To reduce the impacts of future development projects consistent with the proposed project, MM AIR-1a and MM AIR-1b are required. These mitigation measures would reduce emissions of VOC, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 associated with the construction of future development projects in the Plan Area to the extent feasible. However, due to the size of the proposed project and the potential for overlapping construction activities, future development projects could still potentially exceed the Valley Air District regional thresholds, even with the implementation of mitigation. Therefore, project-related construction activities would result in significant and unavoidable regional air quality impacts.
Operational Emissions
Buildout of the proposed project would result in direct and indirect criteria air pollutant emissions from area, energy, and mobile sources. Area sources would include activities such as landscape maintenance and occasional architectural coatings. Energy sources would include electricity and natural gas combustion for space and water heating. Mobile sources would include vehicle trips associated with passenger cars. As previously discussed, the Valley Air District regional emission significance thresholds were used to determine the proposed project’s impact significance. The proposed Fresno SEDA Specific Plan policies emphasize development of mixed-use areas and improvements to active and public transit facilities that would contribute to reducing vehicle trips and VMT. As an example, the proposed project would create mixed use areas and would integrate distinct neighborhood commercial development areas that would provide daily services and amenities for the nearby residences and businesses.
Overall, the general proposed guiding principles and objectives for land use planning and the proposed land use changes and transportation improvements would contribute to reducing vehicle trips and VMT per service population to the extent feasible. Furthermore, existing General Plan policies would further reduce emissions from the operation of future projects in the Plan Area.
However, when compared to the existing land uses, due to the magnitude of planned growth in the Plan Area, implementation of the proposed project would generate significant emissions of criteria pollutants, and a net increase of approximately 602,972 in total regional VMT (see Appendix B). As City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-51
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx the proposed project would become fully operational in 2050, Table 3.3-9 shows the annual operational emissions for full buildout of the proposed project in 2050.
Table 3.3-9: Project Net Annual Operational Emissions–Unmitigated (2050) Emissions Source
Pounds per Year
VOC NOX CO SOX
PM10
(Total)
PM2.5
(Total)
Area 1,100.19 19.43 320.23 0.12 3.02 3.02
Energy 6.47 56.24 30.23 0.35 4.47 4.47
Mobile 166.63 311.03 1,798.71 4.59 644.30 173.88
Annual Total Emissions 1,273.29 386.69 2,149.17 5.06 651.79 181.37 Existing Emissions 178.12 83.42 462.80 0.87 71.17 29.72 Net Annual Emissions 1,095.17 303.27 1,686.37 4.19 580.62 151.65 Valley Air District
Significance Thresholds 10 10 100 27 15 15
Exceed Threshold? Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Notes:
CO = carbon monoxide
NOX = oxides of nitrogen
PM10 = particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5 = particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns.
SOX = oxides of sulfur
Source of emissions: Appendix B.
As shown in this table, due to the magnitude of the proposed growth, operation of the land uses accommodated under the proposed project at buildout would generate air pollutant emissions that exceed the Valley Air District’s regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 at full buildout. Emissions of VOC and NOX that exceed the Valley Air District regional threshold would cumulatively contribute to the ozone nonattainment designation of the SJVAB. Emissions of NOX that exceed the Valley Air District’s regional significance thresholds would cumulatively contribute to the ozone and particulate matter nonattainment designations of the SJVAB. Emissions of direct PM10 and PM2.5 would contribute to the PM2.5 nonattainment designations.
The application of the Valley Air District Rule 9510 to future individual projects would contribute to reducing NOX and particulate matter emissions. In addition, application of Valley Air District Rule 9410 (Employer Based Trip Reduction) would contribute to reducing mobile source emissions from the operation of the proposed project. The objectives and policies included in the proposed Specific Plan would generally support a more sustainable development pattern to accommodate growth within the Plan Area by creating complete neighborhoods, high-density housing in proximity to jobs and service amenities, and supporting alternative transit options through improvements to the pedestrian, bicycle, public transportation, and alternative-fueled vehicle networks and infrastructure, which would contribute in minimizing long-term criteria air pollutant emissions.
L
7 ~ _J
7 7
7 j
_J
7 7
7 E L
i i
r
_J
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Air Quality Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.3-52 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx However, while compliance with the Valley Air District rules and the policies of the proposed Specific Plan may contribute to reducing operation-related regional air quality impacts of individual projects envisioned under the proposed Specific Plan to less than significant levels, the projected cumulative emissions associated with future development projects would be in exceedance of the Valley Air District thresholds. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would result in a significant impact because it would significantly contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SJVAB. To reduce emissions from the operation of future projects envisioned in the proposed project, MM AIR- 1c and MM AIR-1d are required to reduce emissions to the extent feasible, in combination with the existing General Plan policies applicable to the proposed project. However, due to the magnitude of emissions generated by the residential, office, and commercial land uses proposed as part of the proposed project, no mitigation measures are available that would reduce cumulative impacts below the Valley Air District’s thresholds. Therefore, despite adherence to the applicable mitigation measures, Impact AIR-2 would remain significant and unavoidable.
Impact Summary
Regional emissions generated by the proposed project would exceed applicable thresholds after compliance with all rules, regulations, and mitigation measures during operation. Localized operational emissions would also present a potentially significant impact after incorporation of identified mitigation. This impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement MM AIR-1a through MM AIR-1d.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and unavoidable impact.
Buildout of the proposed project would occur over approximately 25 years, or longer. Construction activities associated with buildout of the proposed project could generate short-term emissions that exceed the Valley Air District’s significance thresholds during this time and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SJVAB. The General Plan policies and the implementation of MM AIR-1a and MM AIR-1b would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions from construction- related activities to the extent feasible. However, specific construction time frames and equipment for individual site-specific projects are not available and there is a potential for multiple developments to be constructed at any one time, resulting in potentially significant cumulative construction-related emissions.
Buildout in accordance with the proposed project would generate long-term emissions that would exceed the Valley Air District’s regional significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SJVAB. To reduce emissions from the operation of future projects envisioned in the proposed project, MM AIR-1c is required to reduce operation emissions to the extent feasible, in combination with the existing General Plan policies. In addition, MM AIR-1d will City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-53
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx serve to reduce emissions and exposure and potential health risks associated with operation of the proposed project. However, due to the magnitude of emissions generated by the residential, office, and commercial land uses proposed as part of the proposed project, no mitigation measures are available that would reduce cumulative impacts below the Valley Air District’s thresholds. Therefore, Impact AIR-2 would remain significant and unavoidable.
Sensitive Receptors Exposure to Pollutant Concentrations Impact AIR-3 The proposed project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Impact Analysis
Sensitive Receptors
Those who are sensitive to air pollution include children, the elderly, and persons with preexisting respiratory or cardiovascular illness. The Valley Air District considers a sensitive receptor to be a location that houses or attracts children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Examples of sensitive receptors include hospitals, residences, convalescent facilities, and schools.
Construction: ROG
ROG is emitted during the application of architectural coatings (painting). The amount emitted is dependent on the amount of ROG (or VOC) in the paint. ROG emissions are typically an indoor air quality health hazard concern rather than an outdoor air quality health hazard concern. Therefore, exposure to ROG during architectural coatings is a less than significant health impact.
There are three types of asphalt that are typically used in paving: asphalt cements, cutback asphalts, and emulsified asphalts. However, District Rule 4641 prohibits the use of the following types of asphalt: rapid cure cutback asphalt; medium cure cutback asphalt; slow cure asphalt that contains more than 0.5 percent of organic compounds that evaporate at 500°F or lower; and emulsified asphalt containing organic compounds, in excess of 3 percent by volume, that evaporate at 500°F or lower. An exception to this is medium cure asphalt when the National Weather Service official forecast of the high temperature for the 24-hour period following application is below 50°F.
The acute (short-term) health effects from worker direct exposure to asphalt fumes include irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat. Other effects include respiratory tract symptoms and pulmonary function changes. The studies were based on occupational exposure of fumes. Residents are not in the immediate vicinity of the fumes; therefore, they would not be subjected to concentrations high enough to evoke a negative response. In addition, the restrictions that are placed on asphalt in the San Joaquin Valley reduce ROG emissions from asphalt and exposure. The impact to nearby sensitive receptors from ROG during construction is less than significant.
Operation: ROG
During operation, ROG would be emitted primarily from motor vehicles. Direct exposure to ROG from project motor vehicles would not result in health effects, because the ROG would be City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Air Quality Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.3-54 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx distributed across miles and miles of roadway and in the air. The concentrations would not be great enough to result in direct health effects.
Construction and Operation: NOX, PM10, and PM2.5
As discussed in Impact AIR-2, construction and operation of future individual development projects accommodated under the proposed Specific Plan could potentially result in an exceedance of the Valley Air District’s ambient air quality screening threshold of 100 pounds per day.
As stated, the planned improvements, objectives and policies under the proposed Specific Plan would generally support a sustainable development pattern in accommodating future growth within the Plan Area, which would generally contribute to reducing long-term criteria air pollutant emissions. In addition, application of the Valley Air District Rule 9510 and Regulation VIII would contribute to reducing operation- and construction-related NOX and particulate matter emissions.
Furthermore, Rule 9410 would also contribute to reducing operation-related mobile source emissions.
However, while individual development projects may not result in exceeding the screening threshold of 100 pounds per day, the projected cumulative emissions associated with future development projects accommodated under the proposed Specific Plan would be in exceedance and could result in causing an exceedance of the AAQS. Therefore, as construction and operation of future individual development projects accommodated under the proposed Specific Plan could result in causing or contribute to a violation of the AAQS, impacts to air quality would be significant.
Toxic Air Contaminants
During construction and operation, the proposed project could result in emissions of several TACs that could potentially impact nearby sensitive receptors. The Valley Air District has defined health risk significance thresholds. These thresholds are represented as a cancer risk to the public and a non-cancer hazard from exposures to TACs. Cancer risk represents the probability (in terms of risk per million individuals) that an individual would contract cancer resulting from exposure to TACs continuously over a period of several years. The Valley Air District’s latest threshold of significance for TAC emissions is an increase in cancer risk for the maximally exposed individual of 20 in a million (formerly 10 in a million). Exposures to TACs can also result in both short-term (acute) or long-term (chronic) non-cancer health impacts. Such impacts could include illnesses related to reproductive effects, respiratory effects, eye sensitivity, immune effects, kidney effects, blood effects, central nervous system, birth defects, or other adverse environmental effects.
Project construction would involve the use of diesel-fueled vehicles and equipment that emit DPM, which is considered a TAC. Industrial land uses, such as chemical processing facilities, chrome-plating facilities, dry cleaners, and gasoline-dispensing facilities, have the potential to be substantial stationary sources that would require a permit from the Valley Air District for emissions of TACs.
Emissions of TACs would be controlled through permits issued by the Valley Air District and would be subject to further study and an HRA prior to the issuance of any necessary air quality permits. In addition to stationary/area sources of TACs, commercial and industrial operations could generate a substantial amount of DPM emissions from off-road equipment use and truck idling. New land uses in the proposed Plan Area that use diesel trucks, including trucks with transport refrigeration units, City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-55
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx could generate an increase in DPM that would contribute to cancer and non-cancer health risk in the SJVAB.
As it is not possible to determine the amount of TAC concentrations at the time of this analysis, it is not possible to calculate the risks for a particular health effect within the Plan Area. The proposed project is a programmatic project and until specific future projects are proposed, the associated TAC emissions cannot be determined or modeled at this time. Through the implementation of MM AIR- 1d, future development projects subject to environmental review under CEQA would be required to analyze potential TAC emissions and include mitigation as appropriate.
ARB developed a guidance document, Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (ARB Handbook), to address the siting of sensitive land uses in the vicinity of freeways, distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, chrome-plating facilities, dry cleaners, and gasoline- dispensing facilities. This guidance document was developed to assess compatibility and associated health risks when placing sensitive receptors near existing pollution sources. ARB’s recommendations for the siting of new sensitive land uses were based on a compilation of studies that evaluated data on the adverse health effects from proximity to air pollution sources. The key observation in these studies is that proximity to air pollution sources substantially increases both exposure and the potential for adverse health effects. Respiratory and cardiovascular problems including asthma, lung cancer, and premature death have been associated with living near major roadways and freeways.
Children who live near major roadways and freeways have been found to have higher asthma rates and reduced lung function. There are three carcinogenic TACs that constitute the majority of the known health risks from motor vehicle traffic: DPM from trucks and benzene and butadiene from passenger vehicles. It has been found that outdoor concentrations are highest near the roadway and decrease with increasing distance downwind of the source. The ARB recommends avoiding siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of urban roads with more than 100,000 vehicles per day or rural roads with more than 50,000 vehicles per day.28 MM AIR-1d requires that an HRA be performed and potential health impacts be mitigated.
Future development envisioned as a part of the proposed project would be required to comply with AB 2588, and ARB standards for diesel engines. While existing City policies and regulations are intended to minimize impacts associated with sensitive receptors, mitigation measures for future project developments that implement these policies and regulations are identified to ensure that the intended environmental protections are achieved. Compliance with MM AIR-1d would help to ensure that mobile sources of TACs not covered under the Valley Air District permits are considered during subsequent project-level environmental review. This mitigation measure requires the preparation of project-specific technical health risk assessments for certain discretionary large industrial or warehousing uses to evaluate operational-related health risk impacts to further ensure that operational-related emissions are reduced to a less than significant level. However, information regarding operational characteristics of future specific development projects and the associated emissions cannot be determined at the time of this analysis; therefore, cumulative growth within the
28 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Air Quality Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.3-56 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx Plan Area could result in an overall impact above the health-based thresholds established by the Valley Air District.
In addition to operational emissions from new stationary sources of emissions and vehicle trips to and within the Plan Area, the proposed project would locate new sensitive receptors (residents) that could be subject to existing sources of TACs within the proposed project boundary. The California Supreme Court in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District concluded that agencies generally subject to CEQA are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents.
Compliance with existing regulatory programs, General Plan policies, and MM AIR-1d will serve to reduce the health risk impacts of the proposed project to the extent feasible. However, the proposed project would result in the future development of numerous projects, each contributing incrementally to air emissions affecting sensitive receptors. Thus, it is possible that the proposed project would result in cumulatively significant impacts to sensitive receptors, even if individual projects were each less than significant. This is particularly likely since none of the measures herein would prevent multiple development projects from being constructed concurrently within close proximity to sensitive receptors in such a manner as to cause substantial concentrations within the area. Further, neither the amount of construction occurring nor the exact location within the Plan Area is foreseeable and, as such, it cannot be determined whether the resultant construction emissions could be adequately controlled or reduced to below regulatory thresholds. Without such information, it is not possible to conclude that air pollutant emissions resulting from construction activities would be adequately reduced to the point that sensitive receptors are not exposed to substantial concentrations of air pollutants, and thus a significant and unavoidable impact may result.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implement MM AIR-1d.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and unavoidable impact.
Existing regulations and ordinances would reduce operation-related impacts by reducing air pollutant emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Even with the implementation of new project-specific mitigation measures, cumulative operational emissions resulting from future development would likely exceed Valley Air District thresholds, contributing to the nonattainment designation of the SJVAB for the health-based State and national AAQS. Therefore, the potential impacts from the proposed project to sensitive receptors would be significant and unavoidable.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-57
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx Objectionable Odors Exposure
Impact AIR-4 The proposed project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
Impact Analysis
Odors can cause a variety of responses. The impact of an odor is dependent on interacting factors such as frequency (how often), intensity (strength), duration (in time), offensiveness unpleasantness), location, and sensory perception. While offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they still can be very unpleasant, leading to considerable distress and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and regulatory agencies.
Growth within the proposed Plan Area could generate new sources of odors. Odors from the types of land uses that could generate objectional odors (see Table 3.3-7) are regulated under Regulation IV, Prohibitions, Rule 4102, Nuisance, which states:
A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such person or the public or which cause or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.
As further discussed in the “Methodology” section, the Valley Air District has published recommended screening distances, as included in Table 3.3-7, and guidance documentation related to odors, which has been referenced for this analysis.
Construction-related Odors
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include exhaust from diesel construction equipment. However, because of the temporary nature of these emissions, the intermittent nature of construction activities, and the highly diffusive properties of diesel exhaust, nearby receptors would not be affected by diesel exhaust odors associated with project construction. Odors from these sources would be localized and generally confined to the immediate area surrounding the proposed project site. The proposed project would utilize typical construction techniques, and the odors would be typical of most construction sites and temporary in nature.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Operational-related Odors
Industrial land uses have the potential to generate objectionable odors. Examples of industrial projects are wastewater treatment plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch manufacturing plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities. Agricultural operations, such as the existing agricultural land uses currently included in the Plan Area, may also generate odors.
Future developments in the Plan Area could include light industrial land uses such as wastewater treatment plants, and so there is the potential for land uses typically considered to be associated City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Air Quality Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.3-58 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx with odors to be developed in the Plan Area. The proposed project would also develop different types of residential and retail activities, which are not typical odor-generating land uses. Potential impacts from odor sources would be mitigated through compliance with General Plan Policy PU-9-d and by enforcement actions by agencies with regulatory authority over odors. General Plan Policy PU-9-d would ensure that waste and recycling facilities are properly located. The Valley Air District addresses odor issues through Rule 4102– Nuisance. Facilities creating nuisance odors generating public complaints can result in Valley Air District enforcement action.
Future individual development projects consistent with the proposed project will be required to determine whether odors would be a potentially significant impact as part of CEQA review. In addition, projects containing sensitive receptors are likely to be proposed near existing odor sources, such as agricultural operations. Projects proposing new receptors within screening level distances will reduce the impact to less than significant levels. Proposal of a new source within the screening distance would require the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed facility includes odor controls within its design and through implementation of odor management practices to reduce odors to less than significant.
Development consistent with the proposed project could also result in sensitive receptors being constructed within the screening level distances from existing odor sources. These potential odor impacts on new sensitive receptors could be significant. When potential odor impacts on these new sensitive receptors occur, the Valley Air District has authority under Rule 4102 to require the owner of the odor-generating source to take actions that would reduce impacts to less than significant. The Valley Air District provided a record of all odor complaints within the Plan Area from 2018 through 2021 for known sources of odors. No significant odor complaints have been received in the Plan Area or in the vicinity of the proposed project in recent years.
In addition to the existing regulatory programs described above, MM AIR-4 requires developers of projects with the potential to generate significant odor to prepare an odor impact assessment and to implement odor control measures. Compliance with MM AIR-4 would further reduce potential impacts of objectionable odors to below a level of significance. Additionally, implementation of the proposed project’s policies would help to minimize the effects of growth and development on air quality.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM AIR-4 Prior to future discretionary project approval in the Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Area (Plan Area), development project applicants proposing a project with the potential to generate significant odor impacts, as determined through review of San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Valley Air District) odor complaint history for similar facilities and consultation with the Valley Air District, shall prepare an odor impact assessment and shall implement odor control measures recommended by the Valley Air District or the City as needed to reduce the impact to a level deemed acceptable by the Valley Air District.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Air Quality
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.3-59
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
3.3.5 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative impact analysis for Air Quality is the SJVAB. This analysis evaluates whether impacts of the Specific Plan, together with impacts of cumulative development, would result in a cumulatively significant impact with respect to air quality emissions. This analysis then considers whether incremental contribution of the impacts associated with implementation of the Specific Plan would be significant. Both conditions must apply for cumulative effects to rise to the level of significance.
In accordance with the Valley Air District’s methodology, any project that produces a significant project-level regional air quality impact in an area that is in nonattainment contributes to the cumulative impact. Because of the extent of the area potentially impacted from cumulative project emissions (i.e., the SJVAB); the Valley Air District considers a project cumulatively significant when project-related emissions exceed the regional emissions thresholds, as discussed in Impact AIR-2 and Impact AIR-3. No significant cumulative impacts were identified with regard to CO hotspots.
Criteria Pollutants
The SJVAB is designated nonattainment for ozone and PM2.5, under the California and national AAQS and nonattainment for PM10 under the California AAQS. Construction of cumulative projects will further degrade the regional and local air quality. Air quality will be temporarily impacted during construction activities. As discussed in Impact AIR-2, construction emissions associated with the proposed Plan would exceed the Valley Air District’s regional construction emissions thresholds for VOC, NOX, CO, PM2.5, and PM10. and NOX, after implementation of MM AIR-1a and MM AIR-1b. Thus, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts would be cumulatively considerable and therefore significant.
For operational air quality emissions, any project that does not exceed or can be mitigated to less than the annual regional threshold values is not considered by the Valley Air District to be a substantial source of air pollution and does not add significantly to a cumulative impact. As discussed, the Valley Air District Rules 9510 and 9410 would contribute to reducing emissions of NOX and particulate matter associated with future individual projects accommodated under the proposed Specific Plan and may reduce impacts for these individual development projects to a less than significant level. In addition, the planned improvements, design guidelines, objectives, and policies under the proposed Specific Plan would generally support a more sustainable development pattern in the Plan Area. Creation of more complete neighborhoods, with high-density housing located in proximity to jobs and amenities, in addition to improving the public transit, pedestrian, and bicycle networks and infrastructure would contribute to reducing per capita VMT. However, due to the amount of growth for the proposed Plan Area, operation of the cumulative projects accommodated under the proposed Plan would result in emissions in excess of the Valley Air District regional emissions thresholds for VOC, NO
X, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 after implementation of MM AIR-
1c. Thus, the proposed Specific Plan’s criteria air pollutant emissions would be cumulatively considerable and therefore significant.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Air Quality Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.3-60 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-03 Air Quality.docx Toxic Air Contaminants
The proposed project would permit residential, office, commercial and industrial land uses.
Development of the land uses that are allowed under the proposed project may result in stationary sources of TAC emissions, including light industrial facilities, warehouses, dry cleaners, restaurants with charbroilers, or buildings with emergency generators and boilers. While MM AIR-1d would serve to reduce the potential health impacts of TAC emissions in the Plan Area, there is not enough information currently available to quantify the emissions of specific project development that may occur as a part of the proposed project to guarantee a less than significant finding. Furthermore, the construction and operation of multiple projects in the Plan Area may lead to a cumulatively considerable, and therefore significant, amount of TAC emissions.
Objectionable Odors Exposure
As discussed in Impact AIR-4, potential odor sources associated with the proposed project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities; however, construction odor emissions would be temporary, short- term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction and is thus considered less than significant. Although it is possible other construction activities could occur in proximity concurrent with construction of the proposed project, due to the short duration and intermittent nature of construction-related odors, impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
For long-term operation, the proposed project and other cumulative developments would be required to comply with Valley Air District Rule 4102 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances, as well as MM AIR-4, which would require potential future odor-generating industrial projects to mitigate potential impacts. Therefore, odors associated with the proposed project operations would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Cumulative Mitigation Measures
Implement MM AIR-1a through MM AIR-1d and MM AIR-4.
Level of Cumulative Significance After Mitigation
Significant and unavoidable impact.
As discussed above, while implementation of MM AIR-1a through MM AIR-1d would serve to reduce criteria air pollutant and TAC emissions generated by the proposed project, there is currently not enough information to quantify emissions of specific project development that may occur under the proposed project. Without quantification to guarantee a less than significant finding, future development projects may still exceed the Valley Air District regional significance thresholds.
Additionally, due to the size of the proposed project, there is not sufficient mitigation available to reduce the potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with the proposed project to levels that would not exceed the Valley Air District thresholds of significance. Therefore, cumulative impacts to air quality would be considered to remain significant and unavoidable.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx
3.4 - Biological Resources
3.4.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing biological setting and potential effects from project implementation on the project site and the surrounding area. This section also identifies mitigation measures to reduce these potential effects to less than significant levels. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based, in part, on the Fresno General Plan (General Plan), the Fresno Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Specific Plan (Specific Plan), the Fresno Municipal Code (Municipal Code), aerial photographs and maps, existing reports relevant to the Specific Plan area (Plan Area), and the results of database searches.
As further discussed in Chapter 1, Introduction, seven public comments were received during the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Draft PEIR) scoping period related to the proposed project’s potential biological resources impact:
• Requests that the Draft PEIR analyzes potential impacts on the special-status species identified in the comment letter and provides necessary mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
• States that any construction within or near a stream will require a clearance from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and Streambed Alternation Agreement if buildout would result in alternation or degradation.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR accurately captures and analyzes baseline conditions and potentially significant project-specific and cumulative impacts within and adjacent to the planning area.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR identifies and adopts all feasible and enforceable mitigation measures that avoid and reduce negative impact.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR analyzes and creates mitigation measures consistent with all applicable laws, including State and federal fair housing, civil rights, and climate laws such as Senate Bill (SB) 743.
3.4.2 - Environmental Setting
Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat
City of Fresno
The City is mainly comprised of previously disturbed urban and developed areas and includes several types of vegetation communities, as further described below.
According to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), a total of 11 vegetation communities were identified within the City and its Sphere of Influence (SOI), including two that are considered special-status natural communities by the CDFW. Table 3.4-1, below, describes the City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx vegetation communities identified in the City and its SOI as well as their associated acreages and percentages of total area.1
Table 3.4-1: Vegetation Communities within the City
Vegetation Community Type
Total Acreage Within the City and SOI
(Acres)
Approximate Percentage of the Total
City and SOI
Urban 67,100 63%
Irrigated Row and Field Crops 19,500 18%
Deciduous Orchard 14,500 14%
Lacustrine 3,000 3%
Annual Grassland 1,000 1%
Valley Foothill Riparian 370 Less than 1%
Riverine 270 Less than 1%
Valley Oak Woodland 120 Less than 1%
Barren 106 Less than 1%
Pasture 60 Less than 1%
Northern Claypan Vernal Pool 1 Less than 1%
Notes:
SOI = Sphere of Influence
Source: California Natural Diversity Database. 2019.
The City’s developed land accounts for approximately 63 percent of the of the City and its SOI and is mostly comprised of commercial, residential, and industrial buildings. The City’s developed areas also include roads and parking lots. Approximately 32 percent of the Plan Area contains previously disturbed agricultural lands, orchards, pasture, and row and field crops, located predominately along the outer boundaries of the City and its SOI. Undeveloped and undisturbed areas with native vegetation occur within the remaining 5 percent of the City and its SOI. Further descriptions of these types of vegetation communities, as described in the General Plan, are included in Table 3.4-2, below.
2 Table 3.4-2: Vegetation Community Types and Description Vegetation
Community Type Description
Urban Urban (developed area) lands have been constructed upon or otherwise covered with a permanent, unnatural surface (e.g., concrete, asphalt, buildings, homes, etc.) or large amounts of debris or other materials.
1 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2019. Natural Communities and Vegetation. Website:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB. Accessed December 12, 2024. 2 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan, Chapter 5 Parks, Open Space, and Schools.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Vegetation
Community Type Description
Irrigated Row
and Field Crops
Irrigated Row and Field Crops land occurs most frequently in floodplains or upland areas with high soil quality. Irrigated row and field crows include annual and perennial crops, grown in rows, with open space between the rows. Row and field crops are artificially irrigated and feature a moderate disturbance rate by vehicle and pedestrian encroachment typically associated with farming activities. Species composition changes frequently, both by season and by year.
Deciduous
Orchard
Deciduous orchard communities primarily occur where there are flat alluvial soils on valley floors, rolling foothills and relatively steep slopes. Orchard communities are typically comprised of artificially irrigated habitat dominated by one, sometimes several, tree or shrub species planted for cultivation. Trees are typically low and bushy, and the understory is open, with little groundcover. In the City and its SOI, deciduous orchards include a variety of fruit trees (e.g., apples, apricots, cherries, citrus, kiwi, peaches, nectarines, pears, persimmons, plums, pluots, pomegranates, etc.) and/or nut trees and shrubs (e.g., almonds, olives, pistachios, walnuts, etc.). Understory species generally consist of short native and non-native grasses and other herbaceous species.
Lacustrine Lacustrine communities consist of standing/open waters in topographic depressions (i.e., lakes) or dammed river channels. Lacustrine communities lack persistent emergent vegetation but may have submerged or floating-leaved aquatic vegetation. Generally, lacustrine systems are surrounded by hydrophytic plants, grasses, and trees.
Annual
Grassland
Annual grassland communities includes a mix of native and non-native, annual grasses, which often occur in association with ruderal herbs and occasional native annual forbs. The dominant plant species within the annual grassland vegetation community typically include black needlegrass (Nasella sp.), fescue (Vulpia sp.), brome (Bromus sp.), and wild oats (Avena spp), with mustard (Brassica nigra), dove weed (Eremocarpus setigerus), and poppy (Eschscholzia sp.). These grasses germinate with the fall rains, grow during the winter and spring, and wither in the early summer.
Valley Foothill
Riparian
Valley Foothill Riparian communities within the City and its SOI occur primarily within mature riparian forests along the San Joaquin River corridor. They typically have a 20 to 80 percent canopy cover with trees that are winter deciduous. Wild grape (Vitis californica) often provides 30 to 50 percent ground cover. There is very little herbaceous understory with the exception of disturbed openings in the canopy cover. The understory typically consists of leaf-litter, fallen limbs, and is often impenetrable for smaller herbaceous plants.
Tree canopy species within this community typically includes cottonwood (Populus fremontii), California sycamore (Platanus racemosa), and valley oak (Quercus lobata).
Subcanopy species often includes white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), boxelder (Acer negundo), and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia). Typical understory shrub layer plants include wild grape, California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), blue elderberry (Sambucus caerulea), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and willows (Salix sp.).
Riverine Riverine systems consist of linear aquatic communities of flowing, non-tidal waters with a distinct channel and little to no persistent emergent vegetation. Riverine systems may also include areas with abundant submerged or floating-leaved aquatic vegetation. Vegetation communities abutting riverine systems tend to be dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergent vegetation, and/or emergent mosses and lichens. This vegetation community occurs near or depends upon a nearby freshwater source or areas with fresh water flow during all or part of the year.
Valley Oak
Woodland
Valley oak woodland communities vary from open-canopy savanna-like woodlands to partially closed canopy woodlands but mostly consist of winter deciduous, broad-leaved City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Vegetation
Community Type Description
species. Valley oak (Quercus lobata), a winter deciduous species and California’s largest broad-leaved tree, is usually the only tree species present, although blue oak (Q. douglasii) may also be present. Mature valley oaks can reach heights of 50 to 100 feet (about 15 to 35 meters). Valley oak woodlands typically occur on deep, well-drained alluvial soils in valley bottoms that have a higher summer moisture content. This community intergrades with valley oak riparian near rivers and with blue oak woodlands on drier slopes. Characteristic understory species include creeping wild rye (Elymus triticoides), wild oats (Avena sp.), brome (Bromus sp.), barley (Hordeum zp.), needlegrass (Nassella sp.), and poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum).
Barren Barren communities are areas in which the vegetative cover comprises less than 10 percent of the surface area (disregarding natural rock outcrops) and where there is evidence of soil surface disturbance and compaction from previous legal human activity, and/or areas in which the vegetative cover is greater than 10 percent, soils surface compaction is evident, and building foundations and debris are present (e.g., irrigation piping, fencing, old wells, abandoned farming or mining equipment) from legal activities (as opposed to illegal dumping). Vegetation within barren land has a high predominance of non-native or weedy species that are indicators of soil disturbance, including Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), horehound (Marrubium vulgare), and sow thistle (Sonchus oleraceus), and a sub-dominance of non-native grasses. Barren land only provides moderately suitable habitat for one special-status species, California horned lark.
Pasture Pasture lands form a dense habitat with nearly 100 percent cover; usually monoculture crops are planted in these areas, which are irrigated, artificially seeded, and frequently maintained. Characteristic species include non-native grasses such as oat (Avena sp.), bermuda grass (Cynodon sp.), barley (Hordeum sp.), Sorghum grass, as well as clover (Medicago sp.). Often times, this land contains significant areas of bare ground due to livestock grazing and movement across acres of this vegetation community.
Northern
Claypan Vernal
Pool
The northern claypan vernal pool community is located in an area that is surrounded by a lacustrine vegetation community in the northern portion of the City. Typically, these pools are located within the lower elevations of the main San Joaquin Valley. These areas are typically associated with a series of small mima mounds with interspersed pools. Typically, these pools have highly alkaline and may display whitish salt deposits in non-vegetated centers of dry pools. These vernal pools are dominated by a high percentage of non-native species.
