F T E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T J U LY 2 0 2 5

6-8
This page intentionally left blank
7-1

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

7.0 REPORT PREPARATION

7.1 REPORT PREPARERS

7.1.1 City of Fresno
2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065, Third Floor
Fresno, CA 93721

7.1.2 LSA Associates, Inc.
2565 Alluvial Avenue, Suite 112
Clovis, CA 93611

7.2 REFERENCES
Air Quality
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2000. Diesel Risk Reduction Plan. September. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/diesel-risk-reduction-plan (accessed May 2025).

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2000. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles. October. Prepared by the Stationary Source Division and Mobile Source Control Division. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/diesel/documents/rrpfinal.pdf (accessed May 2025).

California Air Resources Board. 2021. On-Road Heavy-Duty Current Standards, Test Procedures and Regulatory Documents. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/road- heavy-duty-current-standards-test-procedures-and-regulatory-documents (accessed May 2025).

California Air Resources Board. 2023. Truck and Bus Regulation. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/truck-and-bus-regulation (accessed May 2025).

California Air Resources Board. 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April.

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2025. Inhalable Particulate Matter and Health (PM2.5 and PM10). Website: ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/inhalable-particulate-matter-and-health (accessed May 2025).

Propper, Ralph, Patrick Wong, Son Bui, Jeff Austin, William Vance, Álvaro Alvarado, Bart Croes, and Dongmin Luo. 2015. Ambient and Emission Trends of Toxic Air Contaminants in California.

American Chemical Society: Environmental Science & Technology. Website:
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acs.est.5b02766?ref=article_openPDF (accessed May 2025).

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

7-2

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). 2015. Final Draft - Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. Website:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/g4nl3p0g/gamaqi.pdf (accessed May 2025).

Western Regional Climate Center. n.d. Fresno Yosemite International Airport (043257), Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. Website: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca3257 (accessed May 2025).

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2017. Criteria Air Pollutants. October.

Website: www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants (accessed May 2025).

Biological Resources
California Native Plant Society, Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v9.5.1a), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/, accessed April 2025.

Holland, R.F. 1986 (updated 1996). Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Non-game Heritage Program. California Department of Fish and Game.

Sacramento, California.

Pacific Gas & Electric. 2007. PG&E San Joaquin Valley Operation & Maintenance Habitat Conservation Plan. November.

Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
Arnold, et al. 2004. The Archaeology of California. Journal of Archaeological Research 12:1-73.

Bancroft, Hubert Howe. 1884-1890. History of California, 7 vols. The History Company, San Francisco, California.

Cook, S.F. 1976. The Population of the California Indians 1769-1970. University of California Press.

Berkeley, California.

California High Speed Rail Authority. 2012. California High-Speed Train Project EIR/EIS Merced to Fresno Section.

City of Fresno. Planning and Development, Historic Preservation. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/ planning/historic-preservation/#database (accessed December 10, 2024).

Fagan, Brian. 2003. Before California. Landham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Historic Fresno. 2019. A Guide to Historic Architecture in Fresno, California. Website:
www.historicfresno.org/heritage/index.htm (accessed December 10, 2024). 7-3

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Hughes, Richard E. 1994. Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology:

Essays by James A. Bennyhoff and David A. Frederickson. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, No. 52. Berkeley.

Kroeber. A. L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California (1976 Diver Edition). Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 76, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.

Moratto, Michael J. 1984. California Archaeology.

National Park Service. 1997. Bulletin 16a. Available online at:
www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB16A-Complete.pdf (accessed December 10, 2024).

National Register, 2024.

The Planning Center. 2010. Fresno El Paseo Environmental Impact Report. Prepared for the City of Fresno.

Rosenthal, Jeffrey S., et al. 2007. The Central Valley: A View from the Catbird’s Seat. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Cultural, and Complexity.

San Joaquin River Restoration Program (SJRRP). 2011. San Joaquin River Restoration Program Draft Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report. Available online at: www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/includes/documentShow.php?Doc_ID=7557 (accessed December 10, 2024).