Source: City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan, Chapter 5 Parks, Open Space, and Schools.
Plan Area
The Plan Area is located in the southeast portion of the City and its SOI and is composed of six of the 11 vegetation communities/land cover types present in the City and its SOI, as described above.
Exhibit 3.4-1 includes a map of the vegetation communities’ locations in the Plan Area, and Table
3.4-3, below, lists the vegetation communities, approximate acreage, approximate percentage of the total Plan Area, and suitability for special-status species.3,4
3 E sri. 2022. Aerial Imagery of the City of Fresno. Accessed July 5, 2022. 4 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan, Chapter 5, Parks, Open Space, and Schools. 3 1 6 8 0 0 3 7 " 1 2 / 2 0 2 4 | 3 . 4 - 1 _ l a n d _ c o v e r _ v e g . m x d E x h i b i t 3 . 4 - 1
L a n d C o v e r T y p e s a n d
V e g e t a t i o n C o m m u n i t i e s S o u r c e : E S R I A e r i a l I m a g e r y . C I T Y O F F R E S N O
F R E S N O S O U T H E A S T D E V E L O P M E N T A R E A S P E C I F I C P L A N R E C I R C U L A T E D P R O G R A M 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 ·|}þ180
Clovis Ave
Mckinley Ave
Belmont Ave
Mccall Ave
Jensen Ave
North Ave
Highland Ave
Shields Ave
Ashlan Ave
Church Ave
Fowler Ave
I
4 , 6 0 0 0 4 , 6 0 0 2 , 3 0 0
F e e t
Legend
Fresno Southeast Development Area 8,769.57 acres
Land Cover Types and Vegetation Communities
Deciduous Orchard 4,741.08 acres
Irrigated Row and Field Crops 2,983.38 acres
Lacustrine 7.47 acres
Pasture 5.91 acres
Riverine 10.43 acres
Urban 1,021.30 acres
ICJI
-----
-
FIRSTCARBON
SOLUTIONSTM
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-7
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Table 3.4-3: Vegetation Communities within the Plan Area Vegetation
Community Type
Approximate Total
Acreage Within the
Plan Area
Approximate
Percentage of the
Total Plan Area Suitability for Special-status Species
Deciduous
Orchard
4,741 53% This community is relatively disturbed, containing very little groundcover and planted trees that
provide moderately suitable habitat for only one
special-status species: California horned lark.
Irrigated Row and
Field Crops
2,983 34% This community contains active agriculture and is significantly disturbed with altered substrates.
This vegetation community does not provide
suitable habitat for any special-status plant
species and limited habitat for special-status
wildlife species: burrowing owl, California horned
lark.
Urban 1,021 12% This community provides poor quality habitat for any special-status species. Special-status species
are unlikely to occur within this vegetation
community.
Riverine 10 Less than 1% This community provides a suitable habitat for aquatic species: western yellow-b illed cuckoo,
tricolored blackbird, hardhead, hoary bat, spotted
bat, western pond turtle, and California satintail.
Lacustrine 7 Less than 1% This community provides a suitable habitat for species that need standing/open waters: western
spadefoot, tricolored blackbird, hoary bat,
spotted bat, western pond turtle, dwarf
downingia, and Sanford’s arrowhead.
Pasture 6 Less than 1% This community contains significant areas of bare ground due to livestock grazing and movement
across acres of this vegetation community and is a
limited habitat for special-status species:
burrowing owl, California horned lark, San Joaquin
kit fox, and Swainson’s hawk.
Sources:
Esri Aerial Imagery. 2022. City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan.
As described above, the majority of land cover in the Plan Area, approximately 87 percent, includes deciduous orchard and irrigated row and field crops. Generally, as shown in Exhibit 3.4-1, the majority of deciduous orchard communities in the Plan Area are concentrated in the southern portion of the Plan Area and irrigated row and field crops are concentrated in the northern portion of the Plan Area. Urban lands in the Plan Area are primarily concentrated south of McKinley Avenue and north of State Route (SR) 180.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-8 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Special-status Natural Communities
City of Fresno
The City and its SOI contain two special-status natural communities: the valley oak woodland vegetation community and the northern claypan vernal pool vegetation community. Based on a review of the CNDDB, there are three additional special-status natural communities located in the vicinity of the City and its SOI. These three special-status natural communities include the northern hardpan vernal pool, great valley mixed riparian forest, and sycamore alluvial woodland. Each of these additional three special-status natural communities are associated with stream courses, waterways, drainages, wetlands, and seasonal pools; however, these have not been recorded to occur within the City and its SOI and are, therefore, not likely to occur. 5 Plan Area
As shown in Exhibit 3.4-1, the Plan Area does not contain any of the special-status natural communities identified in the City and its SOI.
Special-status Species
City of Fresno
The City and its SOI contain potentially suitable habitat for a total of 28 special-status species, which includes 12 plant species and 16 wildlife species. Each of the special-status species with potential to occur (or that are known to occur) within the City and its SOI is described in more detail below.6 Special-status Plant Species
A listing of plant species was obtained from the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), and six listed plant species have the potential to occur within the City and its SOI: 7 • California jewel flower (Caulanthus californicus)
• San Joaquin Valley orcutt grass (Orcuttia inaequalis) • hairy orcutt grass (Orcuttia pilosa)
• Hartweg’s golden sunburst (Pseudobahia bahiifolia)
• succulent owl’s clover (Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta) • Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei)
In addition to the six listed plant species, there are six additional special-status plant species have the potential to occur in the City and its SOI, including:
• California satintail (Imperata brevifolia)
• Madera leptosiphon (Leptosiphon serrulatus)
• Sanford’s arrowhead (Sagittaria sanfordii)
• caper-fruited tropidocarpum (Tropidocarpum capparideum) • spiny-sepaled button-celery (Eryngium spinosepalum)
• dwarf downingia (Downingia pusilla)
5 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan, Chapter 5, Parks, Open Space, and Schools. 6 Ibid.
7 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2024. Website: https://www.cnps.org/. Accessed December 12, 2024.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Special-status Wildlife Species
A listing of the wildlife species was obtained from the CNDDB, and a total of seven listed wildlife species have the potential to occur or are known to occur within the City and its SOI.8 • California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) • Fresno kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides exilis)
• San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica)
• Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni)
• valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) • vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)
• western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis)
In addition to the seven listed wildlife species, there are nine additional special-status wildlife species that have the potential to occur or are known to occur within the City and its SOI,9 including:
• American badger (Taxidea taxus)
• burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia)
• hardhead (Mylopharodon conocephalus)
• pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus)
• spotted bat (Euderma maculatum)
• tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)
• western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis)
• western pond turtle (Emys marmorata)
• western spadefoot (Spea hammondii)
Plan Area
The potential for the Plan Area to support special-status plant and wildlife species is discussed below. The description and legal status of these species is presented in Table 3.4-4 and Table 3.4-5.
Figure 3.4-2 shows the records for special-status plants and animals contained within the CNDDB as of June 2022 within a four quadrangle radius of the Plan Area.
Special-status Plant Species
According to the CNDDB, nine special-status plants have the potential to occur in the Plan Area.
Table 3.4-4 describes the three special-status plant species listed for the Plan Area and their legal status as shown on Exhibit 3.4-2 as well as the six plant species and their legal status that are not shown on Exhibit 3.4-2 but are also known to occur within this four quadrangle radius of the Plan Area.10
8 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2019. Natural Communities and Vegetation. Website:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB. Accessed December 12, 2024. 9 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. 10 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2022. Rare Plant Program. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9-01 1.5). Website:
https://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed July 5, 2022.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
3 1 6 8 0 0 3 7 " 1 2 / 2 0 2 4 | 3 . 4 - 2 _ C N D D B . m x d C I T Y O F F R E S N O F R E S N O S O U T H E A S T D E V E L O P M E N T A R E A S P E C I F I C P L A N R E C I R C U L A T E D P R O G R A M 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 E x h i b i t 3 . 4 - 2
C N D D B S p e c i a l - S t a t u s S p e c i e s O c c u r r e n c e s S o u r c e : B i n g S t r e e t I m a g e r y . C a l i f o r n i a N a t u r a l D i v e r s i t y D a t a b a s e ( C N D D B ) , J u n e 2 0 2 2 . U S G S C l o v i s , R o u n d M o u n t a i n , M a l a g a , a n d S a n g e r Q u a d r a n g l e s . 1 0 , 0 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0
F e e tI
Legend
Fresno Southeast Development Area
4-Quad Search Radius
Plant (circular)
Animal (circular)
Multiple (circular)
b u r r o w i n g o w l
v e r n a l p o o l f a i r y s h r i m p m i d v a l l e y f a i r y s h r i m p b r i s t l y s e d g e
s u c c u l e n t o w l ' s - c l o v e r v a l l e y e l d e r b e r r y l o n g h o r n b e e t l e w e s t e r n p o n d t u r t l e
f o r k e d h a r e - l e a f
C a l i f o r n i a l i n d e r i e l l a d o u b l e - c r e s t e d c o r m o r a n t N o r t h e r n H a r d p a n V e r n a l P o o l S a n J o a q u i n a d o b e s u n b u r s t S a n f o r d ' s a r r o w h e a d
w e s t e r n s p a d e f o o t
A m e r i c a n b a d g e r
G r e e n e ' s t u c t o r i a
Athene cunicularia
Branchinecta lynchi
Branchinecta mesovallensis
Carex comosa
Castilleja campestris var. succulenta
Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
Emys marmorata
Lagophylla dichotoma
Linderiella occidentalis
Nannopterum auritum
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
Pseudobahia peirsonii
Sagittaria sanfordii
Spea hammondii
Taxidea taxus
Tuctoria greenei
T h e f o l l o w i n g s p e c i e s ( n o t s h o w n o n m a p ) a r e a l s o k n o w n t o o c c u r w i t h i n t h i s 4 - q u a d r a d i u s a r e a :
Scientific Name Common Name C N D D B v e r s i o n 0 6 / 2 0 2 2 . P l e a s e N o t e : T h e o c c u r r e n c e s s h o w n o n t h i s m a p r e p r e s e n t t h e k n o w n l o c a t i o n s o f t h e s p e c i e s l i s t e d h e r e a s o f t h e d a t e o f t h i s v e r s i o n . T h e r e m a y b e a d d i t i o n a l o c c u r r e n c e s o r a d d i t i o n a l s p e c i e s w i t h i n t h i s a r e a w h i c h h a v e n o t y e t b e e n s u r v e y e d a n d / o r m a p p e d . L a c k o f i n f o r m a t i o n i n t h e C N D D B a b o u t a s p e c i e s o r a n a r e a c a n n e v e r b e u s e d a s p r o o f t h a t n o s p e c i a l s t a t u s s p e c i e s o c c u r i n a n a r e a .
S w a i n s o n ' s h a w k
N o r t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a l e g l e s s l i z a r d C a l i f o r n i a s a t i n t a i l C a l i f o r n i a g l o s s y s n a k e c o a s t h o r n e d l i z a r d
C a l i f o r n i a t i g e r s a l a m a n d e r - c e n t r a l C a l i f o r n i a D P S m o l e s t a n b l i s t e r b e e t l e C r o t c h b u m b l e b e e
C a l i f o r n i a j e w e l f l o w e r M a d e r a l e p t o s i p h o n
A n t i o c h e f f e r i a n r o b b e r f l y H u r d ' s m e t a p o g o n r o b b e r f l y Buteo swainsoni
Anniella pulchra
Imperata brevifolia
Arizona elegans occidentalis
Phrynosoma blainvillii
Ambystoma californiense pop. 1
Lytta molesta
Bombus crotchii
Caulanthus californicus
Leptosiphon serrulatus
Efferia antiochi
Metapogon hurdi
Scientific Name Common Name
ng Hills
ale
ammond
Easton
Vi
[ci l
1••1
• ■ ••
CJ
CJ
CJ
HOOVER
Bo les
FIRSTCARBON
SOLUTIONS™
Gordon
4fjJ:lldJID~
~~
HARLAN RANCl-l
1--- ~ . • • • [JJJ[jJ, fl
Airport
Cecile I
L':::==i;~~ ===-J
@lffUimflD •· ~a~@lffUimflD~
lvesta
Wolf
99 ~~
~~
- -- ~lifillifi'lili/i111-i~
~~~
Clotho
Del Rey
Winel
Ce
~~fDI!11JE
&i:m~l!mlml
Parlier
Kings
River
UVA
Cel
Waht
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Table 3.4-4: Special-status Plant Species within the Plan Area Special-status Species Name
Federal Legal
Status
State Legal
Status
CNPS List and
Threat
Shown on Exhibit 3.4-2
California satintail (Imperata brevifolia) None None CNPS 2B.1 California jewel flower (Caulanthus californicus) FE SE CNPS 1B.1 Madera leptosiphon (Leptosiphon serrulatus) None None CNPS 1B.2 Not Shown on Exhibit 3.4-2
Bristly sedge (Carex comosa) None None CNPS 2B.1
Succulent owl’s clover (Castilleja campestris ssp.
succulenta)
FT SE CNPS 1B.2
Forked hare-leaf (Lagophylla dichotoma) None None CNPS 1B.1 San Joaquin adobe sunburst (Pseudobahia peirsonii) FT SE CNPS 1B.1 Sanford’s arrowhead (Sagittaria sanfordii) None None CNPS 1B.2 Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei) FE SR CNPS 1B.1
Notes:
Listing Status:
FE = Federally Listed Endangered
FT = Federally Listed Threatened
FC = Federal Species of Concern
SE = State-listed Endangered
ST = State-listed Threatened
SR = State Rare
SSC = California Species of Special Concern
SP = State Fully Protected Species
CNPS Lists:
1A = Plants presumed extinct in California
1B = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere 2 = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere 3 = Plants about which more information is needed
4 = Watch List: Plants of limited distribution
CNPS Treat Code Extensions:
.1 = Seriously endangered in California
.2 = Fairly endangered in California
.3 = Not very endangered in California
Sources:
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) 2022.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) 2022.
Special-status Wildlife Species
According to the CNDDB, 18 special-status wildlife species have the potential to occur in the Plan Area. Table 3.4-5 describes the nine special-status wildlife species listed for the Plan Area and their City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx legal status as shown on Exhibit 3.4-2 as well as the nine special-status wildlife species and their legal status that are not shown on Exhibit 3.4-2 but are also known to occur within this four quadrangle radius of the Plan Area.
Table 3.4-5: Special-status Wildlife Species within the Plan Area Special-status Species Name
Federal Legal
Status
State Legal
Status
Shown on Exhibit 3.4-2
Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) None ST
Northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra) None SSC California glossy snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis) None SSC Coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) None SSC
California tiger salamander–Central California DPS
(Ambystoma californiense pop. 1)
FT None
Molestan blister beetle (lytta molesta) – –
Crotch’s bumble bee (bombus crotchii) – –
Antioch efferian robberfly (Efferia antiochi) – –
Hurd’s metapogon robberfly (Metapogon hurdi) – –
Not Shown on Exhibit 3.4-2
Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) None SSC
Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) FT None Midvalley fairy shrimp (Branchinecta mesovallensis) – – Valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) FT None Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) None SSC
California linderiella (Linderiella occidentalis) – –
Double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus) – –
Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) None SSC
American badger (Taxidea taxus) None SSC
Notes:
Listing Status:
FE = Federally Listed Endangered
FT = Federally Listed Threatened
FC = Federal Species of Concern
SE = State-listed Endangered
ST = State-listed Threatened
SR = State Rare
SSC = California Species of Special Concern
SP = State Fully Protected Species
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Special-status Species Name
Federal Legal
Status
State Legal
Status
CNPS Lists:
1A = Plants presumed extinct in California
1B = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere 2 = Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere 3 = Plants about which more information is needed
4 = Watch List: Plants of limited distribution
CNPS Treat Code Extensions:
.1 = Seriously endangered in California
.2 = Fairly endangered in California
.3 = Not very endangered in California
Source: California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) 2022.
Wetlands and Waters of the United States and the State
City of Fresno
The City and its SOI include a variety of rare plants and wildlife species, particularly along the San Joaquin River, which provides a concentrated riparian plant and animal sanctuary. This area of natural habitat is recognized as unique and scenic given its topographic variation in the characteristically flat San Joaquin Valley. It is a sensitive environment hosting a diversity of wildlife, fish, and plant species, and it contains the last remnants of a true riparian environment, due to the year–round presence of flowing water, which supports aquatic life. This riparian community provides nesting and roosting sites for raptors, herons, egrets, and other bird species (resident and migratory). It also contains special-status species, such as the valley elderberry long horn beetle as well as non-special-status vegetation, such as cottonwood and willow trees. In short, this segment of the river provides habitat diversity of great value to wildlife. Aside from the San Joaquin River, there are several canals that traverse the City and its SOI that provide opportunities for both vegetation and wildlife; however, such opportunities are limited.
11 Plan Area
The Plan Area is traversed by several constructed drainage features and natural waterways: Gould Canal, Redbank Slough, Dry Creek Canal, Mill Ditch, Fancher Creek Canal, and Briggs Canal. Some canals in the Plan Area are mostly unvegetated and the banks are enforced with rock or broken asphalt and concrete, with some portions fully concrete-lined. In addition, there are several small ponds and numerous lateral irrigation ditches present that deliver water from the canals to agricultural fields. The Plan Area is not located near the San Joaquin River.
Several unnamed drainages and creeks exist within the Plan Area that may have hydrologic connectivity to a navigable or perennial surface water source or tributary. These may be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (1972) and could be directly impacted by uncontrolled runoff or construction. Activities that require a permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act will require
11 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan. Accessed July 6, 2022.
I I
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-16 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx State water quality certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Formal wetland delineation is required to understand the limits and extents of such habitats before any construction begins. Many of these area types are generally disturbed, making certain special-status species’ presence unlikely.
Wildlife Movement Corridors
The City is highly fragmented by roads and is dominated by several land uses, such as agriculture, residential, industrial, and commercial. Because of this fragmentation, it is unlikely to find corridors for wildlife movement or individual exchanges between populations. Native wildlife nursery sites are unlikely to be successful within the City. The urbanized area of the City provides little existing habitat value for native wildlife species in the agricultural, residential, industrial, and commercial land use areas, so land conversion would not be expected to substantially degrade the existing conditions for native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, wildlife corridors, or nursery sites. Additionally, the City provides habitats for several species of mammal, the most common of which are raccoons, squirrels, opossums, rats, and bats. The riparian communities within the City provide nesting and roosting sites for raptors, herons, egrets, and other bird species (resident and migratory).
Regulated Trees
Implementation of the proposed project may result in the removal or alteration of existing trees within the boundaries of the Plan Area. Project development within the Plan Area has the potential to impact trees on public property; however, future development would be required to comply with Municipal Code Section13-305. Municipal Code Section 13-305 protects all public trees in the City, including but not limited to trees that are affecting surface improvements or underground facilities, or are diseased, or are located where construction is being considered or will occur. No person, except authorized City personnel, shall remove, destroy, deface, or injure any tree on public property by any means, including but not limited to: pouring material on or immediately adjacent to any tree, attaching any sign or notice to a tree without supervision of the Director of the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, causing or encouraging fire around any tree, or covering the ground within a 4-foot radius around any tree with concrete or other unnatural surface. Any removal of trees shall be conducted only after an evaluation and inspection by the Director and written authorization.
3.4.3 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
Endangered Species Act
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has jurisdiction over species listed as threatened or endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973. Section 9 of Endangered Species Act protects listed species from “take,” which is broadly defined as actions taken to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” The Endangered Species Act protects threatened and endangered plants and animals and their habitat. Additionally, the USFWS designates specific areas as “Critical Habitat” for species listed under the Endangered Species Act.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-17
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Candidate species are those proposed for listing; these species are usually treated by resource agencies as if they were actually listed during the environmental review process.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) implements international treaties between the United States and other nations devised to protect migratory birds, their parts, eggs, and nests from activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing, selling, and shipping, unless expressly authorized in the regulations or by permit. All migratory birds and their nests are protected from take and other impacts under the MBTA (16 United States Code [USC] § 703, et seq.).
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are afforded additional protection under the Eagle Protection Act, amended in 1973 (16 USC § 669, et seq.) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC §§ 668–668d).
Clean Water Act
Section 404
The USACE administers Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), which regulates the discharge of dredge and fill material into waters of the United States.
As of the date of this report, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and USACE (hereafter the agencies) are in receipt of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona’s August 30, 2021, order vacating and remanding the Navigable Waters Protection Rule in the case of Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In light of this order, these agencies have halted implementation of the Navigable Waters Protection Rule and are interpreting “waters of the United States” consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime until further notice.12 Therefore, since the agencies are interpreting “waters of the United States” consistent with the pre- 2015 regulatory regime until further notice, this analysis follows 40 Code of Federal Regulations 230.3(s), in effect under the pre-2015 regulatory regime, which defines “waters of the United States“ as follows:
1. All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
2. All interstate waters including interstate wetlands.
3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:
12 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2021. Website: https://www.epa.gov/wotus/current-implementation-waters- united-states. Accessed September 9, 2021.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-18 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx a) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or
b) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or
c) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
4. All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition.
5. Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (s)(1) through (4) of this section.
6. The territorial sea.
7. Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (s)(1) through (6) of this section; waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of the CWA (other than cooling ponds as defined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations 423.11(m) which also meet the criteria of this definition) are not waters of the United States.
Waters of the United States do not include prior converted cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area’s status as prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the CWA, the final authority regarding CWA jurisdiction remains with the EPA and/or USACE.
“Wetland” refers to areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and seasonal wetlands. Wetlands are considered jurisdictional if they fall under one of the categories of waters of the United States defined above. The USACE jurisdiction typically extends up to the ordinary high water mark (OHWM).
In general, a USACE permit must be obtained before placing fill in wetlands or other waters of the United States. The type of permit depends on the impacted acreage, the purpose of the proposed fill, and other factors.
Section 401
As stated in Section 401 of the CWA, “any applicant for a federal permit for activities that involve a discharge to waters of the State, shall provide the federal permitting agency a certification from the State in which the discharge is proposed that states that the discharge will comply with the applicable provisions under the federal Clean Water Act.” Therefore, before the USACE will issue a Section 404 permit, applicants must apply for and receive a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-19
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx State
CEQA Guidelines
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to evaluate potential impacts to special-status species and their habitat. The following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist questions serve as thresholds of significance when evaluating the potential impacts of a proposed project on biological resources. Impacts are considered significant if a project would:
• Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as being a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally and State-protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. • Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
• Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
• Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan.
California Fish and Game Code
Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), CDFW has the responsibility for maintaining a list of endangered and threatened species (Fish and Game Code [FGC] § 2070). Fish and Game Code Sections 2050 through 2098 outline the protection provided to California’s rare, endangered, and threatened species. Fish and Game Code Section 2080 prohibits the taking of plants and animals listed under the CESA. Fish and Game Code Section 2081 established an incidental take permit program for State-listed species. The CDFW maintains a list of “candidate species,” which it formally notices as being under review for addition to the list of endangered or threatened species.
In addition, the Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (NPPA) (FGC § 1900, et seq.) prohibits the taking, possessing, or sale within the State of any plants with a State designation of rare, threatened, or endangered (as defined by the CDFW). An exception to this prohibition in the NPPA allows landowners, under specified circumstances, to take listed plant species, provided that the owners first notify the CDFW and give the agency at least 10 days to retrieve (and presumably replant) the plants before they are plowed or otherwise destroyed. Fish and Game Code Section 1913 exempts from “take” prohibition “the removal of endangered or rare native plants from a canal, lateral ditch, building site, or road, or other right-of-way.” Project impacts to these species are not considered significant unless the species are known to have a high potential to occur within the area of disturbance associated with construction of the proposed project.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-20 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx In addition to formal listing under the Endangered Species Act and CESA, some species receive additional consideration by the CDFW and local lead agencies during the CEQA process. Species that may be considered for review are those listed as a “Species of Special Concern.” The CDFW maintains lists of “Species of Special Concern” that serve as species “watch lists.” Species with this status may have limited distributions or limited populations, and/or the extent of their habitats has been reduced substantially, such that their populations may be threatened. Thus, their populations are monitored, and they may receive special attention during environmental review. While they do not have statutory protection, they may be considered rare under CEQA and specific protection measures may be warranted. In addition to Species of Special Concern, the CDFW Special Animals List identifies animals that are tracked by the CNDDB and may be potentially vulnerable but warrant no federal interest and no legal protection.
Sensitive species that would qualify for listing but are not currently listed are afforded protection under CEQA. CEQA Guidelines Section 15065 (Mandatory Findings of Significance) requires that a substantial reduction in numbers of a rare or endangered species be considered a significant effect.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 (Rare or Endangered Species) provides for the assessment of unlisted species as rare or endangered under CEQA if the species can be shown to meet the criteria for listing. Unlisted plant species on the CNPS List ranked 1A, 1B, and 2 would typically require evaluation under CEQA.
Fish and Game Code Sections 3500 to 5500 outline protection for fully protected species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. Species that are fully protected by these sections may not be taken or possessed at any time. The CDFW cannot issue permits or licenses that authorize the take of any fully protected species, except under certain circumstances such as scientific research and live capture and relocation of such species pursuant to a permit for the protection of livestock.
Under Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5, it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders of Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto. To comply with the requirements of CESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any State-listed endangered or threatened species may be present in the project study area and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, the CDFW encourages informal consultation on any proposed project that may impact a candidate species.
Project-related impacts to species on the CESA endangered or threatened list would be considered significant. State-listed species are fully protected under the mandates of CESA. “Take” of protected species incidental to otherwise lawful management activities may be authorized under Fish and Game Code Section 206.591. Authorization from the CDFW would be in the form of an Incidental Take Permit.
Fish and Game Code Section 1602 requires any entity to notify the CDFW before beginning any activity that “may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake” or “deposit debris, waste, City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-21
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx or other materials that could pass into any river, stream, or lake.” “River, stream, or lake” includes waters that are episodic and perennial and ephemeral streams, desert washes, and watercourses with a subsurface flow. A Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement will be required if the CDFW determines that project activities may substantially adversely affect fish or wildlife resources through alterations to a covered body of water. CDFW jurisdiction typically extends to the edge or “drip line” of the riparian habitat or top of bank.13
California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The RWQCB regulates actions that would involve “discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect the water of the State” (Water Code § 13260(a)), pursuant to provisions of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act. “Waters of the State” are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State” (Water Code § 13050(e)). In 2019, the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) published the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (Procedures) to guide wetland/waters of the State determinations and the permitting process.14
California Native Plant Society
The CNPS maintains a rank of plant species that are native to California and that have low population numbers, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. The following identifies the definitions of the CNPS ranks:
Rank 1A: Plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere Rank 1B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere Rank 2A: Plants presumed extirpated in California but common elsewhere Rank 2B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more numerous elsewhere Rank 3: Plants about which more information is needed
Rank 4: Watch List: Plants of limited distribution
Potential impacts to populations of CNPS-ranked plants receive consideration under CEQA review. All plants appearing on the CNPS List ranked 1 or 2 are considered to meet the CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 criteria. Rank 3 and 4 plants do not automatically meet this definition. Rank 4 plants do not clearly meet CEQA standards and thresholds for impact considerations. Nevertheless, some level of CEQA review is justified for California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 4 taxa, and under some circumstances, a full impact analysis is warranted. Taxa that can be shown to meet the criteria for endangered, rare, or threatened status under CEQA Section 15380(d) or that can be shown to be regionally rare or unique as defined in CEQA Section 15125(c) must be fully analyzed in a CEQA document. Some circumstances, such as local rarity, having occurrences peripheral to the taxon’s distribution, or having occurrences on unusual substrates or rare and declining habitats, provide justification for treating some CRPR 4 taxa occurrences as regionally rare or unique. One limitation to fully analyzing
13 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2020. California Natural Community List. Updated August 2021. Website:
http://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities. Accessed January 17, 2022. 14 California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). 2019. State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. April 2, 2019.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-22 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx impacts on CRPR 4 taxa is the difficulty in obtaining current data on the number and condition of the occurrences.15
Oak Woodlands Conservation Act
California SB 1334, the Oak Woodlands Conservation Act, became law on January 1, 2005, and was added to the CEQA statutes as 21083.4. This statute requires that a county must determine whether or not a project will result in a significant impact on oak woodlands and, if it is determined that a project may result in a significant impact on oak woodlands then the county shall require one or more of the following mitigation measures:
• Conserve oak woodlands through the use of conservation easements; • Plant an appropriate number of trees, including maintenance of plantings and replacement of failed plantings;
• Contribute funds to the Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund for the purpose of purchasing oak woodlands conservation easements;
• Other mitigation measures developed by the county.
Local
Habitat Conservation Plan
The proposed project does not lie within the boundaries of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or State HCP .
Fresno General Plan
The General Plan outlines a long-range vision for the physical development of the City that reflects the community’s vision to preserve the desirable qualities of the existing community while encouraging the aspirations of the community. The following objectives, policies, and programs are related to biological resources:
Open Space and Biological Resources Element:
Policy POSS-5-a Habitat Area Acquisition. Support federal, State, and local programs to acquire significant habitat areas for permanent protection and/or conjunctive educational and recreational use.
PolicyPOSS-5-b Habitat Conservation Plans. Participate in cooperative, multijurisdictional approaches for area-wide habitat conservation plans to preserve and protect rare, threatened, and endangered species.
Policy POSS-5-c Buffers for Natural Areas. Require development projects, where appropriate and warranted, to incorporate natural features (such as ponds, hedgerows, and wooded strips) to serve as buffers for adjacent natural areas with high ecological value.
15 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2020. Considerations for Including CRPR 4 Plant Taxa in CEQA Biological. Resource Impact Analysis. Sacramento, CA. January 21, 2020.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-23
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Policy POSS-5-d Guidelines for Habitat Conservation. Establish guidelines for habitat conservation and mitigation programs, including:
• Protocols for the evaluation of a site's environmental setting and proposed design and operating parameters of proposed mitigation measures. • Methodology for the analysis depiction of land to be acquired or set aside for mitigation activities.
• Parameters for specification of the types and sources of plant material used for any re-vegetation, irrigation requirements, and post-planting maintenance and other operational measures to ensure successful mitigation. • Monitoring at an appropriate frequency by qualified personnel and reporting of data collected to permitting agencies.
Policy POSS-5-e Pursue development of conjunctive habitat and recreational trail uses in flood control and drainage projects.
Policy POSS-5-f Regional Mitigation and Habitat Restoration. Coordinate habitat restoration programs with responsible agencies to take advantage of opportunities for a coordinated regional mitigation program.
Policy POSS-5-g Assistance in Valley Arboretum Master Planning. Assist community organizations that have raised grant funds to pursue the preparation of a Valley Arboretum Master Plan and Implementation Program, including funding, to be coordinated with community groups, as well as related plans and policies for established neighborhoods and other areas with park deficiencies.
Objective POSS-6 Maintain and restore, where feasible, the ecological values of the San Joaquin River corridor.
Policy POSS-6-a San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan. Support the San Joaquin River Conservancy in its efforts to update the San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan by working with the other jurisdictions and the River Conservancy to create a comprehensive and feasible plan for preservation, conservation, and Parkway development.
Policy POSS-6-b Effects of Stormwater Discharge. Support efforts to identify and mitigate cumulative adverse effects on aquatic life from stormwater discharge to the San Joaquin River.
• Avoid discarge of runoff from urban uses to the San Joaquin River or other riparian corridors.
• Approve development on sites having drainage (directly or indirectly) to the San Joaquin River or other riparian areas only upon a finding that adequate measures for preventing pollution of natural bodies of water from their runoff will be implemented.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-24 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx • Periodically monitor water quality and sediments near drainage outfalls to riparian areas. Institute remedial measures promptly if unacceptable levels of contaminant(s) occur.
Objective POSS-7 Support the San Joaquin River Conservancy in its collaborative, multiagency efforts to develop the San Joaquin River Parkway.
Policy POSS-7-a Preserve Wildlife Corridors. Acquire and expand natural reserves and wildlife corridors through purchase, easements, mitigation for proposed activities, or other mutually satisfactory transactions.
Policy POSS-7-b Wildlife Corridor along San Joaquin River. Create a wildlife corridor to provide continuous open space land and water areas parallel to the San Joaquin River within the jurisdiction of the City.
• Preserve a minimoum width of 200 feet of riparian vegetation on both sides of the river.
• Require the corridor to be wider when possible and/or necessary to protect additional areas of native plants and critical habitat (such as wildlife breeding areas). Re-establishment of a 200-foot or wider band of native plants is recommended in areas where 200 feet of riparian vegetation no longer exists along the river bank, to the maximum extent feasible from topologic and hydrologic standpoints.
• Allow exceptions where the minimum-width corridor is infeasible due to topography, hydrology, or other constraints. An offsetting expansion may be approved in those instances on the opposite side of the river. Incorporate the bluff face into the wildlife corridor where steep bluffs drop directly into or close to the river.
Policy POSS-7-c Monitoring River Corridor Conditions. Undertake periodic monitoring to determine the status of conditions and mitigation measures required for projects within, and in the vicinity of, the river corridor.
• Pursue a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or other agreement so that the San Joaquin River Conservancy can perform, or participate in, this monitoring program in order to furnish additional expertise, provide for cost efficiency, and to ensure consistency throughout the river corridor. • Based on information obtained from monitoring, modifications in special permits, reclamation plans, and other documents, operating parameters for uses may be necessary to insure human health and safety and the well-being of riparian plants and wildlife.
Policy POSS-7-d Buffer Zones near Intensive Uses. Protect natural reserve areas and wildlife corridor areas in the San Joaquin River corridor whenever more intensive human City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-25
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx uses exist or are proposed on adjacent lands. Use buffer zones to allow multiple uses on parts of the parkway while still protecting wildlife and native plants. • Require studies of appropriate buffer widths to be approved by State and federal wildlife agencies before variances from standard buffer zone widths are granted.
• Maintain natural riparian buffer zones with appropriate native plants (seed material and cuttings locally derived).
• Incorporate open space uses such as pasture, low-intensity agricultural activities, and the “rough” or marginal areas of golf courses, into buffer zones when they constitute and improvement in habitat over a previous use or degraded area. Evaluate and address the potential impacts of construction, cultural, and operational practices (such as grading, number of livestock per acre, lighting, and use pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers) before these uses are be approved for buffering.
• For nearby areas of the San Joaquin River corridor outside fo the exclusive jurisdiction of the City, support efforts to work with other jurisdictions to achieve this policy.
Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan
The Fresno SEDA Specific Plan is framed within three significant and interrelated goals: fiscal responsibility, social equity, and environmental sustainability. The proposed Plan and policies that form its implementation framework are formulated and coordinated to meet the criteria of these overlapping goals. The proposed Specific Plan contains the following objectives and policies related to biological resources:
Open Space, Schools and Public Facilities
Objective OS-2 Create and maintain an open space network that serves multiple purposes, including recreation, stormwater management, community farming, and environmental preservation.
Policy OS-2.2 Passive Open Space. Support community farming and agriculture in appropriate locations within the open space network. See the Community Farming and Agriculture Chapter for details about the SEDA agricultural land typology. • Pursue partnerships with local organizations to promote agricultural uses in the open space network.
Objective OS-5 Promote the preservation of sensitive natural environments.
Policy OS-5.2 Habitat Corridors. Establish contiguous areas of passive open space to provide habitat corridors for local wildlife, including but not limited to riparian and canal greenway corridors, greenway/trail corridors, and parks and flood control facilities throughout the SEDA Plan. Habitat preservation shall be consistent and City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-26 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx coordinated with the findings of the SEDA Environmental Impact Report and subsequent environmental studies and findings.
Fresno Municipal Code
Section 13-305–Tree Preservation
Section 13-305, Tree Preservation, of the Municipal Code establishes a policy to utilize whatever techniques, methods, and procedures are required to preserve, whenever feasible, all trees in the City.
Section 15-306–Special Tree List
Section 13-306, Special Tree List, authorizes the Director to develop and maintain a Special Tree List to give such trees special treatment and care to retain and protect them.
3.4.4 - Methodology
Literature Review
Existing Documentation
FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) Biologists reviewed existing environmental documentation for the Plan Area and immediate vicinity. This documentation included the City of Fresno General Plan and Municipal Code, noted above, literature pertaining to the habitat requirements of special-status species potentially occurring on or near the planning area, and federal Endangered Species Act listings, protocols, and species data provided by the USFWS and CDFW.
Elevation and Drainage
An FCS Biologist reviewed current United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map(s)and aerial photographs as a preliminary analysis of the existing conditions within the project site and immediate vicinity.
16 Information obtained from the topographic maps included elevation, general watershed information, and potential drainage feature locations using Google Earth in conjunction with the EPA Watershed Assessment, Tracking, and Environmental Results System (WATERS).
17 Aerial photographs provided a perspective of the current site conditions relative to on-site and off-site land use, plant community locations, and potential locations of wildlife movement corridors.
Soil
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has published soil surveys that describe the soil series (i.e., group of soils with similar profiles) occurring within a particular area.18 These profiles include major horizons with similar thickness, arrangement, and other important characteristics.
These series are further subdivided into soil mapping units that provide specific information
16 United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2022. National Geospatial Program. Website: https://www.usgs.gov/core-science- systems/national-geospatial-program/us-topo-maps-america?qt-science_support_page_related_con=4#qt- science_support_page_related_con. Accessed December 28, 2022. 17 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. Watershed Assessment, Tracking and Environmental Results System (WATERS). Website: https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-watershed-assessment-tracking-environmental-results-system.
Accessed December 28, 2022.
18 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Web Soil Survey (WSS). United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Website: https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed December 28, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-27
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx regarding soil characteristics. Many special-status plant species have a limited distribution based exclusively on soil type. Therefore, pertinent USDA soil survey maps were reviewed to determine the existing soil mapping units within the project site and to inform whether the soil conditions on-site are potentially suitable for any special-status plant species. However, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil maps utilize an approximately 1.4-acre minimum mapping unit and line placement may not be accurate on a large (i.e., parcel-level) scale.
Special-status Wildlife and Plant Species
An FCS Biologist compiled a list of threatened, endangered, and otherwise special-status species previously recorded within the project vicinity based on a search of the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database,19 the CNDDB and the CNPS Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California for the Malaga, Sanger, Round Mountain, and Clovis, California USGS 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Maps.20,21 The CNDDB Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 5) was used to determine the distance between the known occurrences of special-status species and the Plan Area.22 The database search results can be found in Appendix C.
Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands
Regulated Trees
Prior to conducting the reconnaissance-level field survey, an FCS Biologist reviewed City ordinances pertaining to tree preservation and protection and ascertained whether tree replacement measures or permits for the removal of protected trees are required.
Vegetation
Taxonomic nomenclature used in this study follows The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California.23 Common plant names, when not available from The Jepson Manual, were taken from other regionally specific references.
Sensitive Natural Communities
Sensitive natural communities are vegetation communities or special wildlife habitats that are rare or occur in limited distributions or provide specific habitat requirements for special-status plant or wildlife species. The CDFW maintains a list of natural communities which attempts to classify vegetation types found within the State of California and rank them based on rarity. Communities
19 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Website:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed December 28, 2022. 20 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Maps and Data, RareFind 5 internet application. Website: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data . Accessed December 28, 2022. 21 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2022. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory. Website:
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed December 28, 2022. 22 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 5). Website:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS. Accessed December 28, 2022. 23 Baldwin, B. et al. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California. Berkeley: University of California Press. County of San Bernardino (Bernardino). 2007 (amended 2015).
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-28 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx ranked S1-S3 are considered sensitive natural communities.24 Riparian vegetation communities are generally considered sensitive.
Wildlife Movement Corridors
Wildlife movement corridors link areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by natural and anthropogenic dispersal barriers, including rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, development, or human disturbance. Urbanization and the resulting fragmentation of open space areas create isolated “islands” of wildlife habitat, forming separated populations. Corridors act as an effective link between populations. Online resources such as eBird and California Herps were consulted, as necessary.
25,26
Approach to Analysis
Impacts on biological resources were evaluated based on the likelihood that special-status species, sensitive habitats, wildlife corridors, and protected trees are present within the Plan Area and the likely effects of construction or operation on these resources. For the purposes of this Recirculated Draft PEIR, the word “substantial” as used in the significance thresholds above is defined by the following three principal components:
• Magnitude and duration of the impact (e.g., substantial/not substantial), • Uniqueness of the affected resource (rarity), and
• Susceptibility of the affected resource to disturbance.
In this Biological Resources Analysis, the project site (Plan Area) is defined as all areas directly affected by project development.
3.4.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The Lead Agency utilizes the criteria in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist as thresholds to determine whether impacts to biological resources are significant environmental effects.
Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines is a sample Initial Study Checklist that includes questions for determining whether impacts to resources are significant. These questions reflect the input of planning and environmental professionals at the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the California Natural Resources Agency based on input from stakeholder groups and experts in various other governmental agencies, nonprofits, and leading environmental consulting firms. Accordingly, the City has derived its significance criteria, based in part on the questions posed in Appendix G.
These significance criteria are as follows:
The proposed project would be considered significant if the project would:
24 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Sensitive Natural Communities List, Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Wildlife. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities. Accessed December 28, 2022. 25 eBird. 2022. Online bird occurrence database. Website: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/. Accessed August 28, 2022. 26 California Herps. 2022. A Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of California. Website: http://www.californiaherps.com/. Accessed December 28, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-29
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan.
3.4.6 - Impact Analysis, Mitigation Measures, and Level of Significance After Mitigation
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.
Special-status Species
Impact BIO-1: The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
Development under the proposed project would result in additional residential and nonresidential development throughout the Plan Area. Additionally, the proposed project may result in other private and public improvements throughout the Plan Area with the potential for environmental effects related to biological resources. Thus, subsequent development under the proposed project could result in the direct/indirect loss of natural vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for 27 special-status plant and wildlife species that have the potential to occur or are known to occur within the Plan Area. The vegetation communities within the Plan Area boundary that provide suitable habitat for listed and other special-status species are described above, under Section 3.4.2. Development within the Plan Area could result in the loss or degradation of natural habitats such as lacustrine, riverine, and pasture, which may support special-status plant and wildlife species. Project-related impacts to any of these habitat types may result in a substantial adverse City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-30 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx effect, if it is determined that a special-status species would be impacted, either directly or through habitat modifications.
Special-status Plant Species
A special-status plant species is defined as any plant species which is listed, or proposed for listing, as threatened or endangered by the USFWS under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act.27 This includes any species designated by USFWS as a “candidate” or “species of concern” or species identified on California Native Plant Societty’s Lists 1A, 1B, or 2, implying potential danger or extinction.
A significant impact would occur if future development under the proposed project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directlly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.
Special-status and rare plant surveys were not conducted within the Plan Area. However, as shown on Exhibit 3.4-2, a database search was conducted to identify where rare plants occurences are located within the Plan Area. The results of that search determined that nine special-species plants have limited protential to occur in the Plan Area, as shown in Table 3.4-4. If individuals of these species are present in the Plan Area, plants could be adversely impacted from development (e.g., soil compaction, trampling, or earthmoving activities) of the Plan Area.
Special-status Wildlife Species
A special-status wildlife species is defined as any wildlife species which is listed, or proposed for listing, as threatened or endangered by the USFWS or National Marine Fisheries Service under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act.28 It also includes any species designated by the CDFW as a “candidate” or “species of concern.”
A significant impact would occur if future development under the proposed project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directlly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.
Special-status wildlife surveys were not conducted within the Plan Area. However, as shown on Exhibit 3.4-2, a database search was conducted to identify where special-status wildlife is located within the Plan Area. The results of that search determined that 18 special-species wildlife have limited potential to occur in the Plan Area, as shown in Table 3.4-5.
Direct project impacts to species listed as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species by local, State, and federal agencies should be avoided to the greatest extent feasible; however, it is acknowledged it may not be feasible for future projects to avoid these species. Project-related
27 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan. December 18 Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2019/07/ConsolidatedGP6182020.pdf. Accessed July 7, 2022. 28 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan. December 18 Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2019/07/ConsolidatedGP6182020.pdf. Accessed July 7, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-31
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx impacts that result in the direct take of a special-status species may be considered a significant impact. The presence/absence of a special-status species on a project site and the potential to impact a special- status species must be determined prior to project construction. If development within the Plan Area results in the direct take or loss of suitable habitat for any of the 27 special- status species that have the potential to occur in the Plan Area, project-level site-specific mitigation would be required to reduce the potential impacts to less than significant levels. Project impacts to special-status species listed as threatened or endangered by CDFW and/or USFWS may also require agency consultation and/or take permits. However, future development in the Plan Area would be required to comply with the following General Plan policies pertaining to biological resources, specifically within the Parks, Open Space, and Schools Element (POSS), as outlined above. Project- level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS-5-a through POSS-5-f would reduce potential project impacts to special-status species and their associated habitats. Furthermore, incorporation of Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-1a to MM BIO-1d into the conditions of approval would ensure that if one or more of these special-status species occur in the Plan Area, their presence would be detected, the risk of mortality would be avoided to the maximum extent feasible.
Additionally, all future development in the Plan Area would be required to comply with the proposed Specific Plan policies pertaining to biological resources, including Policy OS-2.2, which protects passive open space, and Policy OS-5.2, which protects habitat corridors.
Implementation of the City’s relevant General Plan policies pertaining to biological resources (POSS- 5-a through POSS-5-f); Mitigation Measures (MM BIO-1a to MM BIO-1d); and Specific Plan Policies (OS-2.2 and OS-5.2); would reduce impacts to special-status species to a less than significant level.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM BIO-1a Construction of a proposed project shall avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special-status species known to occur within the Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Plan Area. If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, the presence/absence of any special- status plant or wildlife species must be determined prior to construction, to determine whether the habitat supports any special-status species. If a special- status species are determined to occupy any portion of a project site, avoidance and minimization measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of a project to avoid direct or incidental take of a listed species to the greatest extent feasible. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to special- status species shall be determined on a case-by-case basis through agency consultation during the review process for discretionary projects, and shall be consistent with survey protocols and mitigations measures recommended by the agency at the time of consultation.
MM BIO-1b Direct or incidental take of any State or federally listed species shall be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. If construction of a proposed project will result in the City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-32 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resources agencies and/or additional permitting may be required. Agency consultation through the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) 2081 and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes shall take place prior to any action that may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to special- status species shall be determined on a case-by-case basis through agency consultation during the review process for discretionary projects and shall be consistent with survey protocols and mitigations measures recommended by the agency at the time of consultation.
MM BIO-1c Development within the Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Plan Area shall avoid, where possible, special-status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special-status species. If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special-status natural community or suitable habitat for special-status species, compensatory habitat-based mitigation is required under CEQA and California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Mitigation shall consist of preserving on-site habitat, restoring similar habitat or purchasing off-site credits from an approved mitigation bank. Compensatory mitigation shall be determined through consultation with the City and/or resource agencies. An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio shall be agreed upon by the Developer and Lead Agency to reduce project impacts to special-status natural communities to a less than significant level. Agreed-upon mitigation ratios shall depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special-status species. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to special-status natural communities and vegetation communities shall be determined on a case-by-case basis through agency consultation during the review process for discretionary projects and shall be consistent with survey protocols and mitigations measures recommended by the agency at the time of consultation.
MM BIO-1d Proposed projects within the Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Plan Area should avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species protected under Fish and Game Code 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site. If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre-construction clearance survey to determine whether any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500 feet of a project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a Biological Monitor shall be on- site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest. A suitable buffer shall be established around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the Biological Monitor. Prior to commencement of grading activities and issuance of any building permits, the Director of the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, or designee, City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-33
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx shall verify that all proposed project grading and construction plans include specific documentation regarding the requirements of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Section 3503, that pre-construction surveys have been completed and the results reviewed by staff, and that the appropriate buffers (if needed) are noted on the plans and established in the field. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to avian species protected under Fish and Game Code 3500 and the MBTA shall be determined on a case-by-case basis through agency consultation during the review process for discretionary projects and shall be consistent with survey protocols and mitigations measures recommended by the agency at the time of consultation.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Sensitive Natural Communities or Riparian Habitat
Impact BIO-2: The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
Sensitive natural communities are vegetation communities or special wildlife habitats that are rare or occur in limited distributions or provide specific habitat requirements for special-status plant or wildlife species. The CDFW maintains a list of natural communities which attempts to classify vegetation types found within the State of California and rank them based on rarity. Communities ranked S1-S3 are considered sensitive natural communities. 29 Riparian habitat is defined as any
habitat with characteristic vegetation relating to or located on the bank of a natural watercourse often described as riparian corridors.
A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the CDFW or USF W.
The Plan Area contains natural communities, primarily along existing creeks and streams. Less than 1 percent of the Plan Area includes riparian habitats (riverine and lacustrine communities), which provide suitable habitat for a number of special-status plant and wildlife species known to occur in the region. The vast majority of future development within the Plan Area is limited to existing disturbed and developed land and within areas that are unlikely to support special-status species.
However, the presence of riparian habitat and/or a sensitive natural community on a project site must be evaluated prior to project approval. Any project-related impacts to riparian habitat and/or a sensitive natural community are considered a significant impact and require mitigation. Project-level implementation of the approved General Plan Objective (POSS-6) and Policies (POSS-6-a and POSS-6-
29 C alifornia Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Natural Communities List, Sacramento: California Department of Fish and Wildlife. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities. Accessed July 6, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-34 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx b), and Objective (POSS-7) and Policies (POSS-7-a through POSS-7-d) would reduce potential project impacts to riparian habitats. Further, incorporation of MM BIO-2a through MM BIO-2c would ensure that sensitive natural communities and/or riparian habitats are not significantly impacted. Thus, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM BIO-2a A pre-construction clearance survey, following current California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) protocols, shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist to determine whether a proposed project will result in the removal or impact to any riparian habitat and/or a special-status natural community with potential to occur in the Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Plan Area, compensatory habitat-based mitigation shall be required to reduce project impacts. Compensatory mitigation must involve the preservation or restoration or the purchase of off-site mitigation credits for impacts to riparian habitat and/or a special-status natural community.
Mitigation must be conducted in-kind or within an approved mitigation bank in the region. The specific mitigation ratio for habitat-based mitigation shall be determined through consultation with the appropriate agency (i.e., CDFW or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]) on a case-by-case basis. The project applicant/developer for a proposed project shall develop and implement appropriate mitigation regarding impacts on their respective jurisdictions.
MM BIO-2b A pre-construction clearance survey, following current California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) protocols, shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist to determine whether a proposed project will result in significant impacts to streambeds or waterways protected under Section 1600 of Fish and Wildlife Code and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The project applicant/developer for a proposed project shall consult with partner agencies such as CDFW and/or the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to develop and implement appropriate mitigation regarding impacts on their respective jurisdictions, determination of mitigation strategy, and regulatory permitting to reduce impacts, as required for projects that remove riparian habitat and/or alter a streambed or waterway. The project applicant/developer shall implement mitigation as directed by the agency with jurisdiction over the particular impact identified.
MM BIO-2c Prior to project approval, a pre-construction clearance survey, following current California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) protocols, shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist to determine whether a proposed project will result in project- related impacts to riparian habitat or a special-status natural community or if it may result in direct or incidental impacts to special-status species associated with riparian or wetland habitats. The project applicant/developer for a proposed project shall be obligated to address project-specific impacts to special-status species City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-35
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx associated with riparian habitat through agency consultation, development of a mitigation strategy, and/or issuing incidental take permits for the specific special- status species, as determined by the CDFW and/or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Wetlands and Jurisdictional Features
Impact BIO-3: The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
Wetlands are defined as areas that are permanently wet or periodically covered with shallow water, such as saltwater and freshwater marshes, open or closed brackish marshes, swamps, mud flats, and fens.
30 A significant impact would occur if the construction or operations of the proposed project produced a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands including marshes, vernal pools, coastal, etc., through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means.
Development within the Plan Area, particularly in undeveloped areas with the potential to support wetland habitat (e.g., pasture/grassland), could result in the loss of jurisdictional wetland habitat, which includes vernal pool habitats, seasonal wetlands and waters of the U.S. or intermittent/permanent water bodies. Any project-related impacts that result in the significant alteration or fill of a State or federally protected wetland is considered a significant impact.
Additionally, special-status species associated with wetlands and vernal pool habitats, such as vernal pool fairy shrimp, may be impacted as a result of project impacts to protected wetlands. Project- specific agency (i.e., CDFW, RWQCB, and/or USACE) coordination and/or regulatory permitting would be required to reduce potential project impacts to wetland habitat. The implementation of Policies (POSS-6-a through POSS-7-d) would reduce potential project impacts to wetlands and wetland habitat. Further, implementation of MM BIO-3a and MM BIO-3b would ensure that wetlands are not significantly impacted. Thus, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM BIO-3a If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site. The delineation shall be used to determine whether federal permitting and mitigation strategy are
30 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan. December 18 Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2019/07/ConsolidatedGP6182020.pdf. Accessed July 7, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-36 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx required to reduce project impacts. Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and USACE approval of a wetland mitigation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the Planning Area. Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation shall be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the impacted wetland.
MM BIO-3b In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified from a list provided by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) shall be incorporated into the design and construction phase of the project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland.
Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage and incorporating detention basins shall assist in ensuring project-related impacts to wetland habitat are minimized to the greatest extent feasible.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Fish and Wildlife Movement Corridors
Impact BIO-4: The proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites.
A wildlife corridor is defined as a natural corridor, such as an undeveloped ravine, that is frequently used by wildlife to travel from one area to another.31 A significant impact would occur if any construction or operations of the proposed project would interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with an established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites.
As previously discussed, the majority of the Plan Area includes disturbed and agricultural land. These areas are mainly surrounded by existing development and disturbed habitat areas resulting in habitat fragmentation. Because of the isolation of these areas, there are few substantive linkages to consider them as part of a wildlife movement corridor. Regardless, all future development would be required to comply with the approved General Plan, including Policies (POSS-6-a through POSS-7-d) that would reduce impacts to wildlife movement corridors by providing buffer zones, control stormwater runoff, and providing periodic monitoring of the biological resource conditions. These policies would reduce potential impacts to wildlife movement corridors to a less than significant level.
The Municipal Code also includes policies pertaining to fish and wildlife movement corridors that relate to future development within the Plan Area such as Section 12-5.510 also dictates that all practical and reasonable measures should be taken to protect fish and wildlife and preserve wildlife corridors during any operations that require mining related processes.
31 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan. December 18 Website: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2019/07/ConsolidatedGP6182020.pdf. Accessed July 7, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-37
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx Additionally, all future development in the Plan Area resulting from the proposed project must comply with the proposed Specific Plan policies pertaining to biological resources, including Policy OS-2.2, which protects passive open space, and Policy OS-5.2, which protects habitat corridors. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Local Policies or Ordinances
Impact BIO-5: The proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
A significant impact would occur if any construction or operation within the proposed project would conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Future development projects must meet restrictions mandated by Section 13-305 of the Municipal Code which defines “Protected Trees” and sets forth the requirements for mitigating impacts to protect trees.
Project development within the Plan Area may result in the removal or alteration of existing street and public trees within the boundaries of the Plan Area. Existing preserved trees and landscaped trees within public property, including parkways, must be preserved in order to beautify the City, purify its air, and provide shade for its inhabitants.
Project development within the Plan Area could have the potential to impact trees on public property; however, future development would be required to comply with Article 3 of Chapter 13 of the Municipal Code, as discussed above, which provides for plans and establishes regulations governing the preservation of trees in public property. Compliance with the Municipal Code would reduce any impacts related to conflicts with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Therefore, potential impacts to the City’s public tree ordinance would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Local, Regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan
Impact BIO-6: The proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Biological Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.4-38 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx A significant impact would occur if construction or operations within the proposed project would conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or State HCP.
As discussed above, the Plan Area is not located within the boundaries of any approved or draft HCP , NCCP , or other adopted local, regional or State HCP . Therefore, development within the Plan Area would not result in any impacts to an adopted HCP or NCCP . As such, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
3.4.7 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographical scope of the cumulative impact analysis for Biological Resources is the Plan Area as well as the surrounding cities and communities of Clovis, Sanger, Lone Star, and Las Palmas. This analysis evaluates whether the impacts of the proposed project, together with the impacts of cumulative development, would result in a cumulatively significant impact on special-status species; wetlands and other waters of the United States and/or State; or other biological resources protected by federal, State, or local regulations or policies. This analysis then considers whether incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project would be significant. Both conditions must apply for a project’s cumulative effects to rise to the level of significance.
As discussed above, the most direct and indirect impacts would result from construction-related disturbances and residential, industrial, and commercial development. Similarly, potential cumulative impacts would be related to construction. However, as described in the Regulatory Setting section, numerous laws and regulations are in place to protect biological resources, including, but not limited to, CESA, FESA, and the Clean Water Act. Development of future projects within the cumulative geographic context would be required to comply with federal, State, and local laws and policies and all applicable permitting requirements of the regulatory and oversight agencies intended to address potential impacts on biological resources. Because cumulative development would be required to comply with the above requirements, as well as the overall land use vision, design review regulations and policies in local and regional plans, including the Specific Plan, if adopted, and the Municipal Code, cumulative biological impacts will be less than significant.
Moreover, the incremental effect of the proposed project, when combined with the less than significant effects created by other past and reasonably foreseeable projects, would not be cumulatively considerable or significant because future projects implemented under the proposed project would be required to obtain regulatory approvals, comply with the proposed Specific Plan policies and General Plan policies, and implement MM BIO-1a to MM BIO-1d, MM BIO-2a to MM BIO-2c, MM BIO-3a, and MM BIO-3b. The applicable policies and mitigation measures would ensure protection of existing habitat, special-status plant and animal species, and potential wetlands, and City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Biological Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.4-39
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-04 Bio Resources.docx ensure there are no conflicts with existing policies and regulations related to the protection of biological resources within the Plan Area. Also, because it would be speculative to assume the exact location and extent of development that would occur during implementation of the proposed project, future projects would be subject to project-level CEQA analysis which would further identify project-specific impacts and mitigation measures at that time to ensure protection of biological resources. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in a considerable incremental contribution to cumulative impacts to biological resources, because local, State, and federal regulations contain policies and programs to protect sensitive vegetative and wildlife habitat as well as creek corridors. Therefore, the proposed project contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant and a less than significant cumulative impact would occur.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Mitigation Measures
None required.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx
3.5 - Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
3.5.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing cultural and tribal cultural resources setting and potential effects from project implementation on the site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on the Fresno General Plan, the Fresno Municipal Code, the Office of Historic Preservation Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File for Fresno County, a Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) records search for the Plan Area, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), the California Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) for Fresno County, and the California Points of Historical Interest List.
As further discussed in Chapter 1, Introduction, seven public comments were received during the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Draft PEIR) scoping period related to potential impacts to the proposed project’s Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources. • Request to be notified of all future development under the proposed project that may have impacts on cultural and tribal cultural resources.
• Expressed concern that the Plan Area may contain houses and structures of historical interest (in excess of 100 years of age) with an outside possibility of Yokuts artifacts present. • Request that the preparation of the Draft PEIR and Specific Plan adhere to Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18.
• Suggest that the City contact the following Tribes to inquire if they are aware of any historical and/or cultural resources in the Plan Area: Table Mountain Ranch, Big Sandy, and Traditional Transundi Tribe.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR accurately captures and analyzes baseline conditions and potentially significant project-specific and cumulative impacts within and adjacent to the Plan Area.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR identifies and adopts all feasible and enforceable mitigation measures that avoid and reduce negative impact.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR analyzes and creates mitigation measures consistent with all applicable laws, including State and federal fair housing, civil rights, and climate laws such as SB 743.
3.5.2 - Environmental Setting
Cultural Resources Components
The term “cultural resources” encompasses historic resources, archaeological resources, Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) and Burial Sites, which are generally defined as follows:
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx • Historic Resources: Historic resources are associated with the recent past. In California, historic resources are typically associated with the Spanish, Mexican, and American periods in the State’s history and are generally less than 200 years old. Historic resources often take the form of buildings, structures, and other elements of the built environment. • Archaeological Resources: Archaeology is the study of artifacts and material culture with the aim of understanding human activities and cultures in the past. Archaeological resources may be associated with pre-contact indigenous cultures as well as later historic periods. • Tribal Cultural Resources: TCRs include sites, features, places, or objects that are of cultural value to one or more California Native American Tribe.
• Burial Sites and Cemeteries: Burial sites and cemeteries are formal or informal locations where human remains have been interred. Burial sites may be associated with pre-contact indigenous cultures as well as later historic periods.
More specifically, cultural resources may be understood as resources that have been formally recognized by a lead agency and/or are listed or determined eligible for listing on the CRHR (Public Resources Code [PRC] § 5024.1, Title 14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] § 4852). It is notable that the fact that a resource is not yet identified as a historical resource or found eligible for the CRHR does not preclude a lead agency from determining that said resource is a historical resource pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource would constitute a significant effect on the environment.
Cultural Resources Setting
Following is an overview of the pre-contact history, ethnography, and historic background, providing a context in which to understand the background and relevance of sites and structures found in the Plan Area. This section is not intended to be a comprehensive review of the current resources available; rather, it serves as a general overview. Further details can be found in ethnographic studies, mission records, and major published sources.1,2,3,4,5,6 General Pre-contact Historic Setting
In North America, radiocarbon dates from existing samples of archaeological materials demonstrate human presence as early as 15,000 years Before Present (BP). 7 The lithics from the earliest (14,000
to 15,000 BP) documented sites in North America include cores, flakes, and flake tools (e.g., five blades, 14 bladelets, 12 bifaces, one discoidal flake core, 23 edge-modified tools that includes
1 Kroeber, A.L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin 78. Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
2 Beardsley, R.K. 1948. “Cultural Sequences in Central California Archaeology.” American Antiquity. 3 Bennyhoff, J. 1950. Californian Fish Spears and Harpoons. Berkeley: University of California Anthropological Records. 4 Chartkoff J.L. and K.K. Chartkoff. 1984. The Archaeology of California. Menlo Park: Stanford University Press. 5 Moratto, M.J. 1984. California Archaeology. San Diego: Academic Press. 6 Jones, T.L. and Kathryn A. Klar. 2007. California Prehistory. Lanham: AltaMira Press; Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 7 Waters, M. R., J. L. Keene, S. L. Forman, E. R. Prewitt, D. L. Carlson, J. E. Wiederhold. 2018. Pre-Clovis projectile points at the Debra L.
Friedkin site, Texas-Implications for the Late Pleistocene peopling of the Americas. Science Advances.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx scrapers and gravers from the Debra L. Friedkin site in, Texas) with an absence of projectile points.8 The first known projectile points in North America are from 13,000 years BP , with lanceolate fluted points (Clovis Complex) in sites from central and eastern North America, and stemmed projectile points from sites in areas of western North America that were not glaciated.9,10 The oldest California radiocarbon date as of 2007 from archaeological materials confirms a human presence in the northeastern part of the State (from site CA-SIS-218) as early as 13,500 years BP. 11 The radiocarbon
date corresponds to the period of fluted points and fluted points have been found throughout California, although projectile points and other chronologically and culturally informative materials are absent from the SIS-218 sample.
12,13
Archaeological sites from the Early Period (12,000 BP to 8,000 BP) are not very well represented in the southern San Joaquin Valley, partially due to periodic episodes of erosion and deposition that have removed or buried large segments of the Early Period landscape. Currently, the earliest evidence of human occupation in the region comes from fluted and basally thinned projectile points in the Tulare Lake basin at the Witt site (KIN-32). Hundreds of Late Pleistocene concave base points have been discovered from human occupation along the remnant shoreline of Tulare Lake in southern Kings County. Artifacts from this site include Clovis-like projectile points made of chert, chipped crescents, various scrapers, and other stone tools associated with the Fluted Point and/or Western Pluvial Lakes tradition. The Witt site also contained faunal bones from horse, bison, ground sloth, and the tusk of a mammoth or mastodon.