Wallace, William J. 1978. Southern Valley Yokuts. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol 8, California. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.

Energy
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, Green Building, https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/greenbuilding/ (accessed April 2025).

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021b. Electricity Consumption by Entity. Website:
http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx (accessed April 2025).

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021c. Electricity Consumption by County. Website:
http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx (accessed April 2025).

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. Gas Consumption by Entity. Website: http://www.ecdms. energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx (accessed April 2025).

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. Gas Consumption by County. Website:
http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx (accessed April 2025).

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

7-4
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. 2023 Integrated Energy Policy Report. Docket Number:
23-IEPR-01.

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. 2023 Total System Electric Generation. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2022- total-system-electric-generation (accessed April 2025).

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2024. 2024 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update. Docket Number: 24-IEPR-01.

California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). 2020. Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program.

Website: https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/rps/ (accessed April 2025).

United States Energy Information Administration. 2022b. Natural Gas Explained, Use of Natural Gas.

Website: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/use-of-natural-gas.php (accessed April 2025).

United States Energy Information Administration. 2023. California State Profile and Energy Estimates, Table F10: Motor gasoline consumption, price, and expenditure estimates, 2023.

Website: eia.gov/state/seds/data.php?incfile=/state/
seds/sep_fuel/html/fuel_mg.html&sid=CA (accessed April 2025).

United States Energy Information Administration. 2023. Electricity Explained. Website:
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/ (accessed April 2025).

United States Energy Information Administration. 2025. Natural Gas Consumption by End Use (Million Cubic Feet). Website: https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_cons_sum_dcu_SCA_a.htm (accessed June 2025).

Geology Greenhouse Gas Emissions
California Department of Water Resources. Water Data Library. Website: wdl.water.ca.gov/water datalibrary/index.cfm (accessed January 2025).

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
California Environmental Protection Agency. n.d. Sites Identified with Waste Constituents above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit. Website:
https://calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList- CurrentList.pdf (accessed May 2024).

California Environmental Protection Agency. n.d. Cortese List Section 65962.5(a). Website:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5a/ (accessed May 2024).

California Water Resources Control Board. 2024. GeoTracker Database. Website:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?myaddress=California&from=header&cqid=69 20362174 (accessed May 2024).
7-5

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Find Law. 2020. California Code, Health and Safety Code Section 25260. Website:
codes.findlaw.com/ca/health-and-safety-code/hsc-sect-25260.html (accessed May 2024).

Fresno County Department of Environmental Health. Hazardous Materials Business Plans. Website:
https://www.fresnocountyca.gov/Departments/Public-Health/Environmental- Health/Hazardous-Materials-Business-Plans (accessed January 2025).

Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Fresno. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/wp- content/uploads/2023/03/Fresno-2020-UWMP_Final_2021-07-21.pdf (accessed June 2025).

Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Website: msc.fema.gov/ portal/home (accessed February 19, 2025).

State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. 2015. MyHazards. Website:
myhazards.caloes.ca.gov (accessed February 20, 2025).

Western Regional Climate Center. Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary, Fresno Yosemite Intl AP, California (043257). Average Total Precipitation (inches). Website: wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/ cliMAIN.pl?ca3257 (accessed March 27, 2025).

Noise
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.

Office of Planning and Environment. Report No. 0123. September.

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1995. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. April.

Population and Housing
Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG). 2017. Executive Summary - Fresno County 2050 Growth Projections. May 4. Website: https://www.fresnocog.org/wp- content/uploads/publications/
Demographics/Fresno_COG_2050_Projections_Exec_Sum_0517.pdf (accessed May 2024).

Fresno Council of Governments. 2024. Fresno County 2023-2060. Growth Projections Website:
https://www.fresnocog.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/2024-Fresno-COG-2023-2060- Growth-Projections-REPORT.pdf (accessed June 2025).

United States Census Bureau. QuickFacts. Fresno city, California. Website: https://www.census.gov/ quickfacts/fact/table/fresnocitycalifornia/PST120223 (accessed May 2024).