14 The bones, including some human bone, has been
radiocarbon dated to 11,000 to 13,000 BP. 15
The Middle Horizon (8,000 BP to 2,500 BP) is characterized by an increase in groundstone tools, including metates and manos. Middle Horizon site deposits include an abundance of expedient cobble-based pounding, chopping, scraping, and mulling tools, which reflect an increased dependence on vegetative foods that require processing. Archaeobotanical assemblages from Foothill sites confirm that acorn and pine nuts were targeted food plants. 16,17 However, the lithic
technology remained relatively unchanged from the Early Period, in which stone tools were very
8 Waters, M. R., J. L. Keene, S. L. Forman, E. R. Prewitt, D. L. Carlson, J. E. Wiederhold. 2018. Pre-Clovis projectile points at the Debra L.
Friedkin site, Texas-Implications for the Late Pleistocene peopling of the Americas. Science Advances. 9 Jenkins, D. L., L. G. Davis, T. W. Stafford Jr., P . F. Campos, B. Hockett, G. T. Jones, L. S. Cummings, C. Yost, T. J. Connolly, R. M. Yohe II, S.
C. Gibbons, M. Raghavan, M. Rasmussen, J. L. A. Paijmans, M. Hofreiter, B. M. Kemp, J. L. Barta, C. Monroe, M. T. P . Gilbert, E.
Willerslev. 2012. Clovis Age Western Stemmed Projectile Points and Human Coprolites at the Paisley Caves. Science 337. 10 Beck, C. and G. T. Jones. 2010. Clovis and Western Stemmed: Population migration and the meeting of two technologies in the Intermountain West. American Antiquity.
11 Jones, Terry L. and Kathryn A. Klar. 2007. California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, In California Prehistory, Edited by, Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar. Altimira Press, New York. Kroeber, A.L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin
78. Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington, DC. Smithsonian Institution. 12 Rondeau, Michael F. 2009. Fluted Points of the Far West. Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology 21:265–274 13 Rondeau, Michael L., Jim Cassidy, and Terry L. Jones. 2007. Colonization Technologies: Fluted Projectile Points and the San Clemente Island Woodworking/Microblade Complex, In California Prehistory, Edited by, Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar. Altimira Press, New York.
14 Greenwood and Associates. 2012. Cultural Resources Existing Conditions Report. Fresno Central Southeast Area Specific Plan 15 Rosenthal, Jeffrey S., Gregory G. White, and Mark Q. Sutton. 2007. The Central Valley: A View from the Catbird’s Seat. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Kla. Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press. 16 Jones, Terry L. and Kathryn A. Klar. 2007. California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, In California Prehistory, Edited by, Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar. Altimira Press, New York. Kroeber, A.L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin
78. Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington, DC. Smithsonian Institution 17 Rondeau, Michael L., Jim Cassidy, and Terry L. Jones. 2007. Colonization Technologies: Fluted Projectile Points and the San Clemente Island Woodworking/Microblade Complex, In California Prehistory, Edited by, Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar. Altimira Press, New York.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx similar to the Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition.18 Late Period (2,500 BP to Ethnohistoric Present) The beginning of the Late Period corresponds with the onset of the Late Holocene environmental conditions, marked by an abrupt turn to cooler, wetter, and a more stable climate. Lakes that had dried or diminished during the later parts of the Middle Period returned to higher levels. Cultural diversity was more pronounced marked by artifact styles, contrasting burial positions, and other elements of material culture. People were buried in flexed positions more frequently, and burial goods were more numerous than those from the Middle Period.19 Both the Olivella shell bead and bow-and-arrow technology made their first appearance in the area. There was also a greater reliance on groundstone tools, indicating an increased dependence on nuts, seeds, and acorns. Villages and smaller residential communities developed along the many streams of the foothills and along the river channels and sloughs of the valley bottom. Occupation sites were also larger, reflecting semi- sedentism.20
Native American Background
Southern Valley Yokuts
At the time of European contact, most of the San Joaquin Valley and the foothills of the western slope of the Sierra Nevada were occupied by 40 or so groups classified together as the Yokuts with a Foothills division and a Valley division of language dialects.21 The Yokuts were recognized as having three major subgroups: the Northern Valley, the Foothill, and the Southern Valley. Each of these ethnolinguistic groups was composed of autonomous, culturally, and linguistically related Tribes or Tribelets. Ethnographic evidence suggests the City of Fresno is located in part of the Southern Valley Yokuts territory. The Southern Valley Yokuts were divided into true Tribes, with individual Tribelets having their own name, dialect, and territory and there is no evidence to suggest that they practiced any formal religion.22
Alfred Kroeber divided a Yokuts classification system into Valley Divisions and Foothill Divisions based on ethnographic lines, geographic habitat, and dialect.23 Here, the Foothill Division’s worldview and economy were influenced more by their Shoshonean neighbors than the Valley Division Yokuts.
Later, William Wallace divided the Yokuts into three subgroups, Southern Valley, Northern Valley, and Foothill, and shifted the known Tribelets among these divisions. The following is a review of ethnographic information associated with the Southern Valley Yokuts. The Southern Valley Yokuts occupied a rich environment with abundant water resources from the nearby sloughs, lake basins, and river systems. Swamps and tule marshes surrounded the waterways and teemed with wildlife, including aquatic mammals, fish, and waterfowl. Adjacent grasslands provided food for herds of elk, antelope, and (in the winter) deer. The regional flora was equally, if not more, diverse and was used as a main staple of the Yokuts diet. The Southern Valley Yokuts dietary base relied on a mixed strategy of fishing, waterfowl hunting, shellfish, and plant collecting, with less emphasis on large- game hunting. Important vegetal resources included cattail roots, grasses, nuts, seeds, tule, and
18 Greenwood and Associates. 2012. Cultural Resources Existing Conditions Report. Fresno Central Southeast Area Specific Plan. 19 Rosenthal, Jeffrey S., Gregory G. White, and Mark Q. Sutton. 2007. The Central Valley: A View from the Catbird’s Seat. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar. Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press. 20 Greenwood and Associates. 2012. Cultural Resources Existing Conditions Report. Fresno Central Southeast Area Specific Plan 21 Silverstein, M., 1978. Yokuts: Introduction Handbook of North American Indians California. 22 Gayton, A.H, et al. 1948. Yokuts and Western Mono Ethnography. University of California Press. Berkeley and Los Angeles. 23 Krober, A.L. 1963. Yokuts Dialect Survey. University of California Press. Berkeley and Los Angeles.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-5
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx bulbs. The resource-rich environment allowed for permanent village sites, which typically were occupied throughout the year.24
The Western Mono
The Western Mono, also called the Monache, consisted of six independent Tribes: the Northfork Mono, the Wobonuch, the Entimbich, the Michahay, the Waksachi and the Patwisha, that were connected by a common language, Numic. Traditionally, the Western Mono resided in the Pine Belt of the western side of the south-central Sierra Nevada Mountain range and were bordered by the Sierra Miwok to the north, Southern Valley Yokuts to the west, Owens Valley Paiute and Tubatulabal to the south and maintained a close relationship with all of their neighbors, with several of the Tribes speaking more than two languages, which served in assisting in trade relations, traveling, and intertribal relations. The Monache were seasonal hunters and gatherers, migrating to different areas and elevations of the Sierra Nevada’s in the pursuit of food. Depending on the season and location, the Monache diet generally consisted of deer, bears, rabbit, squirrel, fish and a verity of nuts and fruits. A variety of materials were used for hunting, gathering, and processing food, as well as for shelter, clothing, and luxury items. The primary material for hunting was obsidian knives, arrow points and scrapers which was openly traded among the neighboring Tribes. Feather fire fans made from hawk or vulture tails were used to smoke out smaller animals from their underground holes.
Soaproot brushes were pivotal in grinding food on mortars. Men were commonly seen with tumpline used to carry materials and food during their hunting and gathering excursions. Twine, made from sinew, milkweed fiber, and bark, were used for crafting cradles, seed beaters, trays, and storage baskets. The Western Mono did not have a primary village, and settlement locations were determined by the seasons, elevation, and water availability. The Monache relied on three different types of homes that were primarily determined by elevation. The Conical House had an excavated floor and was typically 6-12 feet in diameter. The Oval House was ground level and used at lower elevations, ranged from 10 to 15 feet by 17 to 20 feet and was equipped with a ridgepole. The Conical Bark Covered house was ground level and used at higher elevations. 25 The Western Mono were organized along patrilineal lines, with each lineage associated with a totem that was considered the family’s pet. The Northfolk Mono were the only Tribe known to use moieties associated with social responsibilities within the Tribe assigning the Eagle moiety with the Chief, and the Roadrunner or Dove moiety with the messenger. Prior to European contact, the Monache population was estimated to be close to 5,000 people, making the Monache Tribe one of the most populous of the Central Valley; however, following European contact, population numbers fell dramatically, with some sources putting the surviving population between 6 to 9 percent. Presently, the surviving Western Mono reside in the upper foothills of the Sierra Nevada’s, Madera County and Fresno County.26
24 Wallace, William J. 1978. Northern Valley Yokuts. In Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 8, California, edited by Robert F.
Heizer. Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution.
25 Spier, R.F., 1978. Monache. Handbook of North American Indians. 26 Loether, C. 1990. Ceremony as Performance: The Western Mono Cry-Dance. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology.
Website: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27825423. Accessed July 11, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-6 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Historic Background
The Spanish Period (1769-1821)
The formalization of Spanish routes in California were established by Father Junipero Serra and Gaspar de Portola in 1769, in what was known as the Portola Expedition. Although the Portola party were not the first Europeans nor the first people to pass through the region, it was their observations and discoveries that formalized the routes and locations of the Mission System and facilitate trade and travel through California.
27 The route used by Portola was further explored in
detail by Lieutenant Colonel Juan Bautista de Anza and Father Pedro Font during the Anza Expedition that lasted from 1775-1776. The Anza Expedition was considered pivotal as it helped establish practical relationships with the natives, who at the time were revolting in San Diego, and help further explore and map Monterey and the San Francisco Bay Area. 28 The region that would become
San Joaquin Valley was periodically visited by Franciscan friars, scouting the area for mission sites, but it was a military expedition led by Gabriel Moraga in September and October of 1806 that first visited the area. The expedition started in San Juan Bautista and to the San Joaquin Plain. Once there, Moraga traversed the several tributaries that fed of the San Joaquin River, discovering and naming the Merced River, and coming upon the Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Mokelumne River.
Moraga’s expedition took him from the foot of the Sierras and the Rancherias between Kings River and Kern River. In 1808, Moraga traveled to Stockton and headed east to scouting sites for future missions. Moraga’s discoveries and mapping of the region contributed to the knowledge of the geography and ethnography of the area. This information served pivotal to Father Narciso Duran, Father Ramón Abella and Lieutenant Luis Antonio Argüello, who followed the San Joaquin River at least as far as the Stockton Channel in 1817, meticulously mapping the area for future mission establishments.
29 The diary kept by Father Duran helped illustrate how the region appeared prior to colonization as well as initial contact with the Yokut people.30 The Mexican Period (1821-1848)
In 1821, Mexico overthrew Spanish rule and the monopoly that the missions had in the area began to decline. By 1833, the Mexican government passed the Secularization Act and the missions were reorganized as parish churches and lost their vast land holdings. Following the Secularization Act, the Mexican government initially planned on redistributing the land holdings to the Native Americans; however, they were instead redistributed to prominent citizens. The last of the mission land holdings were relinquished in 1845, which led the way for the large ranchos common to California in the mid- 1800s. California experienced a period of success with the establishment of the Ranchos, adopting the Spanish ranching traditions and focusing on the herding of cattle as well as adapting to the market trends of the time that included the trade of fur and pelts; however, the constant threat of Russian invasion, the illegal squatting of American immigrants, and a growing threat of rebellion from the mission Indians prevented the region from achieving socio-political stability. 31 32 The
growing tensions between Mexicans and American settlers led to the Bear Flag Revolt of 1846 led by
27 Farquhar, F.P ., 1928. Spanish discovery of the Sierra Nevada. San Francisco, California: Sierra Club, Bulletin, XIII. 28 Hyslop, S.G., 2019. Contest for California: From Spanish Colonization to the American Conquest (Vol. 2). University of Oklahoma Press.
29 Kyle, D.E., Rensch, H.E., Rensch, E.G., Hoover, M.B. and Abeloe, W. 2002. Historic spots in California. Stanford University Press 30 Farquhar, F.P ., 1928. Spanish discovery of the Sierra Nevada. San Francisco, California: Sierra Club, Bulletin, XIII. 31 Beck, W.A. and Williams, D.A., 1972. California: A history of the Golden State. Doubleday Books. 32 Branch, L.C., 1881. History of Stanislaus County, California: With Illustrations Descriptive of Its Scenery, Farms, Residences, Public Buildings with Biographical Sketches of Prominent Citizens. Elliott Moore.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-7
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx U.S. Army Captain John C. Fremont and Ezekiel Merritt against Mexican General Mariano Vallejo who was attempting to bring aid to the Mexican governor of California in an attempt to suppress the growing wave of support for an American coup of California.33 The rebellion concluded with the takeover of Sonoma, thus weakening the little control that Mexico had over Alta California and paving the way for the United States to seize control of the Pacific Coast shortly thereafter. By 1846, on the eve of the U.S.-Mexican War (1846 to 1848), the estimated population of California was 8,000 non-natives and 10,000 Native Americans. However, these estimates have been debated. Cook suggests the Native American population was 100,000 in 1850; the U.S. Census of 1880 reports the Native American population as 20,385.34
Local History
Fresno County
Fresno County, located in Central California, was established in 1856 from parts of Mariposa, Merced and Tulare Counties and the first county seat was located in the small township of Millerton. Fresno is named after Fresno Creek and the ash trees that surrounded the valley. 35 The Fresno community
began to grow from small mining settlements along the Fresno River and Kings River, however, its official creation is credited to Moses J. Church, who is called the “Father of Irrigation” and is credited as the organizer of the newly established community.
36 Church began to build an irrigation system
that diverted water from the Kings River and onto the region using canals and tributaries. The ease of access to water and the affordable land was a primary attraction to people looking for new opportunities. The growing population necessitated a need for the transportation of people and goods and in 1872, the first railroad depot was constructed by Southern Pacific Railroad. This was followed by a larger depot, built in 1889 making the railroad depot a trading center for the whole of the county. Fresno County is home to the cities of Clovis, Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Fresno, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cove, Parlier, Reedley, Sanger, San Joaquin and Selma, in addition to several unincorporated communities.37 As of January 2022, Fresno County has a population of 1,011,273 and growing.38 Fresno County lies in the heart of the nation’s largest agricultural center, making agricultural business the main source of economic stimulus in the region.39
3.5.3 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), as amended, established the NRHP , which contains an inventory of the nation’s significant prehistoric and historic properties. Under 36 Code of
33 National Park Service (NPS). 2015. Website: https://www.nps.gov/index.htm. Accessed July 15, 2022. 34 Cook, S.F., 1976. The population of the California Indians, 1769-1970. University of California Press. 35 California State Association of Counties. 2014. California State Association of Counties. Website: https://www.counties.org/county- profile/fresno-county. Accessed July 15, 2022.
36 Thickens, V.E., 1946. Pioneer agricultural colonies of Fresno County. California Historical Society Quarterly. 37 National Park Service (NPS). 2015. Website: https://www.nps.gov/index.htm. Accessed July 15, 2022. 38 California Department of Finance. Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State – January 1, 2021, and 2022. Website:
https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates-e1/. Accessed July 5, 2022. 39 Fresno County. 2021. Website: https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/. Accessed July 5, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-8 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Federal Regulations 60, a property is recommended for possible inclusion on the NRHP if it is at least 50 years old, has integrity, and meets one of the following criteria:
• It is associated with significant events in history, or broad patterns of events; • It is associated with significant people in the past; • It embodies the distinctive characteristics of an architectural type, period, or method of construction; or it is the work of a master or possesses high artistic value; or it represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or • It has yielded, or may yield, information important in history or prehistory.
Certain types of properties are usually excluded from consideration for listing in the NRHP , but they can be considered if they meet special requirements in addition to meeting the criteria listed above.
Such properties include religious sites, relocated properties, graves and cemeteries, reconstructed properties, commemorative properties, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years.
Archaeological Resources Protection Act
The Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) amended the Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 United States Code [USC] §§ 431–433) and set a broad policy that archaeological resources are important to the nation and should be protected and required special permits before the excavation or removal of archaeological resources from public or Native American lands. The purpose of the ARPA was to secure, for the present and future benefit of the American people, the protection of archaeological resources and sites that are on public lands and Indian lands, and to foster increased cooperation and exchange of information between governmental authorities, the professional archaeological community, and private individuals having collections of archaeological resources and data that were obtained before October 31, 1979.
American Indian Religious Freedom Act
The American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) established federal policy to protect and preserve the inherent rights of freedom for Native American groups to believe, express, and exercise their traditional religions. These rights include but are not limited to access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites.
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 sets provisions for the intentional removal and inadvertent discovery of human remains and other cultural items from federal and tribal lands. It clarifies the ownership of human remains and sets forth a process for repatriation of human remains and associated funerary objects and sacred religious objects to the Native American groups claiming to be lineal descendants or culturally affiliated with the remains or objects. It requires any federally funded institution housing Native American remains or artifacts to compile an inventory of all cultural items within the museum or with its agency and to provide a summary to any Native American Tribe claiming affiliation.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx State
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)—CEQA Definition of Historical Resources CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a), in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, defines a “historical resource” as:
1. A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources.
2. A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code, or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant.
3. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be a historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources.
4. The fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code), or identified in n historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be a historical resource as defined in Public Resources Code Sections 5020.1(j) or 5024.1.
Therefore, under the CEQA Guidelines, even if a resource is not included on any local, State, or federal register, or identified in a qualifying historical resources survey, a lead agency may still determine that any resource is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA if there is substantial evidence supporting such a determination. A lead agency must consider a resource to be historically significant if it finds that the resource meets the criteria for listing in the CRHR. Archaeological and historical sites are protected pursuant to a wide variety of State policies and regulations, as enumerated in the Public Resources Code. Cultural resources are recognized as nonrenewable resources and receive additional protection under the Public Resources Code and CEQA.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3)—California Register of Historical Resources Criteria As defined by CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(a)(3)(A-D), a resource shall be considered historically significant if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the CRHR. The CRHR and many local preservation ordinances have employed the criteria for eligibility to the NRHP as a model (see criteria described above under the description of the NHPA), since the NHPA provides the highest standard for evaluating the significance of historic resources. A resource that meets NRHP criteria is City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx clearly significant. In addition, a resource that does not meet NRHP standards may still be considered historically significant at a local or State level.
California Public Resources Code Section 5024.1—California Register of Historical Resources Section 5024.1 of the Public Resources Code states that the CRHR is a guide to be used by State and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the State’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected from substantial adverse change. Administration of the CRHR is to be overseen by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Section 5024.1 indicates that the register shall include historical resources determined by the NAHC, according to adopted procedures, to be significant and to meet the criteria in subdivision (c).
CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(c)—Effects on Archaeological Resources CEQA Guidelines state that a resource need not be listed on any register to be found historically significant. CEQA Guidelines direct lead agencies to evaluate archaeological sites to determine whether they meet the criteria for listing in the CRHR. If an archaeological site is a historical resource, in that it is listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, potential adverse impacts to it must be considered. If an archaeological site is considered not to be a historical resource but meets the definition of a “unique archaeological resource” as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, then it would be treated in accordance with the provisions of that section.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d)—Effects on Human Remains Native American human remains and associated burial items may be significant to descendant communities and/or may be scientifically important for their informational value. They may be significant to descendant communities for patrimonial, cultural, lineage, and religious reasons.
Human remains may also be important to the scientific community, such as prehistorians, epidemiologists, and physical anthropologists. The specific stake of some descendant groups in ancestral burials is a matter of law for some groups, such as Native Americans (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(d); PRC § 5097.98). CEQA and other State regulations regarding Native American human remains provide the following procedural requirements to assist in avoiding potential adverse effects on human remains within the contexts of their value to both descendant communities and the scientific community:
• When an initial study identifies the existence or probable likelihood that a project would affect Native American human remains, the lead agency is to contact and work with the appropriate Native American representatives identified through the NAHC to develop an agreement for the treatment and disposal of the human remains and any associated burial items (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(d); PRC § 5097.98).
• If human remains are accidentally discovered, the County Coroner must be contacted. If the County Coroner determines that the human remains are Native American, the Coroner must contact the NAHC within 24 hours. The NAHC must identify the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to provide the opportunity to make recommendations for the treatment and disposal of human remains and associated burial items.
• If the MLD fails to make recommendations within 24 hours of notification or the project applicant rejects the recommendations of the MLD, the Native American human remains and City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx associated burial items must be reburied in a location not subject to future disturbance within the project site (PRC § 5097.98).
• If potentially affected human remains or a burial site may have scientific significance, whether or not it has significance to Native Americans or other descendant communities, then under CEQA, the appropriate mitigation of effect may require the recovery of the scientific information of the remains/burial through identification, evaluation, data recovery, analysis, and interpretation (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(c)(2)).
California Public Resources Code Section 5097.91—Native American Heritage Commission Section 5097.91 of the Public Resources Code established the NAHC, whose duties include the inventory of places of religious or social significance to Native Americans and the identification of known graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private lands. Under Section 5097.91 of the Public Resources Code, a State policy of noninterference with the free expression or exercise of Native American religion was articulated along with a prohibition of severe or irreparable damage to Native American sanctified cemeteries, places of worship, religious or ceremonial sites or sacred shrines located on public property. Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code specifies a protocol to be followed when the NAHC receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a County Coroner. Section 5097.5 defines as a misdemeanor the unauthorized disturbance or removal of archaeological, historic, or paleontological resources located on public lands.
California Senate Bill 18—Protection of Tribal Cultural Places SB 18 (Government Code § 65352.3) incorporates the protection of California traditional tribal cultural places into land use planning for cities, counties, and agencies by establishing responsibilities for local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with California Native American Tribes as part of the adoption or amendment of any general or specific plan proposed on or after March 1, 2005. SB 18 requires public notice to be sent to Tribes listed on the NAHC SB 18 Tribal Consultation list within the geographical areas affected by the proposed changes. Tribes must respond to a local government notice within 90 days (unless a shorter time frame has been agreed upon by the Tribe), indicating whether they want to consult with the local government.
Consultations are for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to places, features, and objects described in Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the Public Resources Code that may be affected by the proposed adoption or amendment to a general or specific plan.
California Assembly Bill 52—Effects on Tribal Cultural Resources AB 52 was signed into law on September 25, 2014, and provides that any public or private “project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a TCR is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” TCRs include “[s]ites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the CR or included in a local register of historical resources.” Under prior law, TCRs were typically addressed under the umbrella of “cultural resources,” as discussed above. AB 52 formally added the category of “tribal cultural resources” to CEQA and extends the consultation and confidentiality requirements to all projects, rather than just projects subject to SB 18 as discussed above.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx The parties must consult in good faith, and consultation is deemed concluded when either: (1) the parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect on a TCR (if such a significant effect exists); or (2) when a party concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached. Mitigation measures agreed upon during consultation must be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document. AB 52 also identifies mitigation measures that may be considered to avoid significant impacts if there is no agreement on appropriate mitigation. Recommended measures include:
• Preservation in place
• Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource • Protecting the traditional use of the resource
• Protecting the confidentiality of the resource
• Permanent conservation easements with culturally appropriate management criteria
California Public Resources Code Section 21074—Effects on Tribal Cultural Resources AB 52 amended the CEQA statute to identify an additional category of resource to be considered under CEQA, called “tribal cultural resources,” and added Public Resources Code Section 21074, which defines “tribal cultural resources” as follows:
(a) “Tribal cultural resources” are either of the following:
(1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that are either of the following:
A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR.
B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.
(2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.
(b) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape.
(c) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a “nonunique archaeological resource” as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a).
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 (Treatment of Human Remains) Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code sets forth provisions related to the treatment of human remains. As the Code states, “every person who knowingly mutilates or disinters, wantonly disturbs, or willfully removes any human remains in or from any location other than a dedicated cemetery without authority of law is guilty of a misdemeanor” §§except under City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx circumstances as provided in Section 5097.99 of the Public Resources Code. The regulations also provide guidelines for the treatment of human remains found in locations other than a dedicated cemetery, including responsibilities of the Coroner.
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 (Discovery of Human Remains) Section 5097.98 provides protocol for the discovery of human remains. It states that “when the commission receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a County Coroner pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, it shall immediately notify persons believed to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American.” It also sets forth provisions for descendants’ preferences for treatment of the human remains and what should be done if the commission is unable to identify a descendant.
Local
Fresno General Plan
The General Plan outlines a long-range vision for the physical development of the City that reflects the community’s vision to preserve the desirable qualities of the existing community while encouraging the aspirations of the community. The General Plan includes the following objectives and policies related to cultural and tribal cultural resources:
Historic and Cultural Resources Element
Objective HCR-1 Maintain a comprehensive, citywide preservation program to identify, protect and assist in the preservation of Fresno’s historic and cultural resources.
Policy HCR-1-a Certified Local Government. Maintain the City’s status as a Certified Local Government (CLG), and use CLG practices as the key components of the City’s preservation program.
Policy HCR-1-b Preservation Office, Commission and Program. Maintain the Preservation Office, Historic Preservation Commission, and preservation program to administer the City’s preservation functions and programs.
Policy HCR-1-c Historic Preservation Ordinance. Maintain the provisions of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, as may be amended, and enforce the provisions as appropriate.
Objective HCR-2 Identify and preserve Fresno’s historic and cultural resources that reflect important cultural, social, economic, and architectural features so that residents will have a foundation upon which to measure and direct physical change.
Policy HCR-2-a Identification and Designation of Historic Properties. Work to identify and evaluate potential historic resources and districts and prepare nomination forms for Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources and California and National registries, as appropriate.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Policy HCR-2-b Historic Surveys. Prepare historic surveys according to California Office of Historic Preservation protocols and City priorities as funding is available.
Policy HCR-2-c Project Development. Prior to project approval, continue to require a project site and its Area of Potential Effects (APE), without benefit of a prior historic survey, to be evaluated and reviewed for the potential for historic and/or cultural resources by a professional who meets the Secretary of Interior’s Qualifications. Survey costs shall be the responsibility of the project developer. Council may, but is not required, to adopt an ordinance to implement this policy.
Policy HCR-2-d Native American Sites. Work with local Native American Tribes to protect recorded and unrecorded cultural and sacred sites, as required by State law, and educate developers and the community-at-large about the connections between Native American history and the environmental features that characterize the local landscape.
Policy HCR-2-g Demolition Review. Review all demolition permits to determine whether the resource scheduled for demolition is potentially eligible for listing on the Local Register of Historic Resources. Consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, refer potentially eligible resources to the Historic Preservation Commission and as appropriate to the City Council.
Policy HCR-2-h Minimum Maintenance Standards. Continue to support enforcement of the minimum maintenance provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, as may be amended, and enforce the provisions as appropriate.
Policy HCR-2-I Preservation Mitigation Fund. Consider creating a Preservation Mitigation Fund to help support efforts to preserve and maintain historic and cultural resources.
Policy HCR-2-j Window Replacement. City staff will evaluate potential opportunities for identification of window replacements to ensure historic integrity is maintained while encouraging sustainability. In addition, City staff will evaluate window replacements in federally funded housing projects on a project-by-project basis with consideration for health, safety, historic values, sustainability, and financial feasibility.
Policy HCR-2-k City-Owned Resources. Maintain all City-owned historic and cultural resources in a manner that is consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, as appropriate.
Policy HCR-2-m Local Register Listing. Recommend that property owners, who receive funds from the City of Fresno for rehabilitation of a property, consent to listing it on the Local Register of Historic Resources if the property meets the criteria for age, significance, and integrity. Publicly funded rehabilitation properties which may City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx meet Local Register criteria will be presented to the City’s Historic Preservation Commission for review.
Policy HCR-2-n Property Database and Informational System. Identify all historic resources within the City designated on the Local, State, or National register, and potential significant resources (building, structure, object or site) in existence for at least 45 years, and provide this information on the City’s website.
Objective HCR-3 Promote a “New City Beautiful” ethos by linking historic preservation, public art, and planning principles for Complete Neighborhoods with green building and technology.
Policy HCR-3-a Adaptive Reuse. Promote the adaptive reuse and integration of older buildings into new projects as part of the City’s commitment to nurturing a sustainable Fresno.
Policy HCR-3-b Public Art. Collaborate with the arts community to promote the integration of public art into historic buildings and established neighborhoods. Link arts activities (such as Art Hop) with preservation activities.
Policy HCR-3-c Context Sensitive Design. Work with architects, developers, business owners, local residents and the historic preservation community to ensure that infill development is context-sensitive in its design, massing, setbacks, color, and architectural detailing.
Objective HCR-4 Foster an appreciation of Fresno’s history and cultural resources.
Policy HCR-4-d Public Archives. Maintain public archives that include information on all designated historic properties, as well as historic surveys, preservation bulletins, and general local history reference materials. Post survey reports, Historic Preservation Commission minutes and agendas, and other information of public interest on the historic preservation page of the City’s website.
Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan
The Fresno Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Specific Plan is framed within three significant and interrelated goals: fiscal responsibility, social equity, and environmental sustainability. The proposed Specific Plan and policies that form its implementation framework are formulated and coordinated to meet the criteria of these overlapping goals. The proposed Specific Plan contains the following objectives and policies related to cultural and tribal cultural resources:
Cultural and Historic Resources
Objective CR-1 Preserve the region’s culturally significant landscapes outside the Southeast Development Area by reducing development pressure on those landscapes.
Policy CR-1.2 Conversion of Non-Urban Uses. Limit the conversion of culturally significant rural areas outside the current Fresno SOI.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-16 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Objective CR-3 Identify and protect significant structures, sites and landscapes within the Southeast Development Area.
Policy CR-3.1 Cultural Resource Surveys. Conduct surveys for cultural resources. For all activities in the SEDA meeting the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) definition of a “project,” the City of Fresno shall ensure that a qualified professional Archaeologist; and historian or architectural historian as appropriate based on-site conditions has conducted focused surveys of the project site before issuing grading permits. If cultural resources (prehistoric or historic) are identified as a result of the survey, a qualified professional Archaeologist/historian shall evaluate the significance of the finds and recommend appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources. The City shall ensure the project applicant or designee implements these mitigation measures. Mitigation may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, the avoidance of significant and potentially significant resources through changes in project design and/or subsurface testing and data recovery. Such efforts, particularly those involving testing and excavation, shall be conducted in consultation with appropriate Native American representatives identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC).
Policy CR-3.2 Discovery of Cultural Resources. Protect cultural resources discovered during construction. If previously undocumented cultural materials such as historic building or structure remains; historic artifact deposits or scatters; or prehistoric artifacts such as stone tool flaking debitage, mortars, pestles, shell, or bone are encountered during construction in the SEDA, all ground-disturbing activity shall be suspended temporarily within a 100-foot radius of the find or a distance determined by a qualified professional Archaeologist to be appropriate based on the potential for disturbance of additional resource-bearing soils. A qualified professional Archaeologist shall identify the materials, determine their possible significance, and formulate appropriate mitigation measures. Appropriate mitigation may include no action, avoidance of the resource, and potential data recovery. Ground disturbance in the zone of suspended activity shall not recommence without authorization from the Archaeologist.
Policy CR-3.3 Discovery of Remains. Appropriately address human remains that could be found during construction. If human remains are uncovered during construction in the SEDA, all ground-disturbing activities shall immediately be suspended within a 100-foot radius of the find or a distance determined by a qualified professional Archaeologist to be appropriate based on the potential for disturbance of additional remains.
Policy CR-3.4 State Resources. Identify any resource listed in, or eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources, including archaeological sites, during the Environmental Impact Report.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-17
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Policy CR-3.5 Locally Significant Resources. The City of Fresno shall identify additional cultural resources in road, utility, and other agency and public rights-of-way in the SEDA significant to the San Joaquin Valley and Fresno, such as historic canals and tree- lined boulevards. The City shall convey information on these resources, and appropriate protection measures, to developers, utility companies, and other implementing agencies or stakeholders that might affect these resources.
Policy CR-3.6 Resource Protection. Incorporate historic sites, infrastructure and landscape features into new developments in order to conserve resources and preserve the area’s vernacular landscape and “sense of place.”
Policy CR-3.7 Resource Relocation. The relocation of historic structures should be considered as a last resort for preservation and only when retention in place is infeasible. Moved properties should adhere to the Secretary of Interior’s recommendations.
Policy CR-3.8 Alternate Public Improvement Standards. Develop Alternate Public Improvement Standards (APIs) for historic landscaped roads, if appropriate, to preserve the historic context of the SEDA area.
Objective CR-4 Develop new mixed-use communities that reflect and establish a regional identity in the design of new buildings and complexes.
Policy CR-4.1 Wayside Exhibits. Incorporate wayside exhibits within new developments that depict the history of the site or region through photographs and text.
Fresno Municipal Code
Article 16 of the Municipal Code is the Historic Preservation Ordinance of the City of Fresno, which seeks to preserve, promote, and improve the historic resources and districts of the City of Fresno for educational, cultural, economic and general welfare of the public; to continue to protect and review changes to these resources and districts which have a distinctive character or a special historic, architectural, aesthetic or cultural value to the City, State, and nation; to continue to safeguard the heritage of the City by preserving and regulating its historic buildings, structures, objects, sites and districts which reflect elements of the City's historic, cultural, social, economic, political and architectural history; to continue to preserve and enhance the environmental quality and safety of these landmarks and districts; to continue to establish, stabilize and improve property values and to foster economic development.
40 40 City of Fresno. 2023. Municipal Code and Charter of the City of Fresno, California. Website:
https://library.municode.com/ca/fresno/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=MUCOFR_CH12IMFEHIREOTMITO_ART16HIPROR.
Accessed March 22, 2023.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-18 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx
3.5.4 - Methodology
Records Searches to Identify Existing Cultural Resources Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
On April 13, 2022, a records search for the project site and a 0.5-mile radius beyond the Plan Area boundaries, was conducted at the SSJVIC located at California State University, Bakersfield. To identify additional historic properties or resources, the current inventories of the NRHP, the CRHR, the California Historical Landmarks list, the California Points of Historical Interest List, and the BERD for Fresno County were reviewed to determine the existence of previously documented local historical resources. Ethnographic resources were also reviewed for information regarding reported Native American village sites located within the City. It should be noted that the local Fresno Record of Historic Resources does not currently include any sites within the SEDA Specific Plan Area, as it is not yet within the jurisdiction of the City.
Results from the records search indicate 23 resources (one prehistoric and 22 historic era resources) have been recorded within a 0.5-mile radius of the Plan Area. Eleven of those historic era resources are located within the Plan Area (Table 3.5-1). In addition, 49 previous studies are on file with the SSJVIC within a 0.5-mile radius of the Plan Area, 26 of which address locations within the Plan Area itself (Table 3.5-2).
Table 3.5-1: Cultural Resources Recorded within the Plan Area Resource No. Resource Description Date Recorded
P-10-003930 Southern Pacific Railroad, Historic AH07 (Roads/trails/railroad grades), HP11 (Engineering structure)
1998, 1999, 2001,
2002, 2004, 2009,
2010, 2013, 2014,
2015, 2016, 2018
P-10-004675 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, Historic, HP19 (Bridge); HP37 (Highway/trail)–Rail Road
2000, 2019
P-10-004724 7E–Hansen Canal, Historic, HP20 (Canal/aqueduct) 1991, 2001 P-10-005464 8175 Kings Canyon Road Barn and Residence, Historic, HP33 (Farm/ranch)
2005
P-10-006048 Map Reference #119; Arkelian Sahag Life Estate Property, Historic, HP02 (Single-family property); HP04 (Ancillary building) 2002
P-10-006091 Map Reference #14; Fowler Avenue and Harvey Palm Trees, Historic, HP29 (Landscape architecture)
2002
P-10-006092 Map Reference #53; James Call Property, Historic, HP02 (Single- family property); HP04 (Ancillary building)
2002
P-10-006093 Map Reference #50; State of California Property, Historic, HP02 (Single-family property); HP04 (Ancillary building)
2002
P-10-006094 Map Reference #46; William R. Slaton Property, Historic, HP02 (Single-family property)
2002
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-19
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Resource No. Resource Description Date Recorded
P-10-006126 2629 S. Clovis Avenue, Historic, HP06 (1-3 story commercial building); HP33 (Farm/ranch)
2010
P-10-007030 Gould Canal, Historic, HP20 (Canal/aqueduct) 2016 Source: Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) Records Search. April 18, 2022.
Table 3.5-2: Previous Investigations within the Plan Area Resource
No. Report Title Author Date
FR-00118 Cultural Resources Survey for Rural Residential Development of Tract #4249 in Fresno County
Bissonnette, Linda
Dick
1991
FR-00257 Historic Property Survey Report Route 180 Chestnut Avenue to Highland Avenue; 06-FRE-180, R60.9/R6736 06250–
342400
1990
FR-00448 An Archaeological Assessment of Six Acres Southeast of Clovis, Fresno County, California
Sutton, Mark Q. 1991
FR-00501 Negative Archaeological Survey Report for the Proposed Subdivision of a Parcel of Land on Belmont Avenue in Fresno County, California
Kus, James 1994
FR-00535 Archaeological Survey Report for a Proposed Upgrade of Rural Route 180 Between Fowler and Cove Avenues, Fresno County, California
McGuire, Kelly R. and
Wohlgemuth, Eric
1992
FR-00548 Redbank and Fancher Creeks Intensive Cultural Resources Survey, Fresno County, California
Meighan, Clement,
Dillon, Brian, Verano,
John, and Indermill,
Roc
1987
FR-00578 Archaeological Survey Report for Proposed Channelization on Route 180 at Temperance Avenue, Fresno County,
California
O'Connor, Denise 1981
FR-01114 An Archaeological Survey of a Proposed Ponding Basin, Locan Avenue, Fresno County, California
Wren, Donald G. 1995
FR-01115 An Archaeological Survey of the Qualls Property, Fresno County, California–EA 4101
Wren, Donald G. 1995
FR-01130 Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Redbank and Fancher Creek Investigation Area
Wren, Donald G. and
Crist, Michael
1975
FR-01608 A Cultural Resources Survey for the Fancher Creek Basin Fill Project, Fresno County, California
Roper, Kristina 1998
FR-01627 Shields/Leonard Fill Site Expansion–Redband Creek Channel Restoration Project Cultural/Historical Resource Report Wren, Donald G. 1999
FR-01661 A Cultural Resource Study: Stormwater Retention Basin BG Fresno County, California
Wren, Donald G. 2000
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-20 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Resource
No. Report Title Author Date
FR-01748 A Cultural Resource Study Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Fill Site E. Shields and Leonard Avenue Wren, Donald 2001
FR-01797 A Cultural Resource Study for the Clovis Southeast Specific Plan, Clovis, California
Wren, Donald G. 2002
FR-02044 A Cultural Resource Study of the Mathias Property, Fresno County, California
Varner, Dudley M. 2004
FR-02059 Request for SHPO Review of FCC Undertaking (Ivesta/CA- 1663D)
Billat, Scott 2005
FR-02223 Second Supplemental Historical Architectural Survey Report for the State Route 180, Chestnut Avenue to Highland
Avenue, Fresno County, California
Brady, Jon L. 2002
FR-02356 Cultural Resource Study for a Two Creeks South Project (DeWolf and Leonard) in the City of Clovis, Fresno County, California
Varner, Dudley M. 2010
FR-02439 Results of Architectural History Survey for Verizon Cellular Communications Tower Site–Clovis and Jensen, 2629 S.
Clovis Avenue (APN: 316-051-02), Fresno, California 93725 Brian, Hatoff 2010
FR-02453 Second Supplemental Historic Property Survey Report 180 East Rural Expressway Reevaluation–Fowler Avenue to Cove Avenue Fresno County, California
Unknown 2002
FR-02507 Historic Architectural Survey Report for the Rural Highway 180 Project Fowler Avenue to Cove Avenue, Fresno County, California
Mikesell, Stephen D.
and Wee, Stephen R.
1992
FR-02579 Cultural Resources Investigation for AT&T Mobility CV2714 "Jensen and Clovis" 5608 East Jensen Avenue, Fresno,
California 93725
Losee, Carolyn 2013
FR-02629 Archaeological Sensitivity Assessment Ensite #11227 (250035)/Temperance 7101 E. McKinley Avenue, Fresno,
Fresno County, California
Travers, Aniela 2012
FR-02705 Cultural Resources Survey for S Armstrong/Ensite #17742 (263944) 7125 East Kings Canyon Road, Fresno City and
County, California
Greenberg, Gregory 2014
FR-02751 Cultural Resources Survey S Armstrong/Ensite #17742 (263944) 7125 East Kings Canyon Road, Fresno, Fresno
County, California
Perez, Don C. 2015
Source: Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) Records Search. April 18, 2022.
Native American Heritage Commission Record Search
On April 13, 2022, FCS sent a request to the NAHC in an effort to determine whether any sacred sites are listed on its Sacred Lands File for the project site. A response was received on June 23, 2022, indicating that the Sacred Lands File was positive for the presence of Native American cultural City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-21
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx resources in the Plan Area. The NAHC included a list of 12 Tribal representatives available for consultation who may have additional knowledge of the Plan Area. To ensure that all Native American knowledge and concerns over potential TCRs that may be affected by the proposed project are addressed, a letter containing project information requesting any additional information was sent by FCS to each tribal representative on June 30, 2022. No responses have been received to date.
Correspondence related to the NAHC letters and Tribal representatives can be found in Appendix C.
Additionally, in accordance with requirements promulgated by SB 18 and AB 52, the City sent notifications to Tribal representatives from the North Valley Yokuts Tribe, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians, the Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians, the Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians, the Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, the Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government, the Traditional Choinumni Tribe, and the Table Mountain Rancheria in June 2023. No replies requesting additional consultation were received within the 90-day consultation period.
3.5.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The Lead Agency utilizes the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist to determine whether cultural resources impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed project would be considered significant if the project would:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as pursuant to Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? d) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? e) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1?
3.5.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-22 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Historic Resources
Impact CUL-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.
Impact Analysis
A substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is defined at Section 15064.5(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines as the “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired.” Known historic structures are located throughout the Plan Area as described in the preceding sections.
Development under the proposed project would result in additional residential and nonresidential development throughout the Plan Area. Additionally, the proposed project may result in other private and public improvements throughout the Plan Area that could have significant environmental impacts related to historic resources (see Chapter 2, Project Description). Therefore, subsequent development under the proposed project could affect known historic resources or previously unidentified or undesignated resources.
The General Plan includes policies intended to conserve and reduce impacts to historical resources.
For example, Policies HCR-2-A through HCR-2-C provide clear guidance on when historic resource surveys and evaluations should be undertaken, as well as noting that the individuals making those evaluations should meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Qualification Standards for their respective roles. Policy HCR-2-g requires that the City review all demolition permits to determine whether buildings scheduled for demolition are potentially eligible for listing on the Local Register of Historic Resources and refer potentially eligible resources to the Historic Preservation Commission.
The SEDA Specific Plan includes policies specifically designed to address the conservation and protection of historical buildings and resources. Policy CR-3.1 requires that surveys for cultural resources are conducted for all projects in the SEDA by a qualified professional Archaeologist and Historian or Architectural Historian as appropriate and that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented. Individual development projects which propose to alter a building or structure greater than 45 years of age at the time an application is deemed complete would also be required to undergo project-specific environmental review in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, in order for the City to determine whether the building or structure may be a historic resource, and take appropriate action such as requiring additional site-specific or project-specific measures to reduce any potential impacts. Policies CR-3.6 through CR-3.8 further specify steps to be taken to help preserve the historic context of specific resources. The proposed project would also be required to comply with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, which is incorporated as Article 16 in the City’s Municipal Code.
As the City receives development applications for subsequent development under the proposed project, those applications will be reviewed by the City for compliance with the objectives and policies in the General Plan and the SEDA Specific Plan related to the protection of historical City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-23
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx resources. The City’s Municipal Code and Zoning Ordinance, which implement the City’s General Plan would be reviewed when development applications are received.
In conclusion, development envisioned by the proposed project could result in an increase in new residential and nonresidential development, as well as other public improvements, that could affect known historic resources or previously unidentified or undesignated historic resources within the Plan Area. In addition to and in accordance with the implementation of General Plan and SEDA Specific Plan objectives and policies, MM CUL-1 would ensure that future development projects are appropriately reviewed in terms of potential impacts to historic resources. Future development under the proposed project would therefore not result in significant adverse effects to historical resources and impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-1 Individual development projects which proposed to alter a building or structure greater than 45 years of age at the time an application is submitted would be required to undergo project-specific environmental review, in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, in order for the City to determine whether the building or structure may be a historic resource and take appropriate action such as requiring additional site-specific or project-specific measures to reduce any potential impacts.
These measures are, but not limited to the following:
• Prior to project development that may affect historical resources (i.e., structures 45 years or older), a historical resources assessment shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards in architectural history or history. This shall include a records search to determine whether any resources that may be potentially affected by the project have been previously recorded, evaluated, and/ or designated in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or a local register. Following the records search, the qualified architectural historian shall conduct a survey in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) guidelines to identify any previously unrecorded potential historical resources that may be potentially affected by the proposed project. The criteria for determining a historically significant building or structure shall meet one or more of the following criteria:
- Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local, regional, or national history; or - Is associated with the lives of persons significant in local, regional, or national history; or
- Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a significant architectural style, property type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of an architect, designer, engineer, or builder who is locally, regionally, nationally City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-24 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx significant, or it is a significant visual feature of the City; possess high artistic values, represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
- That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
• Properties identified as historically significant resources, shall contain proper documentation meeting the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Guidelines that shall be prepared and implemented, as approved by the qualified historian meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards. Such documentation shall include drawings, photographs, and written data for each building/structure/element, and provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program, recovery, rehabilitation, redesign, relocation, and/or in situ preservation plan.
• To ensure that projects requiring the relocation, rehabilitation, or alternation of a historical resource do not impact the resource’s significance, the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties shall be used to the maximum extent possible. The application of the standards shall be overseen by a qualified architectural historian or historic architect meeting the Professional Qualified Standards. Prior to any construction activities that may affect the historical resource, a report identifying and specifying the treatment of character- defining features and construction activities shall be provided to the City of Fresno for review and approval.
• If a proposed project would result in the demolition or significant alteration of historical resource, such demolition cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. However, recordation of the resource prior to construction activities will assist in reducing adverse impacts to the resource to the greatest extent possible.
Recordation shall take the form of Historic American Buildings Survey, Historic American Engineering Record, or Historic American Landscape Survey documentation, and shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Professional Qualified Standards. Documentation shall include an architectural and historical narrative; medium- or large-format black and white photographs, negatives, and prints; and supplementary information such as building plans and elevations, and/or historical photographs. Documentation shall be reproduced on archival paper and placed in appropriate local, State, or federal institutions. The specific scope and details of documentation are to be developed in coordination with the City of Fresno.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Archaeological Resources
Impact CUL-2: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-25
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Impact Analysis
Based on a review of information available at the SSJVIC, portions of the Plan Area have been previously surveyed for archaeological resources. While no known archaeological resource sites have been recorded within the Plan Area, archaeological sites have been recorded within 0.5 mile and the possibility exists that additional undiscovered archaeological sites could be present within the Plan Area.
Development under the proposed project would result in additional residential and nonresidential development throughout the Plan Area. Additionally, the SEDA Specific Plan may result in other private and public improvements throughout the Plan Area that could have significant environmental impacts related to archaeological resources. Therefore, subsequent development under the proposed project could affect known archaeological resources or previously unidentified or undesignated archaeological resources.
The potential for additional archaeological sites to be present within the Plan Area exists but varies by location. Prehistoric habitation sites tend to be situated in proximity to creeks and other areas with a reliable water supply. Task-specific sites or resource procurement sites can be situated in almost any environment conducive to human activity. Buried prehistoric archaeological sites tend to be found on Holocene-era landforms, particularly alluvial fans, floodplains, and areas along rivers and streams. As such, within the Plan Area, the areas around Redbank Creek and Dog Creek have increased potential for buried prehistoric archaeological resources to be present.
Policy CR-3.1 requires that surveys for cultural resources are conducted for all projects in the SEDA Specific Plan Area by a qualified professional Archaeologist as appropriate and that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented should archaeological resources be discovered. Policy CR-3.2 requires that, if any previously undocumented cultural materials discovered during construction of a project in the SEDA Specific Plan Area all ground-disturbing activity shall be suspended temporarily within a 100-foot radius of the find or a distance determined by a qualified professional Archaeologist. The Archaeologist shall determine potential significance and appropriate mitigation measures. The proposed project would also be required to comply with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, which is incorporated as Article 16 in the City’s Municipal Code.
As the City receives development applications for subsequent development under the proposed project, those applications would be reviewed by the City for compliance with the policies of the General Plan, the SEDA Specific Plan as well as the regulations of the Historic Preservation Ordinance related to archaeological resources. In particular, proposed new developments in the Plan Area would be required to conduct updated records search with the SSJVIC to determine the archaeological sensitivity of the site, as well as be referred to the NAHC and local Native American Tribes. If required, an archaeological survey of the site would be conducted and/or accidental discovery procedures for archaeological resources would be required.
In conclusion, development envisioned by the proposed project could result in new residential and nonresidential development, as well as other public improvements, that could affect known or previously unidentified archaeological resources within the Plan Area. In addition to and in accordance with compliance with General Plan and SEDA Specific Plan policies, as well as the City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-26 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx regulations of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, MM CUL-2 would ensure that future development projects are appropriately reviewed and designed in terms of potential impacts to archaeological resources. Consistent with General Plan and SEDA Specific Plan, individual development projects would be required to undergo project-specific environmental review, which may require additional site-specific or project-specific measures to reduce any potential impacts and would ensure that impacts remain less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-2 To determine the archaeological sensitivity for individual development projects within the City, an archaeological resources assessment shall be performed under the supervision of an Archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualified Standards for their role. The assessment shall include a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) and a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC).
The records searches shall determine if the proposed project has been previously surveyed for archaeological resources, identify and characterize the results of previous cultural resource surveys, and disclose any cultural resources that have been recorded and/or evaluated. A Phase I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in areas that are developed and undeveloped to locate any surface cultural materials. • If potentially significant archaeological resources are identified through an archaeological resources assessment, and impacts to these resources cannot be avoided, a Phase II Testing and Evaluation investigation shall be performed by an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards prior to any construction-related ground-disturbing activities to determine significance. If resources determined significant or unique through Phase II testing, and site avoidance is not possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken. These might include a Phase III data recovery program that would be implemented by a qualified Archaeologist and shall be performed in accordance with the Office of Historic Preservation’s (OHP) Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR). The Archaeologist must prepare an archaeological data recovery plan to be reviewed and approved by the Lead Agency prior to the excavation of resources.
• If the archaeological assessment did not identify potentially significant archaeological resources within the proposed project area but indicated the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources, this shall be followed by monitoring of all ground-disturbing construction and pre-construction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil by a qualified Archaeologist. The Archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-27
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx activities of the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery.
The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities within 100 feet of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance by an Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. If the discovery proves to be significant, the qualified Archaeologist shall make recommendations to the Lead Agency (City of Fresno) on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. • If the archaeological assessment did not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but indicates the area to be of medium sensitivity for archaeological resources, an Archaeologist who meets the Professional Qualified Standards shall be retained on an on-call basis. The Archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities within 100 feet of the discovery shall be halted while the on-call Archaeologist is contacted. If the discovery proves to be significant, the qualified Archaeologist shall make recommendations to the Lead Agency (City of Fresno) on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
• Potentially significant cultural resources consist of, but are not limited to, stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the project site should be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA Guidelines. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency (City of Fresno) approves the measures to protect these resources. The excavation, study, curation, and/or repatriation of archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be undertaken in close consultation with the Lead Agency (City of Fresno) and representatives from consulting Native American Tribes, as appropriate. All Reports and DPR forms shall be submitted to the Lead Agency (City of Fresno), the SSJVIC, and the OHP , as required.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-28 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Human Remains
Impact CUL-3: The proposed project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
Impact Analysis
Excavation and construction activities allowed under the proposed project may uncover human remains that may not be marked in formal burial locations. Therefore, as future development and infrastructure projects are reviewed by the City, each project would be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, the SEDA Specific Plan, and the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and other applicable State regulations.
Public Resources Code Section 5097 has specific stop-work and notification procedures to follow when Native American human remains are inadvertently discovered during excavation and construction activities. Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code sets forth provisions related to the treatment of human remains, including the treatment of human remains found in locations other than a dedicated cemetery and the responsibilities of the Coroner. These requirements apply to all construction projects within the Plan Area.
The SEDA Specific Plan includes policies intended to conserve and reduce impacts to archaeological resources, including human remains. Policy CR-3.1 requires that surveys for cultural resources are conducted for all projects in the SEDA Specific Plan Area by a qualified professional Archaeologist as appropriate and that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented should archaeological resources be discovered. Policy CR-3.3 requires that, if human remains are uncovered during construction in the SEDA Specific Plan Area, all ground-disturbing activities shall immediately be suspended within a 100-foot radius of the find or a distance determined by a qualified Archaeologist to be appropriate based on the potential for disturbance of additional remains.
In addition to and in accordance with the implementation of policies in the SEDA Specific Plan, as well as compliance with adopted State, federal and local regulations for the protection of archaeological resources and human remains, MM CUL-3 would ensure that future development under the proposed project would not result in significant adverse effects to human remains.
Therefore, impacts would be considered less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-3 In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5; Public Resources Code Section 5097.94 and Section 5097.98 must be followed. If during City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-29
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx the course of any future development project there is accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, the following steps shall be taken.
1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance within 100 feet of the remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine whether the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. If the Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work within 48 hours, for appropriate treatment and disposition of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the MLD or on the project site in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance:
• The NAHC is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation. • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Additionally, California Public Resources Code Section 15064.5 requires the following relative to Native American remains:
When an initial study identifies the existence of, or the probable likelihood of, Native American remains within a project site, a lead agency shall work with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The applicant may develop a plan for treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any items associated with Native American Burials with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-30 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx Listed or Eligible Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-4: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).
Impact Analysis
On April 13, 2022, a letter was sent to the NAHC to determine whether any sacred sites are listed on its Sacred Lands File (SLF) for the Plan Area. A response was received on June 23, 2022, indicating the search returned positive results for TCRs in the Plan Area (see Appendix C). Furthermore, it is always possible that subsurface excavation activities may encounter previously undiscovered TCRs that may meet the eligibility requirements for listing in the CRHR. Therefore, any unidentified TCRs could be adversely affected by development under the proposed project and create a potentially significant impact.
While the proposed project does not directly propose any adverse changes to any recorded TCRs, future development allowed under the proposed project could affect known or previously unidentified TCRs. In addition, the potential for additional undiscovered eligible TCRs to be present within the Plan Area exists but varies by location. As with prehistoric archaeological resources, the areas around Redbank Creek and Dog Creek have increased potential for buried TCRs to be present.
The General Plan includes policies intended to conserve and reduce impacts to TCRs. Policy HCR-2-d requires that the City works with local Native American Tribes to protect recorded and unrecorded cultural and sacred sites, as required by State law.
The SEDA Specific Plan includes policies intended to conserve and reduce impacts to TCRs and archaeological resources, which may include TCRs. Policies CR-3.1 through CR-3.3 require that surveys for cultural resources, and detail procedures to be followed in the event archaeological resources or human remains are encountered. The proposed project would be required to comply with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, which is incorporated as Article 16 in the City’s Municipal Code, and future projects within the SEDA Specific Plan Area would be subject to tribal consultation requirements under AB-52 as applicable.
Additionally, in accordance with requirements promulgated by SB 18 and AB 52, the City sent notifications to Tribal representatives from the North Valley Yokuts Tribe, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians, the Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians, the Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians, the Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, the Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government, the Traditional Choinumni Tribe, and the Table Mountain Rancheria in June 2023. No replies requesting additional consultation were received within the 90-day consultation period.
By adhering to the policies and actions in the General Plan, SEDA Specific Plan, and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, the provisions under State and federal law, and MM CUL-1 through MM City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-31
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx CUL-3, potential impacts to existing or undiscovered eligible TCRs within the Plan Area would be reduced to less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, and MM CUL-3.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Lead Agency Determined Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-5: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.
Impact Analysis
On April 13, 2022, a letter was sent to the NAHC to determine whether any sacred sites are listed on its SLF for the Plan Area. A response was received on June 23, 2022, indicating the search returned positive results for TCRs in the Plan Area, and recommended contacting Tribal representatives from 12 Tribes for additional information. A letter containing project information requesting any additional information was sent by FCS to each tribal representative on June 30, 2022. No responses have been received to date. (See Appendix C).
Additionally, in accordance with requirements promulgated by SB 18 and AB 52, the City sent notifications to Tribal representatives from the North Valley Yokuts Tribe, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians, the Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians, the Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians, the Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, the Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government, the Traditional Choinumni Tribe, and the Table Mountain Rancheria in June 2023. No replies requesting additional consultation were received within the 90-day consultation period.
At this time, the City, in its capacity as Lead Agency, has not identified any TCRs meeting the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 that would be adversely impacted by the proposed project. Nonetheless, as described under Impact CUL-4, future development allowed under the proposed project could affect previously unidentified TCRs.
As discussed under Impact CUL-4, the SEDA Specific Plan includes policies to conserve and reduce impacts to TCRs, such as Policy CR-3.1, Policy CR-3.2, and Policy CR-3.3. Future projects within the SEDA Specific Plan Area would also be subject to tribal consultation requirements under AB-52 as applicable. By adhering to the policies and actions in the General Plan Update, the provisions under City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.5-32 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx State and federal law, and MM CUL-1 through MM CUL-3 potential impacts to existing or undiscovered eligible TCRs within the Plan Area would be reduced to less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, and MM CUL-3.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
3.5.7 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative impact analysis for cultural and TCRs is the SEDA Specific Plan Area as well as the City of Fresno, adjacent communities in the City of Clovis, and unincorporated Fresno County. This analysis evaluates whether the impacts of the proposed project, together with the impacts of cumulative development, would result in a cumulatively significant impact on cultural resources and TCRs. This analysis then considers whether incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project would be significant. Both conditions must apply for a project’s cumulative effects to rise to the level of significance.
Future development within the cumulative geographic scope could have significant cumulative impacts on known or previously unidentified cultural resources and TCRs. However, development within the cumulative geographic context would be required to comply with federal, State, and local laws and policies that protect cultural and TCRs, including the provisions of SB 18 and AB 52, Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, and Sections 5024.1 and 5097 of the Public Resources Code. Compliance with these policies may also require development projects to prepare site-specific project-level analysis to fulfill CEQA requirements, which also would include additional consultation that could lead to the identification of potential site-specific cultural and TCRs. Accordingly, because cumulative development would be required to comply with long-term planning documents, and regulatory agency policies (including, but not limited to, evaluation requirements and inadvertent discovery procedures) that reduce impacts to potential cultural and TCRs, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Moreover, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to these less than significant cumulative impacts would not be significant with implementation of the policies and actions proposed in the SEDA Specific Plan. As analyzed above, Policy CR-3.1 requires that surveys for cultural resources are conducted for all projects in the SEDA Specific Plan Area by a qualified professional Archaeologist as appropriate and that appropriate mitigation measures are implemented should archaeological resources be discovered. Policy CR-3.2 requires that, if any previously undocumented cultural materials discovered during construction of a project in the SEDA Specific Plan Area all ground- disturbing activity shall be suspended temporarily within a 100-foot radius of the find or a distance determined by a qualified professional Archaeologist. The Archaeologist shall determine potential City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.5-33
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-05 Cultural-Tribal Cultural Resources.docx significance and appropriate mitigation measures. Policy CR-3.3 requires that, if human remains are uncovered during construction in the SEDA Specific Plan Area, all ground-disturbing activities shall immediately be suspended within a 100-foot radius of the find or a distance determined by a qualified Archaeologist to be appropriate based on the potential for disturbance of additional remains. The proposed project would also be required to comply with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, which is incorporated as Article 16 in the City’s Municipal Code.
As discussed under Impacts CUL-1 through CUL-5, as the City receives development applications for subsequent development under the proposed project, those applications would be reviewed by the City for compliance with the policies of the General Plan, the SEDA Specific Plan, the provisions of SB 18 and AB 52, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and other relevant federal, State, and local regulations that protect cultural and TCRs, including Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and Sections 5024.1 and 5097 of the Public Resources Code. Future individual development projects would further be required to comply with MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, and MM CUL-3, described above.
Other municipalities within the cumulative geographic context have adopted similar policies to preserve and protect known or previously unidentified cultural and TCRs. Therefore, cumulative impacts from implementation of the proposed project would not result in a considerable incremental contribution to cumulative impacts to cultural and TCRs. In addition, the SEDA Specific Plan contains policies to protect cultural and TCRs, and future development within the cumulative geographic context would be required to comply with regulations set forth by local, State, and federal agencies to protect cultural and TCRs. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Cumulative Mitigation Measures
Implement MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, and MM CUL-3.
Level of Cumulative Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx
3.6 - Energy
3.6.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing energy setting in the project area as well as the relevant regulatory framework. This section also evaluates the possible impacts related to energy that could result from implementation of the project. Information in this section is based, in part, on project- specific energy calculation outputs included in Appendix E. No public comments were received during the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Draft PEIR) scoping period related to energy.
3.6.2 - Existing Setting
Energy Basics
Energy is generally transmitted either in the form of electricity, measured in kilowatts (kW)1 or megawatts (MW),2 or natural gas measured in British Thermal Units (BTU), or cubic feet.3 Fuel, such as gasoline or diesel, is measured in gallons or liters.
Electricity
Electricity is used primarily for lighting, appliances, and other uses associated with the project.
Natural Gas
Natural gas is used primarily for heating, water heating, and cooking purposes and is typically associated with commercial and residential uses.
Fuel
Fuel is used primarily for powering off-road equipment, trucks, and passenger vehicles. The typical fuel types used are diesel and gasoline.
Electricity Generation, Distribution, and Use
State of California
The State of California generates approximately 206,336 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity.
Approximately 43.0 percent of the energy generation is sourced from natural gas, 32.1 percent from renewable sources (i.e., solar, wind, and geothermal), 16.5 percent from large hydroelectric sources, and the remaining 8.4 percent is sourced from coal, nuclear, oil, and other nonrenewable sources.4 In 2021, California was the nation’s top producer of electricity from solar, geothermal, and biomass energy. The State was fourth in the nation in conventional hydroelectric power generation, down from second in 2019, in part because of drought and increased water demand. In 2021, California
1 1 kW = 1.000 watts; A watt is a derived unit of power that measure rate of energy conversion. 1 watt is equivalent to work being done at a rate of 1 joule of energy per second. In electrical terms, 1 watt is the power dissipated by a current of 1 ampere flowing across a resistance of 1 volt.
2 1 MW = 1 million watts
3 A unit for quantity of heat that equals 100,000 British Thermal Units (BTUs). BTU is the quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of 1 pound of liquid water 1°F (degree Fahrenheit) at a constant pressure of 1 atmosphere. 4 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. 2019 Total System Electric Generation. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data- reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-generation/2019. Accessed June 30, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx was the fourth-largest electricity producer in the nation. In 2019, California was the second largest total energy consumer among the states, but its per capita energy consumption was less than in all other states except Rhode Island, due in part to its mild climate and its energy efficiency programs.
Electricity and natural gas are distributed through the various electric load-serving entities (LSEs) in California. These entities include investor-owned utilities (IOUs), publicly owned LSEs, rural electric cooperatives, community choice aggregators, and electric service providers.5 Fresno County
End-use electricity and gas customers in Fresno County are served solely by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to meet electrical power demands. As of 2019, PG&E’s portfolio contains 30 percent electricity generated from renewable sources.6
The smallest scale at which electricity consumption information is readily available is the county level. Therefore, electricity consumption in Fresno County is used herein to generally characterize the City’s existing electricity consumption. Fresno County includes several incorporated cities and a large unincorporated area. According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), Fresno County consumed approximately 7,444.9 GWh in 2019.7 Note that year 2019 was used over reporting year 2020 to present a pre-COVID-19 pandemic level of energy usage.