Public Services and Recreation
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. High and Very High Hazard Severity Zones are classification zones established by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

7-6
Maps. Website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness- and-mitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones (accessed June 2025).

City of Fresno. 2017. Fresno Parks Master Plan. December 14.

City of Fresno. 2024. Adopted Fiscal Year 2024 Budget.

Clovis Unified School District. 2025. Demographics. Website: https://www.cusd.com/demographics (accessed May 2025).

Central Unified School District. 2023. 2023/24 District at a Glance. Available online at:
https://www.centralunified.org/apps/
pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=739772&type=d&pREC_ID=2520980 (accessed May 2025).

Fresno County Public Library. 2025. All Branches at a Glance. Website: www.fresnolibrary.org/ branch/all.html (accessed June 2025).

Fresno Fire Department. 2022. Annual Report. Website: https://www.fresno.gov/wp- content/uploads/2023/02/2022-Annual-Report.pdf (accessed June 2025).

Fresno State University. 2024. Headcount Enrollment from Spring 2021 to Spring 2025. Website:
tableau.fresnostate.edu/views/Enrollment/Headcount?:isGuestRedirectFromVizportal=y&:
embed=y (accessed June 2025).

Sanger Unified School District. 2025. About Our District. Website https://www.sanger.k12.ca.us/about/ (accessed May 2025).

State Center Community College District. 2024. Annual Security & Fire Report. Website:
https://www.scccd.edu/_uploaded-files/documents/departments/police/2024-annual- security-and-fire-safety-report.pdf (accessed June 2025).

U.S. District Court. 2019. Eastern District of California. All Judges. Website: www.caed.uscourts.gov/ caednew/index.cfm/judges (accessed June 2025).

Washington Unified School District. 2025. Maps and Boundaries. Website: www.washington unified.org/district/maps (accessed May 2025).

Transportation
Amtrak, Amtrak FY24 Ridership, Amtrak Route Ridership FY24 vs FY23. 2024. Available online at:
https://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/FY24-Year-End-Ridership-Fact- Sheet.pdf (accessed May 2025).

California Department of Transportation. 2002. Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies.

December.
7-7

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

Fresno Yosemite International Airport. 2024. Website: https://flyfresno.com/wp-content/uploads/ 2025/02/2024-12.pdf (accessed May 2025).

Utilities and Service Systems
CalRecycle. SWIS Facility/Site Summary. American Avenue Disposal Site (10-AA-0009). Website:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/Summary/352, (accessed March 25, 2025).

CalRecycle. SWIS Facility/Site Summary. City Of Clovis Landfill (10-AA-0004). Website:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4529?siteID=347 (accessed March 25, 2025).

CEC. 2022a. Electricity Consumption by Entity. Website:
http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx (accessed March 25, 2025).

CEC. 2022b. Electricity Consumption by County. Website:
https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx (accessed March 25, 2025).

CEC. 2022c. Gas Consumption by Entity. Website: https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx (accessed June 2025).

CEC. 2022d Gas Consumption by County. Website: https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx (accessed June 2025).

Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District. Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan. Exhibit A. Website: http://www.fresnofloodcontrol.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/District-Wall- Map.png (accessed March 25, 2025).

Fresno, City of. Department of Public Utilities, Trash Disposal & Recycling, Multi-Family & Commercial Services, Construction & Demolition Waste. Website:
www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/trash-disposal-recycling/multi-family-commercial- services/#tab-3 (accessed March 25, 2025).

Fresno, City of. Department of Public Utilities, Facilities & Infrastructure, American Avenue Landfill.

Website: https://www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/trash-disposal-recycling/solid-waste- facilities/ (accessed March 25, 2025).

Wildfire
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2025. Fire Hazard Severity Zones.

Website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-and- mitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones (accessed June 2025).