Project Site
The project site contains open space and natural features, as well as existing development, such as residential, commercial, light industrial, and agricultural uses, that currently use electricity from existing utilities.
Natural Gas Generation, Distribution, and Use
State of California
Natural gas is used for everything from generating electricity to cooking and space heating to an alternative transportation fuel. In 2020, total natural gas demand in California for residential, commercial, industrial, vehicle fuel, and electric power generation was 2,019 billion cubic feet per year (BCF/year), up from 2,108 BCF/year in 2016. Demand in all sectors except vehicle fuel has remained relatively flat but demand for vehicle fuel rose 33 percent between 2016 and 2021.8 Natural gas-fired generation has become the dominant source of electricity in California; it fuels about 43 percent of electricity consumption, followed by hydroelectric power. Because natural gas is a resource that provides load when the availability of hydroelectric power generation and/or other sources decrease, use varies greatly from year to year. The availability of hydroelectric resources, the
5 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2019. Electric Load-Serving Entities (LSEs) in California. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/utilities.html. Accessed June 24, 2022. 6 Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2020. Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability Report. 7 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2020. “Electricity Consumption by County.” Website:
https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx. Accessed June 24, 2022. 8 United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022. Natural Gas Consumption by End Use. Website:
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/NG_CONS_SUM_DCU_SCA_A.htm. Accessed June 30, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx emergence of renewable resources for electricity generation, and overall consumer demand are the variables that shape natural gas use in electric generation.9 Fresno County
The City of Fresno is served solely by PG&E to meet natural gas demands. PG&E has detailed information regarding a commitment to use renewable gas sources in the future but has not provided a current figure for renewable gas in their portfolio.
The smallest scale at which natural gas consumption information is readily available is at the county level; therefore, natural gas consumption in Fresno County is used herein to also characterize the City’s existing natural gas consumption. According to the CEC, Fresno County consumed approximately 352.2 million U.S. therms of natural gas in 2019, or approximately 35,220 billion BTU.10 Note that year 2019 was used over reporting year 2020 to present a pre-COVID-19 pandemic level of energy usage.
Project Site
The project site contains existing development such as residential, commercial, and agricultural uses, that currently use natural gas from existing utilities.
Fuel Use
State of California
The main category of fuel use in California is transportation fuel, especially refined petroleum products. California is the second largest consumer of refined petroleum products, after Texas, consuming approximately 524 million barrels of petroleum and accounting for approximately 7.9 percent of U.S. consumption in 2020. The transportation sector uses approximately 85 percent of the petroleum consumed in the State. Natural gas is the second largest transportation fuel used in California. California is the second largest consumer of natural gas after Texas, and the transportation sector’s consumption of compressed natural gas vehicle fuel consumed 1 percent of California’s total consumption.11
Project Site
The project site contains existing development, such as residential, commercial, and agricultural uses, that currently use generate vehicle trips and subsequent fuel use.
9 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. Supply and Demand of Natural Gas in California. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/californias-natural-gas-market/supply-and-demand-natural-gas-california.
Accessed June 30, 2022.
10 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2020. Gas Consumption by County. Website: https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx.
Accessed June 24, 2022.
11 United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022. California State Energy Profile. Website:
https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=CA. Accessed June 29, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx
3.6.3 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
Energy Independence and Security Act
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 created the Renewable Fuel Standard program. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 expanded this program by:
• Expanding the Renewable Fuel Standard program to include diesel in addition to gasoline; • Increasing the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into transportation fuel from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022; • Establishing new categories of renewable fuel and setting separate volume requirements for each one; and
• Requiring the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to apply lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) performance threshold standards to ensure that each category of renewable fuel emits fewer GHGs than the petroleum fuel it replaces.
This expanded Renewable Fuel Standard program lays the foundation for achieving substantial reductions of GHG emissions from the use of renewable fuels, reducing the use of imported petroleum, and encouraging the development and expansion of the nation’s renewable fuels sector.
Signed on December 19, 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 aims to:
• Move the United States toward greater energy independence and security. • Increase the production of clean renewable fuels.
• Protect consumers.
• Increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles. • Promote research on and deploy GHG capture and storage options. • Improve the energy performance of the federal government. • Increase U.S. energy security, develop renewable fuel production, and improve vehicle fuel economy.
EISA reinforces the energy reduction goals for federal agencies put forth in Executive Order 13423, which strengthens federal environmental, energy, and transportation management. It also introduces more aggressive requirements. The three key provisions enacted are the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, the Renewable Fuel Standard, and the appliance/lighting efficiency standards.
EPA is committed to developing, implementing, and revising both regulations and voluntary programs under the following subtitles in EISA, among others:
• Increased Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards
• Federal Vehicle Fleets
• Renewable Fuel Standard
• Biofuels Infrastructure
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-5
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx • Carbon Capture and Sequestration12
EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards Final Rule Congress first passed the Corporate Average Fuel Economy law in 1975 to increase the fuel economy of cars and light-duty trucks. The law has become more stringent over time. On May 19, 2009, the President put in motion a new national policy to increase fuel economy for all new cars and trucks sold in the United States. On April 1, 2010, the EPA and the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced a joint final rule establishing a national program that would reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel economy for new cars and trucks sold in the United States.
The first phase of the national program would apply to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, covering model years 2012 through 2016. They required these vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of CO2 per mile, equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon if the automobile industry were to meet this CO2 level solely through fuel economy improvements. Together, these standards would cut CO2 emissions by an estimated 960 million metric tons and 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program (model years 2012-2016).
The EPA and the NHTSA issued final rules on a second phase joint rulemaking, establishing national standards for light-duty vehicles for model years 2017 through 2025 in August 2012. 13 The new
standards for model years 2017 through 2025 apply to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles. The final standards are projected to result in an average industry fleet wide level of 163 grams/mile of CO2 in model year 2025, which is equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon (mpg) if achieved exclusively through fuel economy improvements.
The EPA and NHTSA issued final rules for the first national standards to reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel efficiency of heavy-duty trucks and buses on September 15, 2011, which became effective November 14, 2011. For combination tractors, the agencies proposed engine and vehicle standards that began in the 2014 model year and achieve up to a 20 percent reduction in CO2 emissions and fuel consumption by the 2018 model year. For heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, the agencies proposed separate gasoline and diesel truck standards, which phased in starting in the 2014 model year and achieve up to a 10 percent reduction for gasoline vehicles and a 15 percent reduction for diesel vehicles by 2018 model year (12 and 17 percent respectively if accounting for air conditioning leakage). Lastly, for vocational vehicles, the engine and vehicle standards would achieve up to a 10 percent reduction in fuel consumption and CO 2 emissions from the 2014 to 2018 model
years.
The State of California has received a waiver from the EPA to have separate, stricter Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. Although global climate change did not become an international
12 United States Environment Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. Summary of the Energy Independence and Security Act. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-energy-independence-and-security-act. Accessed June 24, 2022. 13 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2012. EPA and NHTSA Set Standards to Reduce Greenhouse Gases and Improve Fuel Economy for Model Years 2017-2025 Cars and Light Trucks.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-6 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx concern until the 1980s, efforts to reduce energy consumption began in California in response to the oil crisis in the 1970s, resulting in the incidental reduction of GHG emissions. In order to manage the State’s energy needs and promote energy efficiency, Assembly Bill (AB) 1575 created the CEC in 1975.
California AB 1493: Pavley Regulations and Fuel Efficiency Standards California AB 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks. Implementation of the regulation was delayed by lawsuits filed by automakers and by the EPA’s denial of an implementation waiver. The EPA subsequently granted the requested waiver in 2009, which was upheld by the by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011. 14 The standards were phased in during the 2009 through 2016 model years. When fully phased in, the near-term (2009–2012) standards would result in an approximately 22 percent reduction compared with the 2002 fleet, and the mid-term (2013–2016) standards would result in about a 30 percent reduction.
The second phase of the implementation for the Pavley Bill was incorporated into Amendments to the Low-Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program referred to as LEV III or the Advanced Clean Cars program.
The Advanced Clean Car program combines the control of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2017 through 2025.
The regulation will reduce GHGs from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025. The new rules will reduce pollutants from gasoline and diesel-powered cars, and deliver increasing numbers of zero-emission technologies, such as full battery electric cars, newly emerging plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The regulations will also ensure adequate fueling infrastructure is available for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California.
15 California Code of Regulations Title 13: Motor Vehicles California Code of Regulations, Title 13: Division 3, Chapter 10, Article 1, Section 2485: Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling 16 seeks to reduce
public exposure to diesel particulate matter (DPM) and other air contaminants by establishing idling restrictions, emission standards, and other requirements for heavy-duty diesel engines and alternative idle reduction technologies to limit the idling of diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles.
Any person that owns, operates, or causes to operate any diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicle must not allow a vehicle to idle for more than 5 consecutive minutes at any location or operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system for greater than 5 minutes at any location when within 100 feet of a restricted area.
14 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2013. Clean Car Standards—Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/californias-greenhouse-gas-vehicle-emission-standards-under-assembly-bill-1493-2002-pavley. Accessed June 24, 2022.
15 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2011. Status of Scoping Plan Recommended Measures. 16 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2004. Final Regulation Order, Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-7
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx California Code of Regulations, Title 13: Division 3, Chapter 9, Article 4.8, Section 2449:
General Requirements for In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets.
This measure regulates oxides of nitrogen (NOX), DPM, and other criteria pollutant emissions from in-use off-road diesel-fueled vehicles. This measure also requires each fleet to meet fleet average requirements or demonstrate that it has met Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirements. Additionally, this measure requires medium and large fleets to have a written idling policy that is made available to operators of the vehicles informing them that idling is limited to 5 consecutive minutes or less.
California Senate Bill 1078: Renewable Electricity Standards On September 12, 2002, Governor Gray Davis signed Senate Bill (SB) 1078, requiring California to generate 20 percent of its electricity from renewable energy by 2017. SB 107 changed the due date to 2010 instead of 2017. On November 17, 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-14-08, which established a Renewable Portfolio Standard target for California requiring that all retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020. Governor Schwarzenegger also directed the ARB (Executive Order S-21-09) to adopt a regulation by July 31, 2010, requiring the State’s LSEs to meet a 33 percent renewable energy target by 2020. The ARB Board approved the Renewable Electricity Standard on September 23, 2010, by Resolution 10-23.
California S 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act In 2015, the State legislature approved and the Governor signed SB 350 which reaffirms California’s commitment to reducing its GHG emissions and addressing climate change. Key provisions include an increase in the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS), higher energy efficiency requirements for buildings, initial strategies toward a regional electricity grid, and improved infrastructure for electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. Provisions for a 50 percent reduction in the use of petroleum statewide were removed from the Bill due to opposition and concern that it would prevent the Bill’s passage. Specifically, SB 350 requires the following to reduce Statewide GHG emissions:
• Increase the amount of electricity procured from renewable energy sources from 33 percent to 50 percent by 2030, with interim targets of 40 percent by 2024, and 25 percent by 2027. • Double the energy efficiency in existing buildings by 2030. This target will be achieved through the California Public Utility Commission, the CEC, and local publicly owned utilities. • Reorganize the Independent System Operator (ISO) to develop more regional electrify transmission markets and to improve accessibility in these markets, which will facilitate the growth of renewable energy markets in the western United States.17
California Code of Regulations Title 24
Part 6 (Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings) California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6 (California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings), was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow
17 California Legislative Information (California LegInfo). 2015. Senate Bill 350 Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015. Website:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB350. Accessed June 24, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-8 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx consideration and possible incorporation of new energy-efficient technologies and methods. Energy- efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases GHG emissions. The latest 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards went into effect on January 1, 2020, and the newly updated 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards will go into effect on January 1, 2023.18
Part 11 (California Green Building Standards Code)
California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11, is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial, and school buildings that went in effect January 1, 2011. The Code is updated on a regular basis, with the most recent update consisting of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) that became effective January 1, 2023. 19 Local jurisdictions are
permitted to adopt more stringent requirements, as State law provides methods for local enhancements. CALGreen recognizes that many jurisdictions have developed existing construction and demolition ordinances and defers to them as the ruling guidance provided they provide a minimum 50 percent diversion requirement. CALGreen also provides exemptions for areas not served by construction and demolition recycling infrastructure. California State Building Code provides the minimum standard that buildings need to meet in order to be certified for occupancy, which is generally enforced by the local building official.
California Public Utilities Code
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) regulates privately owned telecommunication, electric, natural gas, water, railroad, rail transit, and passenger transportation companies. It is the responsibility of the CPUC to (1) assure California utility customers safe, reliable utility service at reasonable rates; (2) protect utility customers from fraud; and (3) promote a healthy California economy. The Public Utilities Code, adopted by the legislature, defines the jurisdiction of the CPUC.
Local
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan (General Plan) was adopted in 2014 and contains the following goals and policies related to energy:
Resource Conservation and Resiliency Element
Objective RC-2 Promote land uses that conserve resources.
Policy RC-2-a Link Land Use to Transportation. Promote mixed-use, higher density infill development in multi-modal corridors. Support land use patterns that make more efficient use of the transportation system and plan future transportation investments in areas of higher-intensity development. Discourage investment in infrastructure that would not meet these criteria.
18 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. 19 California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). 2016. Green Building Standards.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx Policy RC-5-f Toolkit. Provide residents and project applicants with a “toolkit” of feasible measures that can be used to reduce GHG emissions, including educational materials on energy-efficient and “climate-friendly” products.
Policy RC-6-d Recycled Water. Prepare, Adopt, and implement a City of Fresno Recycled Water Master Plan.
Objective RC-7 Promote water conservation through standards, incentives, and capital investments.
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 US Bureau of Reclamation Best Management Practices for water consideration 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 Plan Area.
• Expand efforts to educate the public about water supply issues and water conservation techniques.
Policy RC-7-b Water Pricing and Metering. Develop a tiered water cost structure for both residential and commercial users that will properly price water based on its true cost; require all new development to be metered for water use; and charge all customers the true, full cost of their water supply, including costs of acquisition, initial treatment, conveyance, wastewater treatment, operations, maintenance, and remediation.
Policy RC-7-c Best Practices for Conservation. Require all City facilities and all new private development to follow US 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—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx Policy RC-7-h Landscape Water Conservation Standards. Refine landscape water conservation standards that will apply to new development installed landscapes, building on the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and other State regulations:
• Evaluate and apply, as appropriate, augmented xeriscape, “water wise,” and “green gardening” practices to be implemented in public and private landscaping design and maintenance.
• Facilitate implementation of the State’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance by developing alternative compliance measures that are easy to understand and observe.
Objective RC-8 Reduce the consumption of nonrenewable energy resources by requiring and encouraging conservation measures and the use of alternative energy sources.
Policy RC-8-a Existing Standards and Programs. Continue existing beneficial energy conservation programs, including adhering to the California Energy Code in new construction and major renovations.
Policy RC-8-b Energy Reduction Targets. Strive to reduce per capita residential electricity use to 1,800 kWh per year and nonresidential electricity use to 2,700 kWh per year per capita by developing and implementing incentives, design and operation standards, promoting alternative energy sources, and cost-effective savings.
Policy RC-8-c Energy Conservation in New Development. Consider providing an incentive program for new buildings that exceed California Energy Code requirements by 15 percent.
Policy RC-8-d Incentives. Establish an incentive program for residential developers who commit to building all of their homes to ENERGY STAR performance guidelines.
Policy RC-8-e Energy Use Disclosure. Promote compliance with State law mandating disclosure of a building’s energy data and rating of the previous year to prospective buyers and lessees of the entire building or lenders financing the entire building.
Policy RC-8-f City Heating and Cooling. Reduce energy use at City facilities by updating heating and cooling equipment and installing “smart lighting” where feasible and economically viable.
Policy RC-8-g Resolving Energy Fund. Create a City Energy Fund which uses first year savings and rebates from completed City-owned energy efficiency projects to provide resources for additional energy projects. Dedicate this revolving fund to the sole use of energy efficiency projects that will pay back into the fund.
Policy RC-8-h Solar Assistance. Identify and publicize information about financial mechanisms for private solar installations and provide over-the-counter permitting for solar City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx installations meeting specified standards, which may include maximum size (in kV) of units that can be so approved.
Policy RC-8-i Renewable Target. Adopt and implement a program to increase the use of renewable energy to meet a given percentage of the City’s peak electrical load within a given time frame.
Policy RC-8-j Alternative Fuel Network. Support the development of a network of integrated charging and alternate fuel station for both public and private vehicles, and if feasible, open up municipal stations to the public as part of network development.
Policy RC-8-k Energy Efficiency Education. Provide long-term and ongoing education of homeowners and businesses as to the value of energy efficiency and the need to upgrade existing structures on the regular basis as technology improves and structures age.
Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan
The Fresno Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Specific Plan is framed within three significant and interrelated goals: fiscal responsibility, social equity, and environmental sustainability. The proposed Specific Plan and policies that form its implementation framework are formulated and coordinated to meet the criteria of these overlapping goals. The proposed Specific Plan contains the following objectives and policies related to energy:
Housing Choice and Affordability
Objective HC-3 Link housing and transportation together to limit family expenditures on both housing and transportation. The multimodal transportation network connects housing and jobs within the Southeast Development Area and to other major regional centers, facilitating internal travel by non-automobile means. The Urban Form Chapter addresses the location, distribution, and standards for transportation infrastructure investment, combining transportation options with land use development to ultimately lower travel costs for SEDA residents and employees.
Policy HC-3.3 Smart Land Uses. Build smaller-lot single-family and multifamily housing types which use less energy and water than larger units.
Open Space, Schools and Public Facilities
Objective OS-2 Create and maintain an open space network that serves multiple purposes, including recreation, stormwater management, community farming, and environmental preservation.
Policy OS-2.5 Renewable Energy Generation. Support renewable energy technology systems in open spaces, where appropriate.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx • Pursue arrangements with public agencies and private partners to accommodate renewable energy systems, such as solar arrays, in areas that can serve a joint use as passive open space.
Objective OS-6 Ensure that all park, trail, and recreational facilities make the most efficient use of energy, water, and other natural resources.
Policy OS-6.1 Green Building. As important civic structures, park buildings shall conform to green building standards for energy and water efficiency.
Policy OS-6.3 Renewable Energy Systems. Explore developing renewable energy systems to provide power to park facilities.
Objective OS-10 Civic facilities, such as libraries, community centers, senior centers, post offices, and other civic buildings, will be integrated into the urban fabric of centers and communities, and will be well-served by public transit, paths, and trails.
Policy OS-10.5 On-Site Renewable Energy Generation. Pursue opportunities to develop renewable energy systems for civic facilities.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Conservation
Policy RC-1.4 Energy Conservation Strategies. Although new residential development now must meet zero-net-energy requirements, there is still a need to conserve energy to reduce GHG emissions. Energy use in buildings is the second largest generator of GHG emissions after transportation. The following policies will help accomplish needed GHG reductions:
a) Consider developing an incentive program in SEDA for new buildings that exceed the California Energy Code requirements by 15 percent. b) Encourage and reward compliance with voluntary energy conservation certification programs such LEED®, EnergyStar, or Greenpoint Rating systems. c) Promote compliance with State law mandating disclosure of a building’s energy data and rating of the previous year to prospective buyers and lessees of the entire building or lenders financing the entire building. d) Partner with PG&E or other organization to offer a home energy retrofit program to existing homeowners in the SEDA. Ensure that solar retrofits are made available to existing homeowners.
Policy RC-1.5 Waste Diversion, Recycling, & Energy Recovery. Establishing programs and actions that promote recycling and diversion of waste from landfills can reduce energy consumed in the transport and handling of the waste material and can reduce the greenhouse gases that are emitted during the decomposition of organic waste.
The State of California has adopted increasingly stringent mandates for the percentage of solid waste that can be disposed in landfills. In addition, certain City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx landfills are mandated to install methane capture systems to result in greenhouse gas reductions from these sources. The effects of methane are powerful—as it is 21 times more effective than carbon dioxide in retaining heat in the atmosphere.
Methane can be flared, producing mainly carbon dioxide or used in combustion devices to generate heat or power that can be used for productive purposes displacing the use of fossil fuels. The following policies are recommended in the SEDA to reduce GHGs and conserve energy:
1. 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:
a) Continue to require recyclable material collection and storage areas in all residential development.
b) 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. c) Provide educational materials to residents on how and what to recycle and how to dispose of hazardous waste.
d) Provide recycling canisters and collection in public areas where trash cans are also provided.
e) Institute a program to evaluate major waste generators and identify recycling opportunities for their facilities and operations. f) Continue to partner with the California Integrated Waste Management Board on waste diversion and recycling programs and the CalMax (California Materials Exchange) program.
g) 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.
h) Evaluate the feasibility of “carbon footprinting” for the City’s wastewater treatment facilities, biomass and composting operations, solid waste collection and recycling programs.
i) Expand yard waste collection to divert compostable waste from landfills. j) 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.
2. Create a strategic and operations plan for fulfilling the City Council resolution committing the City of Fresno to a Zero Waste goal.
3. Continue to pursue opportunities to reduce air pollution by using methane gas from the old City landfill and the City’s wastewater treatment process.
Policy RC-1.6 Municipal Facilities. SEDA will include a range of municipal facilities from streetlights to parks and open spaces to community centers and police and fire City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx facilities. It is important to include greenhouse gas reductions and energy conservation at City facilities, over which the City has direct control and can allocate resources for this purpose. In addition, implementing these measures at City facilities also establishes the City as a leader in GHG reduction and conservation, which is important as it implements these measures on a citywide basis. The following are potential citywide actions that can be initiated within the SEDA as opportunity allows:
a) Improve energy efficiency in City operations.
b) Exceed Title 24 energy efficiency standards for new City buildings. c) Install renewable energy systems on City facilities. d) Implement City operated transportation demand management for City employees.
e) Purchase green vehicles for City fleets.
f) Enhance reduction, reuse and recycling efforts at City facilities. g) Implement water efficient landscaping in City parks and facilities. h) Establish a green purchasing program.
Policy RC-1.7 Urban Forestry Program. Encouraging the integration and protection of new and existing mature trees within our communities can lead to significant reductions in the urban heat island effect and energy required for cooling. As another significant benefit, trees also store harmful carbon as they grow, in a process known as sequestration. As these trees continue to grow, mature and sequester carbon, it is also important for urban forestry projects to consider potential tree emissions that result from the maintenance and ultimate disposition of trees to ensure a net decrease in greenhouse gas emissions occurs.
Maintaining trees, vegetation and plants throughout City parks is important to the success and longevity of these publicly owned spaces. In addition, these areas provide opportunities for new tree planting and replacement of tree species that possess a low potential to store carbon, with tree species that possess higher carbon storage potential. To better understand how to achieve these opportunities, there are many tools that communities can utilize. The Climate Action Reserve, Urban Forest Project Reporting Protocol (CAR 2019) provides criteria for generating greenhouse gas emission offsets with tree planting along with procedures for project monitoring.
Development of the SEDA will present many opportunities for the strategic planting of trees with high carbon storage potential, as noted below:
a) Develop a tree palette for the SEDA that reinforces its sense of place, reflects native species, and includes tree species with high carbon storage potential. b) Meet parks shading targets noted in the Parks Master Plan. c) Plant shade trees to delineate corridors and the boundaries of urban areas, and to provide tree canopy for bike lanes, sidewalks, parking lots, and trails.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx Objective RC-2 Integrate water supply, treatment and delivery, and flood control and stormwater planning in the Southeast Development Area.
Policy RC-2.1 Energy Planning. Support cooperative, multi-agency water and energy resource planning involving the City of Fresno and other local jurisdictions, water and flood control agencies, the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization and Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
Objective RC-6 Develop sufficient wet utility infrastructure to meet the demand created by new development within the Southeast Development Area, applying cost-effective and low-impact strategies to the extent possible.
Policy RC-6.4 Shared Resources and Infrastructure. Develop methods and systems to share resources, infrastructure, and to capture the highest possible value for all public agencies. Resource-sharing strategies and plans shall be included in the SEDA Infrastructure Financing Plan.
• Energy Generation: Evaluate the potential to generate energy and heat from wastewater treatment facilities.
• Biodigestion: Study opportunities to treat wastewater sludge and organic waste to capture methane, alcohols, fertilizers, and other fuels to transform into renewable energies.
• Wastewater Treatment Plants: Require treatment facilities to separate wastewater solids for energy generation and water for irrigation in the SEDA. • Safety and Access Standards for Facilities: Develop facilities design and management standards that address public safety and access issues.
Economic Opportunity
Objective EO-2 Target economic growth in industries in which Fresno has a competitive advantage.
Policy EO-2.2 Local and Regional Economic Opportunity chapter. Coordinate with other local and regional economic development efforts to build on opportunities presented by new development in the SEDA. This includes plans and programs within the City of Fresno Economic Development Department, as well as any related efforts.
Objective EO-3 Support growth in clean energy and agricultural technologies, tapping into broad demand from the local to national level and beyond. Citywide strategies should be developed to align with and build upon the goals and policies of the Southeast Development Area Specific Plan.
Policy EO-3.1 Collaboration with the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJVCEO).
Work with the SJVCEO to attract projects and investments to the SEDA, promoting it as a key location in which to implement emerging clean energy. Local renewable energy projects can capitalize on Fresno’s abundant solar and biomass resources.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-16 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx Policy EO-3.2 Coordination with California State University, Fresno. Build on partnerships with California State University, Fresno to develop programs and projects to attract funding for research and development in the following areas:
A. Agricultural technology
B. Clean energy technology
C. Green building technology
D. Value-added manufacturing technology
E. Water and wastewater technology
F. City and Regional Planning
Objective EO-5 Expand the economic base and fiscal sustainability of the City by supporting high sales, property values, and employment intensity per acre for economic development in key locations throughout the Southeast Development Area.
Policy EO-5.4 Employment in Open Space Network. Develop the open space network to support employment opportunities.
• Support small-scale farms in rural cluster areas.
• Support agricultural research in open space areas.
• Support the development of clean energy systems within the open space network (e.g., solar farms in parks, flood basins).
Fresno Municipal Code
Fresno Municipal Code, Chapter 11, Article 1, SEC. 11-108 (California Energy Code) states that the California Energy Code, 2019 Edition, is adopted by the City of Fresno and incorporated into the Code and shall be referred to as the Fresno Energy Code.
SEC. 11-109 (California Green Building Standards) states that the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022 Edition, which may be referred to in the Code as CALGreen, is adopted by the City of Fresno and incorporated into the Code and shall be referred to as the Fresno CALGreen Code.
Therefore, future developments within the Plan Area would be required to comply with the Fresno Energy Code and Fresno CALGreen Code.
3.6.4 - Methodology
A discussion of the proposed project’s energy use is presented below. The proposed project’s anticipated energy use was estimated, including natural gas, electricity, and fuel consumption (for vehicles traveling to and from the project), for project construction and operation. Energy calculations are included as Appendix E of this Recirculated Draft PEIR analysis.
3.6.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The Lead Agency utilizes the criteria in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist as thresholds to determine whether impacts related to energy City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-17
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx are significant environmental effects. The project would have a significant impact on the environment if it would:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
3.6.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the development of the project and provides mitigation measures where appropriate. This Recirculated Draft PEIR contemplates implementation of the Fresno SEDA Specific Plan; future discretionary projects facilitated by the proposed project will be evaluated for project-specific energy impacts at the time they are proposed.
Energy Use
Impact ENER-1: The proposed project would not result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.
Implementation of the proposed project would utilize energy resources during construction and operational activities. Energy resources that would be potentially impacted include electricity, natural gas, and petroleum-based fuel supplies and distribution systems. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy.
Construction Energy Usage
During construction, the proposed project would result in energy consumption through the combustion of fossil fuels in construction vehicles, worker commute vehicles, and construction equipment and the use of electricity for temporary buildings, lighting, and other sources. It is not anticipated that natural gas would be consumed as part of project construction. Fossil fuels used for construction vehicles and other energy-consuming equipment would be used during site clearing, grading, paving, and building construction. The types of equipment could include gasoline- and diesel-powered construction and transportation equipment, including trucks, bulldozers, frontend loaders, forklifts, and cranes.
Based on CalEEMod estimations within the modeling output files used to estimate GHG emissions associated with future development projects, under the proposed project construction-related vehicle trips would result in approximately 5,576.3 million Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and consume an estimated 294,072,433 gallons of gasoline and diesel combined during future development projects’ construction phases (Appendix B). 20 Additionally, on-site construction
20 C onstruction-related vehicle fuel was calculated by dividing the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for each phase of construction by the corresponding fuel efficiencies. The EMFAC2017 web database was used to calculate fuel efficiencies based on worker, vendor, and hauling fleet mixes, and VMT was calculated by multiplying trip length by number of trips for each phase of construction. These calculations and assumptions can be found in Appendix B.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-18 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx equipment would consume an estimated 861,427 gallons of diesel fuel (Appendix B).21 Limitations on idling of vehicles and equipment and requirements that equipment be properly maintained would result in fuel savings. California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2449 and 2485, limit idling from both on-road and off-road diesel-powered equipment and are enforced by the ARB.
Additionally, given the cost of fuel, contractors and owners have a strong financial incentive to avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy during construction.
Other equipment could include construction lighting, field services (office trailers), and electrically driven equipment such as pumps and other tools. Because of the temporary nature of construction and the financial incentives for developers and contractors to use energy-consuming resources in an efficient manner, the construction phase of the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy.
Furthermore, as required by Fresno Municipal Code, Chapter 11, Article 1, SEC. 11-108 and SEC. 11- 109, new development would be subject to energy conservation requirements in the California Energy Code (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 24, Part 6, of the, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings) and CALGreen (CCR Title 24, Part 11). Based on standards for new construction established by the State and adherence to the development standards in the Municipal Code, activities associated with implementation of the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy.
Pursuant to the Municipal Code, the City would review development proposals prior to the approval of development plans to ensure that sufficient energy resources and facilities are available and that the development complies with energy conservation and efficiency standards of Title 24 and the Municipal Code. Additionally, implementation of the proposed project’s policies would help to minimize the effects of growth and development on energy resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project will have a less than significant impact under this criterion.
Operation Energy Usage
Implementation of the proposed project may result in the development of approximately 45,000 homes, as well as the development of office centers, flexible research and development districts, and institutional uses within the nearly 9,000-acre Plan Area by the year 2050. Operation of future developments envisioned as a part of the proposed project would consume natural gas and electricity for building heating and power, lighting, and water conveyance, among other operational requirements. The electrical consumption and natural gas usage associated with the potential development have been calculated in the CalEEMod model, which estimates that the potential development would consume 500,083,800 kWh of electricity per year and 1,200,642,400 kilo-British Thermal Units (kBTU) of natural gas per year. All CalEEMod modeling output files and energy consumption estimates are contained in Appendix B.
Future development projects would be designed and constructed in accordance with the City’s latest adopted energy efficiency standards, which are based on the California Title 24 energy efficiency
21 On- site construction fuel consumption is the sum of diesel fuel usage of each type of equipment during each phase of construction.
Diesel fuel usage was calculated for each type of construction equipment by multiplying the number of pieces of equipment by usage hours by horsepower by load factor by number of days and by an estimated fuel usage value of 0.05 gallons of diesel fuel per horsepower-hour. These calculations and assumptions can be found in Appendix B.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-19
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx standards. Title 24 standards include a broad set of energy conservation requirements that apply to the structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems in a building. For example, the Title 24 Lighting Power Density requirements define the maximum wattage of lighting that can be used in a building based on its square footage. Title 24 additionally requires new low-rise residential developments to include rooftop solar systems meeting a minimum system capacity consistent with calculations contained in Title 24, Part 6, Subchapter 8. Title 24 standards, widely regarded as the most advanced energy efficiency standards, would help to reduce the amount of energy required for lighting, water heating, and heating and air conditioning in buildings and promote energy conservation. Additionally, implementation of the General Plan and the proposed project’s policies would help to minimize the effects of growth and development on energy resources. The General Plan, and the guiding principles of the Fresno SEDA Specific Plan, promote higher density housing development in proximity to mixed-use areas and transit options. The plans and policies in the General Plan encourage alternative transit options through the creation of bicycle and pedestrian paths to improve the bikeability and walkability in the Plan Area.
Additionally, the General Plan includes numerous policies and implementation programs focused on improving the sustainability of the City, including reducing the consumption of non-renewable energy resources by requiring and encouraging conservation measures and the use of alternative energy sources (Policies RC-8-a through RC-8-k) and incentives for affordable housing providers, agencies, and non-profit and market rate developers to use Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED
TM) and CALGreen Tier 1 or Tier 2 standards or third party equivalents (Policy HC-3-d).
Moreover, the energy efficiency of buildings is expected to continue to increase and improve throughout the life of the project as new energy efficiency standards are established. Similarly, the proposed project includes Policy RC-1.4 which includes Energy Conservation Strategies and incentives for residential projects.
Plans submitted for building permits of development projects in the project area would be required to include verification demonstrating compliance with the Building and Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Non-Residential Buildings in effect at the time building permits are issued. These standards are updated every 3 years, with the latest update (2022) having gone into effect on January 1, 2023. The proposed project would also be required to adhere to the provisions of CALGreen, which established planning and design standards for sustainable site development, energy efficiency (beyond the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and internal air contaminants. Additionally, because developments that would be considered under the proposed project have not been designed or proposed at this time, potential improvements to the current energy and natural gas facilities would be identified at the time such projects are considered. Therefore, with adherence to Title 24 regulations and the objectives and policies included in the approved General Plan and the proposed Specific Plan, the proposed project would not result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation.
Furthermore, compliance with recommended mitigation for potential Air Quality and GHG impacts included as part of this Recirculated Draft PEIR would reduce energy usage from the proposed project by requiring energy efficiency measures that go beyond the Title 24 and CALGreen standards, City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-20 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx including the use of energy-efficient building design and materials and EV infrastructure. These mitigation measures will further reduce the potential energy impacts of the proposed project.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Standards Consistency Impact ENER-2: The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Impact Analysis
A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Potential new development that may occur from implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with the CALGreen Code (CCR Title 24, Part 11) and the California Energy Code (CCR Title 24, Part 6), which includes provisions related to insulation and design aimed at minimizing energy consumption. Future development projects envisioned as a part of the proposed project would also be required to comply with objectives and policies included in the General Plan that are aimed at reducing energy consumption.
Construction
As discussed under Impact ENER-1, the proposed project would result in energy consumption through the combustion of fossil fuels in construction vehicles, worker commute vehicles, and construction equipment and through the use of electricity for temporary buildings, lighting, and other sources. California Code of Regulations Title 13, Sections 2449 and 2485, limit idling from both on-road and off-road diesel-powered equipment and are enforced by the ARB. The proposed project would comply with these regulations. There are no policies at the local level applicable to energy conservation specific to the construction phase; thus, it is anticipated that construction of the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing energy use or increasing the use of renewable energy. Therefore, construction- related energy efficiency and renewable energy standards consistency impacts would be less than significant.
Operation
The General Plan aims to promote mixed-use development and encourage alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicle trip lengths and reliance on the automobile, which in turn would reduce the transportation energy demand in the Plan Area. The General Plan also encourages development of housing near employment and transportation, which supports reductions in per capita VMT. Implementation of the policies in the General Plan, as well as the guiding principles and policies included in the proposed Fresno SEDA Specific Plan, would also promote land use patterns City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-21
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx that would improve walking and bicycling facilities to be more prominent, comfortable, and safe throughout the City. Compliance with the policies included in the General Plan, including Policy RC-8- j, would support the development of a network of integrated charging and alternate fuel station for both public and private vehicles that would also serve to reduce the overall transportation energy demand. The proposed Fresno SEDA Specific Plan includes the policies to reduce or minimize the effects of the additional demand and consumption of energy resources associated with the planned growth and ensure consistency with State and local plans. Implementation of Policy EO-3.1 encourages collaboration with the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJVCEO) to attract projects and investments to Fresno and specifically the SEDA. Local renewable energy projects can capitalize on Fresno’s abundant solar and biomass resources and would help reduce the effects of the additional demand and consumption of energy resources.
As discussed in Section 3.17, Transportation, average VMT per capita under existing conditions for the City of Fresno is 13.1 miles compared to 16.2 miles for the County of Fresno (approximately 19 percent less than the county average). Through the implementation of the General Plan, in 2035, the City VMT per capita (16.5 miles) is forecast to be 17 percent less than the County VMT per capita (19.9 miles). Corresponding numbers for VMT per employee indicate that the City average is forecast to be 13 percent lower than the 2035 County average. This is a greater reduction in VMT than forecast by the Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), a 12 percent reduction in VMT for the RTP project. The buildout of the proposed project would serve to further reduce VMT per capita in the region by locating high-density housing near service amenities and jobs.
California’s RPS requires that 33 percent of electricity retail sales be served by renewable energy sources by 2020. The proposed project would be served with electricity provided by PG&E. A total of 33 percent of PG&E’s delivered electricity comes from renewable sources, including solar, wind, geothermal, small hydroelectric and various forms of bioenergy. PG&E reached California’s 2020 renewable energy goal in 2017 and is positioned to meet the State’s 60 percent by 2030 renewable energy mandate set forth in SB 100.
The State’s Title 24 energy efficiency standards establishes mandatory measures for residential buildings, including material conservation and resource efficiency. Development consistent with the proposed project would be required to comply with these mandatory measures. The proposed project would also comply with the California Building Standards Code (CBC) requiring proposed low- rise residential buildings to include rooftop solar systems. In addition, per the CBC, the proposed buildings would be required to provide wiring that would allow installation of EV charging equipment in any private garages or carports. Mandatory compliance with the applicable provisions of CALGreen would ensure that development consistent with the proposed project uses energy efficiently.
Compliance with the above measures would ensure that development consistent with the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing energy use or increasing the use of renewable energy. Therefore, operational energy efficiency and renewable energy standards consistency impacts would be less than significant.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Energy Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.6-22 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
3.6.7 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative impact analysis for energy use is the Plan Area and portions of the City of Fresno, City of Clovis, and unincorporated Fresno County adjacent to the Plan Area.
This analysis evaluates whether impacts of the Specific Plan, together with impacts of cumulative development, would result in a cumulatively significant impact with respect to energy use. This analysis then considers whether incremental contribution of the impacts associated with implementation of the Specific Plan would be significant. Both conditions must apply for cumulative effects to rise to the level of significance.
Construction Energy Demand
Past, present, and future development projects would contribute to energy impacts. All cumulative projects would be required to comply with the Municipal Code, City ordinances and County policies that address energy conservation and energy efficiency during construction, such as complying with the latest California Energy Code. Further, since PG&E is the official electricity provider for the County, cumulative projects would be eligible for PG&E’s clean energy programs and incentives.
Additional citywide programs, such as those required by the General Plan, would combine to reduce the energy demand, water use, amount of materials and wood use, and carbon dioxide emissions of buildings. Accordingly, potential cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Moreover, the Specific Plan would not have a significant incremental contribution to the less than significant cumulative impacts. Based on the preceding analysis, implementation of the General Plan and the proposed project’s policies would help to minimize the effects of growth and development on energy resources. The construction activity associated with the proposed project would not result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would not be more energy intensive than other similar construction operations throughout the region, and the proposed project would be subject to applicable regulations designed to reduce energy consumption. Accordingly, the proposed project’s contribution to less than significant cumulative impacts due to construction-related energy consumption would be less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable.
Operational Energy Demand
Mandatory compliance with the applicable provisions of CALGreen would ensure that the proposed project and other past, present, and future projects would use energy efficiently. Additionally, all cumulative projects would be required to comply with City ordinances and County policies that address energy conservation and energy efficiency. Accordingly, potential cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Energy
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.6-23
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-06 Energy.docx Moreover, the proposed project would not have a significant incremental contribution to cumulative impacts. Energy consumed by the proposed project is calculated to be comparable to, or less than, energy consumed by other individual residential or commercial uses of similar scale and intensity currently constructed and operating in California. On this basis, the proposed project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy. The proposed project would not result in additional energy facilities or energy delivery systems outside of connection to the existing utilities located in the adjacent roadways, and any potential additional energy facilities would be analyzed as a separate project.
As indicated under the analysis for Impact ENER-2, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. As such, the proposed project has no cumulatively considerable impacts due to a conflict with or obstruction of such plans.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Mitigation Measures
None required.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx
3.7 - Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
3.7.1 - Introduction
This section describes existing conditions related to geology and soils in the region and project area summarizes the relevant regulatory framework. This section also evaluates the possible significant impacts related to geology and soils that could result from implementation of the project and provides mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. Information included in this section is based on, in part, the regional geologic reports and maps from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the California Geological Survey (CGS), the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and other public sources, as well as the Geological Hazards Investigation prepared by Krazan and Associates, Inc., on June 15, 2012, for the Fresno General Plan.
As further discussed in Chapter 1, Introduction, eight comments were received during the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Draft PEIR) scoping period related to geology and soils, including:
• Recommends that all future development under the proposed project collect soil samples for lead analysis prior to performing any intrusive activities. • Requests that the Draft PEIR require any future development under the proposed project that requires the importation of soil to backfill any excavated areas to conduct the proper sampling to ensure that the imported soil is free of contamination. • Identifies locations within the Plan Area that are within Special Flood Hazard Areas, which would be subject to Fresno County Ordinance Code Title 15, Chapter 15.48 as well as Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood elevation requirements as applicable. • States that any grading will require either an engineered grading and drainage plan, road improvement plan, permit or voucher and must comply with the City of Fresno standards/requirements.
• Requests that all engineered grading and drainage plans, road improvement plans, permits, and vouchers also be forwarded to the City of Fresno.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR accurately capture and analyze baseline conditions and potentially significant project-specific and cumulative impacts within and adjacent to the Planning Area.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR identify and adopt all feasible and enforceable mitigation measures that avoid and reduce negative impacts.
• Requests that the Draft PEIR analyze and create mitigation measures consistent with all applicable laws, including State and federal fair housing, civil rights, and climate laws such as Senate Bill (SB) 743.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx
3.7.2 - Environmental Setting
Geologic Setting
Regional Setting
The Plan Area is in the San Joaquin Valley portion of the Great Valley Geomorphic Province of California, which is about 450 miles long. The San Joaquin Valley is bordered to the north by the Sacramento Valley, which together comprise the province. The San Joaquin Valley is surrounded by the Sierra Nevada to the east, the Coast Ranges to the west, and the Tehachapi Mountains to the south.1 The Fresno Metropolitan area is set on gently southwest-sloping alluvial fans and plains formed by the San Joaquin and Kings rivers. The San Joaquin River and the Kings River are the principal rivers in the area, with the alluvial fans formed by these rivers serving as the predominant geomorphic features in the area. The City and Sphere of Influence (SOI) is generally characterized by low alluvial fans and plains, which constitute a belt of coalescing alluvial fans of low relief between the dissected uplands, adjacent to the Sierra Nevada and the valley trough.
Faulting
No active faults are mapped within the City of Fresno (City), and there are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones in the City.2 Active faults are those showing evidence of surface displacement within the last 11,000 years.3 The nearest fault to the Plan Area mapped by the CGS is the Clovis Fault, located about 3.8 miles to the northeast.4 The Clovis Fault is mapped as pre- Quaternary in age—that is, older than 1.6 million years, and is not considered an active fault.5 The nearest active faults to the Plan Area mapped by the CGS are the Nunez Fault about 48 miles to the southwest; the San Andreas Fault about 61 miles to the southwest; and the Ortigalita Fault Zone about 54 miles to the west. The Sierra Nevada Fault Zone is about 90 miles east of the Plan Area in the eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevada, and the Owens Valley Fault Zone is about 90 miles east of the Plan Area in the Owens Valley.
Existing Soils
Subsurface Soils in the Fresno Region
Based on the Geologic Hazards Investigation prepared for the Fresno General Plan, the uppermost 6 to 12 inches of soils in the Fresno region are very loose silty sand, silty sand with trace clay, sandy silt, clayey sand, or clayey gravel. These soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and are highly compressible when saturated.
Between approximately 2 to 4 feet below ground surface (BGS), soils are generally loose/soft to very dense/hard clays, silts, sands, and gravels. These soils are typically moderately strong and slightly to moderately compressible.
1 California Geological Survey (CGS). 2002. Note 36: California Geomorphic Provinces. Website:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/CGS-Notes/CGS-Note-36.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022. 2 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan, Chapter 9 Noise and Safety, Seismic And Geologic Hazards, . 3 California Geological Survey. 2017. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Website:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/alquist-priolo. Accessed May 11, 2022. 4 California Department of Conservation. 2015. Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey. Website:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/. Accessed May 12, 2022. 5 Ibid.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx Below 3 to 5 feet BGS, soils generally consist of clays, silts, sands, and gravels. These soils are typically moderately strong and slightly compressible.6 Geological Hazards
The following description of geologic hazards is based partly on the Geological Hazards Investigation prepared for the Fresno General Plan by Krazan and Associates in 2012. The information presented here is a region-wide summary only and is not indicative of conditions on any development site. Site- specific geotechnical investigations would be required for each development project considered for approval under the proposed project.
Strong Ground Shaking
The peak ground acceleration with a 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years—that is, an average return period of 2,475 years—ranges from approximately 0.282g along State Route (SR) 180 to 0.276g on the northeast site boundary to 0.321g at the southeast corner of the site to 0.328g at the northwest corner of the site; g is the acceleration of gravity.7 Ground acceleration of 0.321g correlates with Intensity VII on the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale, a subjective scale of how earthquakes are felt by people and the effects of earthquakes on buildings.8 The MMI Scale is a 12-point scale where Intensity I earthquakes are generally not felt by people and Intensity XII earthquakes result in total damage with objects thrown into the air. In an Intensity VII earthquake, some chimneys are broken, and damage is negligible in buildings of good design and construction, is slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures, and is considerable in poorly built or badly designed structures.9
The Fresno region has historically been subject to low to moderate ground shaking. Two of the historic earthquakes that caused ground shaking in the region, the Owens Valley Earthquake of 1872 and the Coalinga Earthquake of 1983, each generated ground shaking of Intensity VII in the region.10 The Geologic Hazards Investigation prepared for the Fresno General Plan includes estimated ranges of seismic parameters pursuant to the California Building Standards Code (CBC); seismic parameters must be calculated for each development project.11
6 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
7 California Geological Survey (CGS). 2008. Ground Motion Interpolator. Website: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/ground- motion-interpolator. Accessed May 12, 2022.
8 Wald, D.J, Vincent, Q., and Heaton, T.H., et al. 1999. Relationships between Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Velocity, and Modified Mercalli Intensity in California. August 1. Journal of Earthquake Spectra. Website: https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586058.
Accessed May 12, 2022.
9 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
10 Ibid.
11 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx Liquefaction
Liquefaction refers to loose, saturated sand or silt deposits that behave as a liquid and lose their load-supporting capability when strongly shaken. Loose granular soils and silts that are saturated by relatively shallow groundwater are susceptible to liquefaction.
Soils in the Fresno region range from gravel to sand to silt to clay. Shallow soils—especially within 1 foot of the ground surface—are highly compressible; deeper soils—over 3 to 5 feet BGS—are typically moderately strong and slightly compressible.12 Liquefaction potential in the City of Fresno is considered low to moderate.13 No liquefaction has been observed in Fresno from any historic earthquake.14 Seismic Ground Settlement
Ground shaking can cause unconsolidated sediments to settle. Because of the nature of the soils underlying the City, and the history of low to moderate ground shaking, seismic settlement is not considered a significant hazard in the region.15
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface layer. Lateral spreading is not considered a substantial hazard in the region for the same reasons given for seismic ground settlement.16
Landslides
There is no risk of large landslides in the Fresno area due to its relatively flat topography. However, there is potential for small landslides along the steep banks of rivers, creeks, or drainage basins such as the San Joaquin River Bluff and the many unlined basins and canals that trend throughout the City. Because of the generally flat-lying nature of the City, problems from landslides are not anticipated to affect the majority of the City provided developments in the vicinity of the San Joaquin River Bluff, basins, and canals are constructed properly with an appropriate setback from the slope edge.17
The San Joaquin River is located in the northwestern part of the City. The project site is located in the southwestern part of the City and is not located near the San Joaquin River. The project site is
12 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
13 Ibid.
14 County of Fresno. 2018. Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. Website:
https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/35154. Accessed May 13, 2022. 15 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
16 Ibid.
17 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-5
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx relatively flat and does not contain steep slopes. Any development near canals or drainage basins would be required to implement appropriate setbacks.
Erosion
Erosion is a natural process involving the movement of soil from place to place. The main natural agents of erosion in the region are wind and flowing water. Erosion can be accelerated dramatically by ground-disturbing activities if effective erosion control measures are not used. Soil can be carried off construction sites or bare land by wind and water and tracked off construction sites by vehicles.
Sediments can increase the turbidity (cloudiness) of water, clog fish gills, reduce spawning habitat, lower survival rates of young aquatic organisms, smother bottom-dwelling organisms, and suppress aquatic vegetation growth.
The 2018 Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies two types of areas with moderate to high erosion potential: (1) certain soil types in the Sierra Nevada and foothills (both Sierra Nevada and Coast Ranges) on slopes generally over 30 percent, and (2) certain soil types in the western San Joaquin Valley and the Coast Ranges, both in western Fresno County. The Fresno County Multi- Hazard Mitigation Plan’s map of erosion hazards indicates that erosion hazard areas exist in east of Friant Kern Canal in the hills east of the City. The Plan Area is not mapped in an erosion hazard area.18
Construction projects 1 acre or larger in area are required to employ construction Best Management Practices (BMPs)—including erosion control BMPs—to minimize pollution of stormwater by construction activity, including pollution with sediment.
Ground Subsidence
The major causes of ground subsidence are the excessive withdrawal of groundwater and the withdrawal of petroleum. The Fresno region is not known to be subject to subsidence hazards.
Substantial subsidence has occurred elsewhere in the San Joaquin Valley: up to 28 feet in western Fresno County in the western edge of the San Joaquin Valley; more than 12 feet in southwestern Tulare County; and more than 8 feet in Kern County south of Bakersfield.19 Areas of subsidence in Fresno County mapped in the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan are in western Fresno County more than 15 miles west and southwest from the Plan Area.20
18 County of Fresno. 2018. Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. Website:
https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/35154. Accessed May 13, 2022. 19 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
20 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-6 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx Collapsible Soils
Collapsible soils shrink upon being wetted and/or being subject to a load. Shallow soils on-site—to depths of at least 3 to 5 feet BGS—are expected to be compressible to varying degrees, with compressibility generally increasing nearer the surface.21 Expansive Soils
Expansive soils contain substantial amounts of clay that swells when wetted and shrinks when dried; the swelling or shrinking can shift, crack, or break structures built on such soils. Soils underlying the Fresno region consist partly of clays that are considered slightly to moderately expansive.22 The Plan Area is not mapped as having moderately high to high expansion potential.23 Seismicity
The term seismicity describes the effects of seismic waves that are radiated from an earthquake fault in motion. While most of the energy released during an earthquake results in the permanent displacement of the ground, as much as 10 percent of the energy may dissipate immediately in the form of seismic waves. Seismicity can result in seismic-related hazards such as fault rupture, ground shaking, and liquefaction faults form in rocks when stresses overcome the internal strength of the rock, and fault rupture occurs when movement on a fault breaks through to the surface and can result in damage to infrastructure and persons. Ground movement during an earthquake can vary depending on the overall magnitude, distance to the fault, focus of earthquake energy, and type of geologic material. The composition of underlying soils, even those relatively distant from faults, can intensify ground shaking. Strong ground shaking from an earthquake can result in damage, with buildings shifted off their foundations and underground pipes broken. Liquefaction occurs when an earthquake causes ground shaking that results in saturated soil to lose shear strength, deform, and act like a liquid. When liquefaction occurs, it can result in ground failure that can result in damage to roads, pipelines, and buildings.
Slope Disturbance
Slope disturbance from long-term geologic cycle of uplift, mass wasting, intense precipitation or wind, and gravity can result in slope failure in the form of mudslides and rock fall. The project vicinity is seismically active with known faults; however, the project area does not contain active faults that would cause geologic uplifting. Mass wasting refers to a variety of erosional processes from gradual downhill soil creep to mudslides, debris flows, landslides, and rock fall—processes that are commonly triggered by intense precipitation or wind, which varies according to climactic shifts.
Often, various forms of mass wasting are grouped together as landslides, which are generally used to describe the downhill movement of rock and soil. Soil creep is a long-term, gradual downhill migration of soil under the influence of gravity and is generally on the order of a fraction of an inch per year. These soils can creep away downslope sides of foundations and reduce lateral support.
21 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
22 Ibid.
23 County of Fresno. 2018. Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. Website:
https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/35154. Accessed May 13, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-7
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx However, because the Plan Area is relatively flat and does not contain steep slopes, it is unlikely that significant slope disturbance would occur.
3.7.3 - Regulatory Framework
Federal
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) was established by the United States Congress when it passed the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, Public Law 95–124. In establishing the NEHRP , Congress recognized that earthquake-related losses could be reduced through improved design and construction methods and practices, land use controls and redevelopment, prediction techniques and early warning systems, coordinated emergency preparedness plans, and public education and involvement programs. The four basic goals remain unchanged:
• Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake loss reduction and accelerate their implementation.
• Improve techniques for reducing earthquake vulnerabilities of facilities and systems. • Improve earthquake hazards identification and risk assessment methods, and their use. • Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects.
Several key federal agencies contribute to earthquake mitigation efforts. There are four primary NEHRP agencies:
• National Institute of Standards and Technology of the Department of Commerce • National Science Foundation
• United States Geological Survey (USGS) of the Department of the Interior • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security
Implementation of NEHRP priorities is accomplished primarily through original research, publications, and recommendations to assist and guide State, regional, and local agencies in the development of plans and policies to promote safety and emergency planning.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, authorized by Section 402(p) of the federal Clean Water Act, controls water pollution by regulating point sources, such as construction sites and industrial operations that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required to control discharges from a project site, including soil erosion, to protect waterways. A SWPPP describes the measures or practices to control discharges during both the construction and operational phases of the project. A SWPPP identifies project design features and structural and nonstructural BMPs that would be used to control, prevent, remove, or reduce stormwater pollution from the project site, including sediment from erosion.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-8 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx State Regulations
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Public Resources Code [PRC] §§ 2621 to 2630) was passed in 1972 to provide a Statewide mechanism for reducing the hazard of surface fault rupture to structures used for human occupancy. The main purpose of the Act is to prevent the siting of buildings used for human occupancy across the traces of active faults. It should be noted that the Act addresses the potential hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards, such as seismically-induced ground shaking or landslides.
The law requires the State Geologist to identify regulatory zones (known as Earthquake Fault Zones or Alquist-Priolo Zones) around the surface traces of active faults, and to depict these zones on topographic base maps, typically at a scale of 1 inch to 2,000 feet. Earthquake Fault Zones vary in width, although they are often 0.75-mile wide. Once published, the maps are distributed to the affected cities, counties, and State agencies for their use in planning and controlling new or renewed construction. With the exception of single-family wood frame and steel-frame dwellings that are not part of a larger development (i.e., four units or more), local agencies are required to regulate development within the mapped zones. In general, construction within 50 feet of an active fault zone is prohibited.
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (PRC §§ 2690–2699.6), which was passed in 1990, addresses earthquake hazards other than surface fault rupture. These hazards include strong ground shaking, earthquake-induced landslides, liquefaction, or other ground failures. Much like the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act discussed above, these seismic hazard zones are mapped by the State Geologist to assist local government in the land use planning process. The Act states, “it is necessary to identify and map seismic hazard zones in order for cities and counties to adequately prepare the safety element of their general plans and to encourage land use management policies and regulations to reduce and mitigate those hazards to protect public health and safety.” The Act also states, “cities and counties shall require, prior to the approval of a project located in a seismic hazard zone, a geotechnical report defining and delineating any seismic hazard.” California Building Standards Code
The State of California provides minimum standards for building design through the CBC (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 24). Where no other building codes apply, Chapter 29 regulates excavation, foundations, and retaining walls. The CBC applies to building design and construction in the State and is based on the federal Uniform Building Code (UBC) used widely throughout the country (generally adopted on a state-by-state or district-by-district basis). The CBC has been modified for California conditions with more detailed and/or more stringent regulations.
The State earthquake protection law (California Health and Safety Code § 19100 et seq.) requires that structures be designed to resist stresses produced by lateral forces caused by wind and earthquakes. Specific minimum seismic safety and structural design requirements are set forth in Chapter 16 of the CBC. The CBC identifies seismic factors that must be considered in structural design. Chapter 18 of the CBC regulates the excavation of foundations and retaining walls, and City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx Appendix Chapter A33 regulates grading activities, including drainage and erosion control and construction on unstable soils, such as expansive soils and areas subject to liquefaction.
The CBC is updated every 3 years. The 2022 CBC (CCR Title 24) became effective on January 1, 2023.
The 2022 CBC has been adopted by the City of Fresno.
Local Regulations
City of Fresno Building Code
The City of Fresno has incorporated and adopted the 2022 CBC with the City's amendments as Municipal Code Section 11- 102, referred to as the Fresno Building Code.
A preliminary soils report is required under Municipal Code Section 12-1022 for every subdivision for which a final map is required. Grading and erosion control requirements are set forth in Section 12- 1023.
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan is the City's primary policy planning document. Through its 12 elements, the General Plan provides the framework for the management and utilization of the City's physical, economic, and human resources. Each element contains goals, policies, and implementation measures that guide development within the City.
The Fresno General Plan includes the following objectives and policies that pertain to geology and soils:
Noise and Safety
Objective NS-2 Minimize risks of property damage and personal injury posed by geologic and seismic risks.
Policy NS-2-a Seismic Protection. Ensure seismic protection is incorporated into new and existing construction, consistent with the Fresno Municipal Code.
Policy NS-2-b Soil Analysis Requirement. Identify areas with potential geologic and/or soils hazards, and require development in these areas to conduct a soil analysis and mitigation plan by a registered civil engineer (or engineering geologist specializing in soil geology) prior to allowing on-site drainage or disposal for wastewater, stormwater runoff, or swimming pool/spa wate r.
Policy NS-2-c Landfill Areas. Require proposed land uses on or near landfill areas to be designed and maintained to comply with California Code of Regulations, Title 27, Section 21190, Post Closure Land Use.
Policy NS-2-d Bluff Preservation Overlay Zone. Per the requirements of the Bluff Preservation Overlay Zone District and Policy POSS-7-f (Chapter 5, Parks and Open Space), the following standards shall be applicable for property located within the Bluff Preservation zone:
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx • Require proposed development within 300 feet of the toe of the San Joaquin River bluffs to undertake an engineering soils investigation and evaluation report that demonstrates that the site is sufficiently stable to support the proposed development, or provide mitigations to provide sufficient stability. • Establish a minimum setback of 30 feet from the San Joaquin River Bluff edge for all buildings, structures, decks, pools and spas (which may be above or below grade), fencing, lighting, steps, etc.
• An applicant may request to reduce the minimum setback to 20 feet from the bluff edge if it can be demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the City’s Building Official and the Planning Director, that the proposed building, structure, deck, pool and/or spas (which may be above or below grade), fencing, steps, etc., will meet the objectives of the Bluff Preservation Overlay Ordinance. In no case shall the setback be reduced to less than 20 feet.
Public Utilities and Services Element
Objective PU-5 Preserve groundwater quality and ensure that the health and safety of the entire Fresno community is not impaired by use of private, on-site disposal systems.
Policy PU-5-a Mandatory Septic Conversion. Continue to evaluate and pursue where determined appropriate the mandatory abatement of existing private wastewater disposal (septic) systems and mandatory connection to the public sewage collection and disposal system.
Policy PU-5-b Non-Regional Treatment. Discourage, and when determined appropriate, oppose the use of private wastewater (septic) disposal systems, community wastewater disposal systems, or other non-regional sewage treatment and disposal systems within or adjacent to the Metropolitan Area if these types of wastewater treatment facilities would cause discharges that could result in groundwater degradation.
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-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 stormwater 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.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx Policy PU-7-c Biosolid Disposal. Investigate and consider implementing economically effective and environmentally beneficial methods of biosolids handling and disposal.
Policy PU-7-d Wastewater Recycling. Pursue the development of a recycled water system and the expansion of beneficial wastewater recycling opportunities, including a timely technical, practicable, and institutional evaluation of treatment, facility siting, and water exchange elements.
Commentary: This policy corresponds with Policy RC-6-d in the Resource Conservation and Resilience Element.
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-7-f Food and Drink Industry. Ensure adequate provision of facilities for the appropriate management of wastewater from wineries and food processing and beverage facilities, including conformance with Waste Discharge Requirements issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Southeast Development Area Specific Plan
The Fresno Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Specific Plan is framed within three significant and interrelated goals: fiscal responsibility, social equity, and environmental sustainability. The proposed Specific Plan and policies that form its implementation framework are formulated and coordinated to meet the criteria of these overlapping goals. The proposed Specific Plan contains the following objectives and policies related to geology and soils:
Urban Form
Objective UF-1 Create complete neighborhoods in the Southeast Development Area that integrate housing, business and retail amenities. Implement a Southeast Development Area plan that balances and mixes housing, jobs, commercial businesses, services, and public facilities to help meet existing thresholds for lower vehicle miles traveled, reduced air pollution, and the efficient use of groundwater resources in compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014.
Policy UF-1.5 Public Facilities and Open Spaces. Support the development of public infrastructure, facilities, and parks that meet the needs of Plan Area residents according to the policies and standards set in the Open Space, Schools and Public Facilities Chapter and the General Plan.
Open Space, Schools, and Public Facilities
Objective OS-14 Provide water, stormwater, and wastewater infrastructure necessary to serve development in the SEDA.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx Policy OS-14.1 Provision of Water, Stormwater, and Wastewater Infrastructure. Provide water, stormwater, and wastewater infrastructure in accordance with the policies of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Conservation Chapter.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Conservation
Objective RC-5 Protect surface and groundwater supplies from major sources of pollution.
Policy RC-5.3 Construction Erosion.
• Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan: Require all construction projects to create and implement a plan using State and local best management practices for erosion and sedimentation control.
• Runoff Control: Prevent loss of soil by stormwater runoff and sedimentation of storm sewers or receiving streams.
3.7.4 - Methodology
Impacts related to geology, soils, and paleontological resources resulting from implementation of the proposed project are discussed below. The following impact analysis is based on a review of published information, surveys, and reports regarding regional geology and soils. Information was obtained from private and governmental agencies and internet websites, including the CGS and the USGS.
3.7.5 - Thresholds of Significance
The Lead Agency utilizes the criteria in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist as thresholds to determine whether impacts to geology and soils are significant environmental effects.
Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines is a sample Initial Study Checklist that includes questions for determining whether impacts to resources are significant. These questions reflect the input of planning and environmental professionals at the Governor ’s Office of Planning and Research and the California Natural Resources Agency, based on input from stakeholder groups and experts in various other governmental agencies, nonprofits, and leading environmental consulting firms. Accordingly, the City has derived its significance criteria, based, in part, on the questions posed in Appendix G.
These significance criteria are as follows:
The proposed project would be considered significant if the project would:
a) D irectly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. iv. Landslides.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
3.7.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where necessary.
Earthquakes
Impact GEO-1: The proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking.
iii) Seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction. iv) Landslides.
Impact Analysis
i) Surface Fault Rupture
Buildout of the Specific Plan would not subject people or structures to hazards from surface rupture of a known active fault. The closest known active fault to the Plan Area is the Nunez Fault, which is located about 48 miles to the southwest of the project site. Furthermore, the nearest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone to the site is along the Nunez Fault. Therefore, the proposed project is not located near a fault and would not result in the rupture of a known earthquake fault. No impact would occur due to the distance of the Plan Area from the nearest known active fault.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx ii) Strong Seismic Ground Shaking
The entire Planning Area is within a seismically active region that could experience strong ground shaking during a seismic event. The intensity of ground shaking will ultimately depend on the characteristics of the fault, distance from the fault, magnitude and duration of the earthquake, and site-specific geologic conditions. As previously discussed, the nearest fault to the project site is the Nunez Fault, located about 48 miles to the southwest.