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J U LY 2025

7-8
This page intentionally left blank

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J ULY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

APPENDIX A

NOTICE OF PREPARATION

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J ULY 2025

This page intentionally left blank

9/27/24 1
Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report

Date: September 27, 2024
To: Responsible Agencies, Interested Parties and Organizations Subject: Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction Program
Lead Agency: City of Fresno
Contact: Sophia Pagoulatos
Planning Manager
City of Fresno – Planning and Development Department
2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 621-8062
[email protected]
Notice is Hereby Given: The City of Fresno (City) is the Lead Agency on the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduction Program and Related Environmental Analysis project (proposed project) and has prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The NOP is intended to solicit the views of the public, interested parties, and/or agencies as to the scope and content of the environmental information which is relevant to you or your agency’s statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Specifically, the City is req uesting that commenters identify environmental topics (and/or special studies) that they believe need to be explored in the forthcoming EIR, and to identify other relevant environmental issues related to the scope and content of the forthcoming EIR.

Project Title: Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction Program Project Location: The proposed project will apply to development within the city limits of Fresno.

Project Description: The proposed project aims to establish a VMT Reduction Program with the intent of reducing citywide VMT by establishing mitigation for future development projects in Fresno. The VMT Reduction Program includes two major components that can be applied, individually or in combination, to new development with VMT impacts : an Urban Design Calculator (UDC), which estimates potential VMT reductions for development projects through incorporation of various design elements; and a mitigation fee (supported by a nexus study) and mitigation bank , which would be used to fund VMT - reducing projects throughout Fresno.

The VMT Reduction Program would identify relevant transportation demand management (TDM) strategies and VMT-reducing projects within Fresno to be funded by mitigation fees from developments that trigger potentially significant VMT impacts under CEQA. Potential VMT -reducing measures may include active transportation improvements, multi-modal transportation programs, and improved street connectivity, including bicycle, pedestrian and transit facilities . The program intends to streamline the 9/27/24 2
Senate Bill (SB) 743 compliance process for development projects while funding future VMT improvement projects.

Areas of Potential Environmental Effects: Potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project include, but may not be limited to, the following: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Air Quality , Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities and Service Systems, Wildfire.

In addition, in accordance with Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will assess a range of reasonable alternatives to the project. The range of alternatives to be addressed will include alternatives that are specifically required by CEQA (e.g., the No Project Alternative), as well as other alternatives intended to reduce or eliminate potentially significant impacts as identified through the coordinated consultation and planning process.

Document Availability and Public Review Timeline: Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response to the NOP must be sent no later than 30 days after publication of this notice. The review period for the NOP will be from September 27, 2024, to October 28, 2024. Copies of the NOP can be reviewed at the City of Fresno, 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043, Fresno, CA 93721. Electronic copies can also be accessed on the City’s website at: https://www.fresno.gov/planning/plans -projects-under-review/#sb- 743-vechicle-miles-traveled
Public Scoping Meeting : The CEQA process encourages comments and questions from the public throughout the planning process. Pursuant to Section 15083 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Public Scoping Meeting will be held to solicit public comments on the scope and content of the EIR . A public scoping meeting for this project will be conducted at 5:00 PM on Monday, October 21, 2024. See details below VMT Reduction Program EIR Public Scoping Meeting
Fresno City Hall
2600 Fresno Street
Council Chambers, 2
nd Floor
Fresno, CA 93721

Submitting Comments: Comments and suggestions as to the appropriate scope of analysis of the EIR are invited from all interested parties. Written comments or questions concerning the EIR for the proposed project should be directed to the City’s Planning Manager, Sophia Pagoulatos, at the following address by 5:00 PM on October 28, 2024. Please include the commenter’s full name, address, phone number and/or email so that we may contact you for clarification, if necessary. Please submit comments to:

Sophia Pagoulatos
Planning Manager
City of Fresno – Planning and Development Department
2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 621-8023
[email protected]

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J ULY 2025

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

APPENDIX B

PUBLIC SCOPING COMMENTS

F RESNO VMT REDUCTION PROGRAM

F RESNO , C ALIFORNIA

P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT REPORT
J ULY 2025

This page intentionally left blank

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Page 1 of 5 ends

Fresno City CouncilOctober 16, 2025

Fresno City Council
October 16, 2025