The Fresno region has historically been subject to low to moderate ground shaking. Two of the historic earthquakes that caused ground shaking in the region, the Owens Valley Earthquake of 1872 and the Coalinga Earthquake of 1983, each generated ground shaking of Intensity VII in the region.24,25
Potential structural damage and exposure of people to risk of injury or death from structural failure associated with strong seismic ground shaking would be reduced by compliance with CBC engineering design and construction measures. Foundations and other structural support features would be designed to resist or absorb damaging forces from strong ground shaking. The City of Fresno Municipal Code Section 11–102 incorporates the most recent CBC. The City reviews plans and applications for site clearance, grading, and building permits to ensure compliance with the CBC and imposes requirements for revisions where needed to ensure that new or significantly remodeled structures are constructed in compliance with the CBC, and reflect any additional measures deemed appropriate. Permit issuance would be based upon satisfactory completion of any identified applicable measures. Geotechnical investigations would be required for certain categories of projects considered for approval under the proposed project. Each geotechnical investigation would estimate seismic design parameters for its project site based on site-specific geologic and soil conditions and the types of building occupancies proposed.
Compliance with mandatory CBC requirements and implementation of General Plan Update policies and actions would ensure that future development projects are appropriately investigated in terms of potential seismic hazards and that any new buildings and structures are constructed to withstand strong seismic ground shaking. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction.
Secondary effects of earthquake shaking may include landslides, slope instability, liquefaction, subsidence, and lateral spreading. Liquefaction potential in the City of Fresno is considered low to moderate.26 Additionally, no liquefaction from historic earthquakes has been observed in Fresno, and the potential for liquefaction in the City is considered very low to moderate.27
24 United States Geological Survey (USGS). M 7.4 – The 1872 Owens Valley, California Earthquake. Website:
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ushis161/impact. Accessed December 13, 2024. 25 City of Fresno. 2014. Fresno General Plan, Chapter 9 Noise and Safety, Seismic And Geologic Hazards, Page 369. 26 California Geological Survey (CGS). 2008. Ground Motion Interpolator. Website: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/ground- motion-interpolator. Accessed May 12, 2022.
27 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx Buildings constructed under the proposed project could be subject to liquefaction. Geotechnical investigations would be required for certain categories of projects approved under the Specific Plan.
Each geotechnical investigation would assess liquefaction potential on its project site and would provide needed recommendations, such as foundation design recommendations, to minimize hazards arising from liquefaction. Therefore, impacts related to seismic-related ground failure, such as liquefaction, ground settlement, lurching, lateral spreading, and ground cracking would be less than significant.
iv) Landslides
The proposed project is located in an area that is not at risk of large landslides. Small landslides could occur along canals within the Plan Area; however, appropriate setbacks would be implemented for any construction in these areas. Furthermore, geotechnical investigations for projects considered for approval under the Specific Plan would include site-specific assessments of the potential for landslides and would provide needed recommendations—such as for remedial grading and/or setbacks—to minimize any ensuing hazards. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
In conclusion, compliance with local codes, mandatory CBC requirements, and implementation of General Plan policies and objectives would ensure that future development projects are appropriately investigated in terms of potential seismic hazards, and that any new buildings and structures are constructed to withstand the anticipated range of seismic events. At the programmatic level, seismic impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Consistent with General Plan policies and objectives, individual development projects would be required to undergo project-specific environmental review to minimize risks of property damage and personal injury posed by geologic and seismic risks, which may require additional site-specific or project- specific measures to reduce any potential for loss, injury, or death in the event of a seismic event. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Soil Erosion or Topsoil Loss
Impact GEO-2: The proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
Impact Analysis
Development under the proposed project would involve construction activities such as stockpiling, grading, excavation, paving, and other earth-disturbing activities. Loose and disturbed soils are more City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-16 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx prone to erosion and loss of topsoil by wind and water. As such, soil erosion is dependent on individual site locations and conditions on-site during construction.
Construction activities that disturb one or more acre of land surface are subject to the NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ) adopted by the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). Compliance with the permit requires each qualifying development project to file a Notice of Intent with the State Water Board. Permit conditions require development of a SWPPP , which must describe the site, facility, erosion and sediment controls, runoff water quality monitoring, means of waste disposal, implementation of approved local plans, control of construction sediment and erosion control measures, maintenance responsibilities, and non- stormwater management controls. Inspection of construction sites before and after a storm is also required to identify stormwater discharge from construction activity and to identify and implement erosion controls, where necessary.
The General Plan Policy NS-2-b requires a soil analysis to identify areas with potential soils hazards and requires development in these areas to conduct a soil analysis and mitigation plan by a registered civil engineer (or engineering geologist specializing in soil geology). Additionally, a preliminary soils report is required under Municipal Code Section 12-1022 for every subdivision for which a final map is required. Grading and erosion control requirements are set forth in Section 12- 1023. Furthermore, SEDA Specific Plan Policy RC-5.3 would prevent erosion on construction sites during storm events by requiring all construction projects to create and implement an erosion and sedimentation control plan, and to control runoff on construction sites.
Co mpliance with mandatory NPDES permit requirements and the Municipal Code requirements and General Plan policies and proposed Specific Plan policies would minimize potential soil erosion impacts and loss of topsoil from construction-related soil disturbance for construction activities that occur pursuant to the proposed project. As such, potential impacts related to soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Unstable Geologic Location
Impact GEO-3: The proposed project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse.
Impact Analysis
As discussed previously in Impact GEO-1(iii) and Impact GEO-1(iv), certain areas of the project site could have the potential for small landslides or liquefaction. As such, development allowed under City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-17
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx the proposed project could occur within areas containing unstable geologic units or be located on soils that are unstable or could become unstable from such development. The Fresno region is not known to be subject to subsidence hazards; therefore, buildout of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to substantial hazards from subsidence. Seismic settlement is not considered a significant hazard in the Fresno region due to the nature of the underlying soils and the history of low to moderate ground shaking. Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface laye r. Lateral spreading is not considered a substantial hazard in the Fresno region for the same reasons pertaining to seismic ground settlement.28 Geotechnical investigations for projects considered for approval under the proposed project would include site-specific assessments of the potential for unstable geologic units or unstable soils and would provide needed recommendations—such as for remedial grading and/or foundation design— to minimize any ensuing hazards.
As described previously, any development that occurs under the proposed project would be required to comply with Municipal Code Section 11-102, referred to as the Fresno Building Code, which implements the CBC. The CBC includes requirements to address development on areas containing unstable geologic units or in areas where soil is unstable. Typical measures to treat unstable soil conditions involve removal, proper fill selection, and compaction. In cases where soil remediation is not feasible, the CBC requires structural reinforcement of foundations to resist forces of being located within unstable geologic units or unstable soils.
Therefore, w ith the implementation of the policies and actions in the General Plan Update, as well as applicable State and local codes, potential impacts associated with development on unstable geologic units or unstable soils would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Expansive Soil
Impact GEO-4: The proposed project would not be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property.
Impact Analysis
Development of projects under the proposed project could expose people or structures to hazards arising from expansive soils. New development constructed on expansive soils could be subject to damage or become unstable when underlying soil shrinks or swells. Soils underlying the Fresno
28 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-18 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx region consist partly of clays that are considered slightly to moderately expansive.29 However, the Plan Area is not mapped as having moderately high to high expansion potential.30 A preliminary soils report is required under Municipal Code Section 12-1022 for every subdivision for which a final map is required. General Plan Policy NS-2-b requires a soil analysis to be conducted by a registered civil engineer. Applicants for certain categories of projects would be required to conduct geotechnical studies for their projects before the City would issue building permits. Each geotechnical study would evaluate whether site soils were suitable for supporting the proposed structures. Each project applicant would be required to comply with the recommendations of the applicable geotechnical investigation report. Such reports usually conclude that at least the top few feet of soil are unsuited for supporting structures and recommend removing such soils and replacing them with engineered, moistened, and compacted fill soils. Compliance with the rules and regulations of the Municipal Code, including compliance with the CBC, and implementation of the General Plan policies, would ensure that potential impacts related to expansive soils remain less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Wastewater Disposal Systems
Impact GEO-5: The proposed project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater.
Impact Analysis
The proposed project would encourage planning of growth within the Plan Area. Under the General Plan Update, the location and timing of growth in the City would be planned. The proposed project would result in sewer improvements, and would require developers to build, or contribute toward design and construction, of sewers sufficient to convey wastewater generation at buildout of the proposed project. Implementation of the proposed project would not add land uses that would rely on septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems. The proposed project would include new sewer and water infrastructure needed to serve new development as part of the proposed comprehensive infrastructure plan. Thus, buildout of the proposed project would have a less than significant impact respecting soils incapable of supporting septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems.
29 Krazan and Associates, Inc. 2012. Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan Update. Website:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-Hazards-Investigation.pdf. Accessed May 11, 2022.
30 County of Fresno. 2018. Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. Website:
https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/35154. Accessed May 13, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-19
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx General Plan Objective PU-5 pertains to the preservation of groundwater quality to ensure that the health and safety of the entire Fresno community is not impaired by use of private, on-site disposal systems. Furthermore, General Plan Policy PU-5-a makes septic conversion mandatory by requiring the mandatory abatement of existing private wastewater disposal (septic) systems and mandatory connection to the public sewage collection and disposal system when determined appropriate.
General Plan Policy PU-5-b discourages, and when determined appropriate, opposes the use of private wastewater (septic) disposal systems, community wastewater disposal systems, or other non- regional sewage treatment and disposal systems within or adjacent to the metropolitan area if these types of wastewater treatment facilities would cause discharges that could result in groundwater degradation. Additionally, SEDA Specific Plan Policy OS-14.1 pertains to the provision of water, stormwater, and wastewater infrastructure in accordance with the policies of the Water Resources Element; and SEDA Specific Plan Policy UF-1.5 pertains to building public infrastructure, facilities, and parks that meet the needs of Plan Area residents according to the policies and standards set in the Schools and Public Facilities, and Open Space and R ecreation Elements.
Implementation of po licies and objectives in the General Plan and the proposed project, as well as applicable local codes, would ensure that new septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are constructed on soils that can support such systems. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Destruction of Paleontological Resource or Unique Geologic Feature Impact GEO-6: The proposed project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Impact Analysis
Any project involving earthmoving activity could potentially result in inadvertent discovery and disturbance of paleontological resources during grading and excavation work. Based on the paleontological records search conducted for the proposed project by Kenneth L. Finger, PhD, on April 22, 2022, the project site and surrounding half-mile radius are mapped as Recent (Holocene) Great Valley fan deposits (Qf) and Pleistocene nonmarine deposits (Qc). Marchand and Allwardt (1975) identify the latter unit as the Riverbank Formation. Although Holocene deposits are too young to be fossiliferous, the Riverbank Formation has the potential to yield significant paleontological resources.
The nearest known paleontological resource is located 5 miles east of the City.
Late Pleistocene deposits have a high paleontological sensitivity and a low to moderate paleontological potential for significant paleontological resources. The flat surface of the project area, much of which has developed for mixed uses, precludes any pre-construction paleontological surveys; however, the proposed project would implement Mitigation Measure (MM) GEO-6a, which requires all future development to conduct a field survey and literature search for the unique City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-20 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx paleontological/geological resources on any undisturbed soil, and MM GEO-6b, which requires that all future development conduct paleontological monitoring of construction activities on the site for all construction-related earth-disturbing activities that will impact previously undisturbed sediments.
Pursuant to MM GEO-6b, should any significant paleontological resource (e.g., bones, teeth, well- preserved plants) be unearthed, all construction activities should be diverted at least 15 feet from the find until a professional Paleontologist has assessed it and, if deemed significant, salvaged it in a timely manner . Salvaged fossils should be deposited in an appropriate repository, where they will be properly curated and made available for future research.
As such, construction-related and earth-disturbing actions that occur under the proposed project have the potential to result in impacts on paleontological resources. However, MM GEO-6b, which requires paleontological monitoring, and MM GEO-6a, which requires a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources if excavation or construction activities on undisturbed soils are to take place, would reduce impacts to paleontological resources. As such, with implementation of MM GEO- 6a and MM GEO-6b, potential impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM GEO-6a Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources shall be conducted. The following procedures shall be followed:
• If unique paleontological/geological resources are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that unique paleontological/geological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified Paleontologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified Paleontologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to, excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds. If the resources are determined to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any paleontological/geological resources recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-21
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx • If unique paleontological/geological resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried and evaluated for significance.
If the resources are found to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the qualified Paleontologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include a paleontological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified Paleontologist. If additional paleontological/geological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.
MM GEO-6b Applicants, owners and/or sponsors of all future development or construction projects shall be required to perform or provide paleontological monitoring during ground-disturbing activities. Should significant paleontological resources (e.g., bones, teeth, well-preserved plant elements) be unearthed by the future project construction crew, the project activities shall be diverted at least 15 feet from the discovered paleontological resources until a professional Paleontologist has assessed such discovered resources and, if deemed significant, such resources shall be salvaged in a timely manner . The applicant/owner/sponsor of said project shall be responsible for diverting project work and providing the assessment including retaining a professional Paleontologist for such purpose. Collected fossils shall be deposited by the applicant/owner/sponsor in an appropriate repository (e.g., University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), California Academy of Sciences) where the collection shall be properly curated and made available for future research.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
3.7.7 - Cumulative Impacts
The geographic context for analysis of cumulative impacts related to geology, soils, and seismicity includes the Plan Area and the City of Fresno. This analysis evaluates whether impacts of the proposed project, together with impacts of cumulative development, could result in a cumulatively significant impact to geology, soils, seismicity, or paleontological resources. This analysis then considers whether incremental contribution of impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project would be significant. Both conditions must apply for a project’s cumulative effects to rise to the level of significance. If both conditions apply, this analysis will then evaluate feasible cumulative mitigation that would reduce cumulative effects. If one or both conditions do not apply, cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and no cumulative mitigation is necessary.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.7-22 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx Seismicity and Soils
Potentially adverse environmental effects associated with seismic hazards, as well as those associated with expansive soils, unstable geologic units, unstable soils, landslides, and erosion, usually are site-specific and generally do not result in cumulative effects.
Cumulative projects would be exposed to similar ground shaking during seismic events, but development of individual projects would not combine to increase the potential for cumulative impacts to occur. Individual development proposals would be reviewed separately by the appropriate public agency depending on location and undergo environmental review, if appropriate.
In the event that future cumulative development would result in impacts related to geologic or seismic impacts, those potential project or site-specific impacts would be addressed in accordance with the requirements of CEQA at the project level. New buildings would be constructed utilizing current design and construction methodologies for earthquake resistant design as required by relevant regulations, including the Fresno County Code of Ordinances. Compliance with the CBC, NPDES permits, laws and regulations mentioned above would ensure that cumulative development would have less than significant impacts associated with geology, soils, or seismicity.
Seismic hazards affecting cumulative projects are expected to be moderate due to the low to moderate historic ground shaking in the region, and the distance to known active faults. Other projects would comply with CBC seismic safety requirements and would conduct project-specific geotechnical investigations and comply with recommendations in the reports of such investigations.
The Fresno region bears little to no susceptibility to some seismic hazards, including surface rupture of a known active fault due to the lack of such faults in the region; and to seismic ground settlement and lateral spreading due to the nature of the soils underlying the City and the history of low to moderate ground shaking. Accordingly, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
As previously discussed, development that occurs under the proposed project would be required to comply with provisions of the CBC, excavation and grading requirements of the Municipal Code and General Plan and proposed SEDA Specific Plan, and mandatory NPDES permit requirements to ensure that potential impacts related to site-specific geotechnical conditions remain less than significant. For these reasons, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts on geology, soils, and seismicity are not cumulatively considerable and the cumulative impact would be less than significant.
As cumulative development occurs, all future projects must comply with the federal, State, and pertinent local regulations regarding structural stability, resulting in less than significant cumulative impacts related to subsidence or collapse. Moreover, the proposed project would not contribute to a cumulative impact on liquefaction, lateral spreading, or landslides. As discussed above, impacts related to subsidence or collapse are less than significant. Since the proposed project would experience less than significant impacts associated with subsidence or collapse impacts and these potential impacts are site-specific, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative subsidence or collapse is less than cumulatively considerable, and thus less than cumulatively significant.
Wastewater Disposal Systems
Cumulative development would not contribute to potential impacts on the soils related to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems since new development would be required to City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-23
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-07 Geology.docx adhere to General Plan policies regarding mandatory septic conversion, and the proposed project would include a comprehensive infrastructure plan. As discussed above, impacts related to soils supporting septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are less than significant.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not contribute to potential cumulative impacts related to soils supporting septic systems or alternative wastewater disposal systems, and potential cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Moreover, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to these less than significant cumulative impacts would not be significant. As the City receives development applications for subsequent development under the proposed project, those applications would be reviewed by the City for compliance with the General Plan and the SEDA Specific Plan policies and objectives. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to cumulative impacts and would have less than significant cumulative impacts.
Destruction of Paleontological Resources or Unique Geologic Feature Future development in the City has potential to cumulatively impact paleontological resources.
However, all cumulative projects would be required to comply with federal and State policies related to protection of paleontological resources which reduces potential cumulative impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant. Moreover, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to less than significant cumulative impacts would be less than significant. As the City receives development applications for subsequent development under the proposed project, those applications would be reviewed by the City for compliance with MM GEO-6a and MM GEO-6b, which require all future development in the Plan Area to conduct field surveys and literature searches for unique paleontological/geological resources on any previous undisturbed land and paleontological monitoring if any resources are discovered. Future development under the proposed project would also be required to conform to federal and State policies that protect paleontological resources, including Section 5097 of the California Public Resources Code. For these reasons, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts on paleontological resources are not cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant.
Level of Cumulative Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Mitigation Measures
None required.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx
3.8 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions
3.8.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions setting and potential effects from project implementation on the project site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based, in part, on modeling information and assumptions presented in Section 3.3, Air Quality. The Greenhouse Gas Analysis is included in this Recirculated Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (Recirculated Draft PEIR) as Appendix B. No public comments were received during the Draft PEIR scoping period related to GHG emissions.
3.8.2 - Environmental Setting
Greenhouse Effect, Global Warming, and Climate Change
Most of the energy that affects Earth’s climate comes from the sun. Some solar radiation is absorbed by Earth’s surface, and a smaller portion of this radiation is reflected by the atmosphere back toward space. As Earth absorbs high-frequency solar radiation, its surface gains heat and then re-radiates lower frequency infrared radiation back into the atmosphere. 1 Most solar radiation passes through gases in the atmosphere classified as GHGs; however, infrared radiation is selectively absorbed by GHGs. GHGs in the atmosphere play a critical role in maintaining the balance between Earth’s absorbed and radiated energy, Earth’s radiation budget, 2 by trapping
some of the infrared radiation emitted from Earth’s surface that otherwise would have escaped to space. Radiative forcing is the difference between the incoming energy and outgoing energy.3 Specifically, GHGs affect the atmosphere's radiative forcing,4 which in turn affects Earth’s average surface temperature. This phenomenon, the greenhouse effect, keeps Earth’s atmosphere near the surface warmer than it would be otherwise and allows successful habitation by humans and other forms of life.
Combustion of fossil fuels and deforestation release carbon into the atmosphere that historically has been stored underground in sediments or in surface vegetation, thus exchanging carbon from the geosphere and biosphere to the atmosphere in the carbon cycle. With the accelerated increase in fossil fuel combustion and deforestation since the Industrial Revolution of the nineteenth century, concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere have increased exponentially. Such emissions of GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations contribute to the enhancement of the natural greenhouse effect. This enhanced greenhouse effect has contributed to global warming, an increased rate of warming of Earth’s average surface temperature.
5 Specifically, increases in GHGs lead to increased
1 Frequencies at which bodies emit radiation are proportional to temperature. The Earth has a much lower temperature than the sun and emits radiation at a lower frequency (longer wavelength) than the high-frequency (short-wavelength) solar radiation emitted by the sun.
2 This includes all gains of incoming energy and all losses of outgoing energy; the planet is always striving to be in equilibrium. 3 Positive forcing tends to warm the surface while negative forcing tends to cool it. 4 This is the change in net irradiance at the tropopause after allowing stratospheric temperatures to readjust to radiative equilibrium, but with surface and tropospheric temperatures and state held fixed at the unperturbed values. 5 This condition results when Earth has to work harder to maintain its radiation budget, because when more GHGs are present in the atmosphere, Earth must force emissions of additional infrared radiation out into the atmosphere.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx absorption of infrared radiation by Earth’s atmosphere and warm the lower atmosphere further, thereby increasing temperatures and evaporation rates near the surface.
Variations in natural phenomena such as volcanoes and solar activity produced most of the global temperature increase that occurred during preindustrial times; more recently, however, increasing atmospheric GHG concentrations resulting from human activity have been responsible for most of the observed global temperature increase.6
Global warming affects global atmospheric circulation and temperatures; oceanic circulation and temperatures; wind and weather patterns; average sea level; ocean acidification; chemical reaction rates; precipitation rates, timing, and form; snowmelt timing and runoff flow; water supply; wildfire risks; and other phenomena, in a manner commonly referred to as climate change. Climate change is a change in the average weather of Earth that is measured by alterations in wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. These changes are assessed using historical records of temperature changes occurring in the past, such as during previous ice ages. Many of the concerns regarding climate change use this data to extrapolate a level of statistical significance specifically focusing on temperature records from the last 150 years (the Industrial Age) that differ from previous climate changes in rate and magnitude.
Temperature Predictions by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established by the World Meteorological Organization and United Nations Environment Programme to assess scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information relevant to understanding climate change, its potential impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation. The IPCC constructed several emission trajectories of GHGs needed to stabilize global temperatures and climate change impacts. In its Sixth Assessment Report, the IPCC predicted that the global mean temperature change from 2015 to 2100, given five scenarios, could range from 1.4°C (degrees Celsius) to 4.4°C. Regardless of analytical methodology, global average temperatures and sea levels are expected to rise under all scenarios. 7 The report also concluded that “[i]t is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred.” Warming of the climate system is now considered to be unequivocal,8 with the likely range of total human-caused global surface temperature increases from approximately 0.8°C to 1.3°C since 1850.9
Greenhouse Gases and Global Emission Sources
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are referred to as GHGs. The effect is analogous to the way a greenhouse retains heat. Prominent GHGs that naturally occur in Earth’s atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and ozone. Anthropogenic (human-
6 These basic conclusions have been endorsed by more than 45 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries. Since 2007, no scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion.
7 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis Summary for Policymakers.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx caused) GHG emissions include releases of these GHGs plus release of human-made gases with high global warming potential (GWP) (ozone-depleting substances such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)10 and aerosols, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). The GHGs listed by the IPCC (CO2, methane, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and sulfur hexafluoride) are discussed below, in order of abundance in the atmosphere. Water vapor, despite being the most abundant GHG, is not discussed below because natural concentrations and fluctuations far outweigh anthropogenic influences, making it impossible to predict. Ozone is not included because it does not directly affect radiative forcing. Ozone-depleting substances, which include chlorofluorocarbons, halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and hydrochlorofluorocarbons, are not included because they have been primarily replaced by HFCs and PFCs.
The GWP is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere. The GWP of a gas is essentially a measurement of the radiative forcing of a GHG compared with the reference gas, carbon dioxide (CO
2).
Individual GHG compounds have varying potential for contributing to global warming. For example, methane is 25 times as potent as CO2, while sulfur hexafluoride is 22,200 times more potent than CO2 on a molecule-per-molecule basis. To simplify reporting and analysis, methods have been set forth to describe emissions of GHGs in terms of a single gas. The most commonly accepted method for comparing GHG emissions is the GWP methodology defined in the IPCC reference documents.
The IPCC defines the GWP of various GHG emissions on a normalized scale that recasts all GHG emissions in terms of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which compares the gas in question to that of the same mass of CO2 (by definition, CO2 has a GWP of 1). The GWP of a GHG is a measure of how much a given mass of a GHG is estimated to contribute to global warming. Thus, to describe how much global warming a given type and amount of GHG may cause, the CO2e is used. A CO2e is the mass emissions of an individual GHG multiplied by its G W P. As such, a high GWP represents high absorption of infrared radiation and a long atmospheric lifetime compared to CO2. One must also select a time horizon to convert GHG emissions to equivalent CO2 emissions to account for chemical reactivity and lifetime differences among various GHG species. The standard time horizon for climate change analysis is 100 years. Generally, GHG emissions are quantified in terms of metric tons (MT) of CO2e (MT CO2e) emitted per year.
Table 3.8-1 lists the GWP of each GHG and its lifetime. Units commonly used to describe the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere are parts per million (ppm), parts per billion (ppb), and parts per trillion (ppt), referring to the number of molecules of the GHG in a sampling of 1 million, 1 billion, or 1 trillion molecules of air. Collectively, HFCs, PFCs, and sulfur hexafluoride are referred to as high GWP gases. CO2 is by far the largest component of worldwide CO2e emissions, followed by methane, N2O, and high GWP gases, in order of decreasing contribution to CO2e.
The primary human processes that release GHGs include the burning of fossil fuels for transportation, heating, and electricity generation; agricultural practices that release methane, such as livestock grazing and crop residue decomposition; and industrial processes that release smaller amounts of high GWP gases. Deforestation and land cover conversion have also been identified as
10 CFCs destroy stratospheric ozone. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer prohibited CFCs production in 1987.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx contributing to global warming by reducing Earth’s capacity to remove CO2 from the air and altering Earth’s albedo or surface reflectance, thus allowing more solar radiation to be absorbed. Specifically, CO2 emissions associated with fossil fuel combustion are the primary contributors to human-induced climate change. CO2, methane, and N2O emissions associated with human activities are the next largest contributors to climate change.
GHGs of California concern are defined by California Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (see the Regulatory Environment subsection below for a description) and include CO2, CH4, NOX, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. A seventh GHG, nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), was also added under the California Health and Safety Code Section 38505(g)(7) as a GHG of concern. These GHGs are described in Table 3.8-1 in terms of their physical description and properties, GWP , atmospheric residence lifetime, sources, and atmospheric concentration in 2005.
Table 3.8-1: Description of Greenhouse Gases of California Concern Greenhouse Gas
Physical Description and
Properties
Global
Warming
Potential
(100 years)
Atmospheric
Residence
Lifetime (years) Sources
Carbon dioxide
(CO2)
Odorless, colorless, natural
gas.
1 50-200 burning coal, oil, natural gas,
and wood; decomposition of
dead organic matter;
respiration of bacteria,
plants, animals, and fungus;
oceanic evaporation; volcanic
outgassing; cement
production; land use changes
Methane
(CH4)
Flammable gas and is the
main component of natural
gas.
25 12 geological deposits (natural
gas fields) extraction;
landfills; fermentation of
manure; and decay of
organic matter
Nitrous oxide
(N2O)
Nitrous oxide (laughing gas)
is a colorless GHG.
298 114 microbial processes in soil
and water; fuel combustion;
industrial processes
Chloro-fluoro-
carbons
(CFCs)
Nontoxic, nonflammable,
insoluble, and chemically
unreactive in the
troposphere (level of air at
Earth’s surface); formed
synthetically by replacing all
hydrogen atoms in methane
or ethane with chlorine
and/or fluorine atoms.
3,800-8,100 45-640 refrigerants aerosol
propellants; cleaning
solvents
Hydro-fluoro-
carbons
(HFCs)
Synthetic human-made
chemicals used as a
substitute for CFCs and
contain carbon, chlorine, and
at least one hydrogen atom.
140 to 11,700 1-50,000 automobile air conditioners;
refrigerants
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-5
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Greenhouse Gas
Physical Description and
Properties
Global
Warming
Potential
(100 years)
Atmospheric
Residence
Lifetime (years) Sources
Per-fluoro-
carbons
(PFCs)
Stable molecular structures
and only break down by
ultraviolet rays about 60
kilometers above Earth’s
surface.
6,500 to 9,200 10,000-50,000 primary aluminum
production; semiconductor
manufacturing
Sulfur
hexafluoride
(SF6)
Human-made, inorganic,
odorless, colorless, and
nontoxic, nonflammable gas.
22,800 3,200 electrical power
transmission equipment
insulation; magnesium
industry, semiconductor
manufacturing; a tracer gas
Nitrogen
trifluoride
(NF3)
Inorganic, is used as a
replacement for PFCs, and is
a powerful oxidizing agent.
17,200 740 electronics manufacture for
semiconductors and liquid
crystal displays
Sources:
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller [eds.]). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, N Y, U S A.
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report.
Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K. and Reisinger, A. [eds.]). IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland.
The State has begun the process of addressing pollutants referred to as short-lived climate pollutants. Senate Bill (SB) 605, approved by the Governor on September 14, 2014, required the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to complete a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants by January 1, 2016. The ARB released the Proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy in April 2016. The ARB has completed an emission inventory of these pollutants, identified research needs, identified existing and potential new control measures that offer co-benefits, and coordinated with other State agencies and districts to develop measures.
The short-lived climate pollutants include three main components: black carbon, fluorinated gases, and methane. Fluorinated gases and methane are described in Table 3.8-1 and are already included in the California GHG inventory. Black carbon has not been included in past GHG inventories; however, the ARB will include it in its comprehensive strategy.11 Black carbon is a component of fine particulate matter. Black carbon is formed by incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, biofuels, and biomass. Sources of black carbon within a jurisdiction may include exhaust from diesel trucks, vehicles, and equipment, as well as smoke from biogenic combustion. Biogenic combustion sources of black carbon include the burning of biofuels used for transportation, the burning of biomass for electricity generation and heating, prescribed burning of agricultural residue, and natural and unnatural wildfires. Black carbon is not a gas but an aerosol—
11 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2015. Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy, Concept Paper. May.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-6 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx particles or liquid droplets suspended in air. Black carbon only remains in the atmosphere for days to weeks, whereas other GHGs can remain in the atmosphere for years. Black carbon can be deposited on snow, where it absorbs sunlight, reduces sunlight reflectivity, and hastens snowmelt. Direct effects include absorbing incoming and outgoing radiation; indirectly, black carbon can also affect cloud reflectivity, precipitation, and surface dimming (cooling).
GWPs for black carbon were not defined by the IPCC in its Fourth Assessment Report. The ARB has identified a GWP of 3,200 using a 20-year time horizon and 900 using a 100-year time horizon from the IPCC Fifth Assessment. Sources of black carbon are already regulated by the ARB, and air district criteria pollutant and toxic regulations that control fine particulate emissions from diesel engines and other combustion sources.
12 Additional controls on the sources of black carbon specifically for their GHG impacts beyond those required for toxic and fine particulates are not likely to be needed.
Ozone is another short-lived climate pollutant that will be part of the strategy. Ozone affects evaporation rates, cloud formation, and precipitation levels. Ozone is not directly emitted, so its precursor emissions, volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) on a regional scale and CH4 on a hemispheric scale will be subject of the strategy.13 Water vapor is also considered a GHG. Water vapor is an important component of our climate system and is not regulated. Increasing water vapor leads to warmer temperatures, which causes more water vapor to be absorbed into the air. Warming and water absorption increase in a spiraling cycle. Water vapor feedback can also amplify the warming effect of other GHGs, such that the warming brought about by increased carbon dioxide allows more water vapor to enter the atmosphere.14
Global Climate Change Issue
Climate change is a global problem because GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and hazardous air pollutants (also called toxic air contaminants), which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes, approximately 1 day; by contrast, GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes, several years to several thousand years. GHGs persist in the atmosphere for a long enough time to be dispersed around the globe.
Although the exact lifetime of any particular GHG molecule depends on multiple variables and cannot be pinpointed, more CO2 is currently emitted into the atmosphere than is sequestered. CO2 sinks, or reservoirs, include vegetation and the ocean, which absorb CO2 through photosynthesis and dissolution, respectively. These are two of the most common processes of CO2 sequestration. Of the total annual CO2 emissions generated by human and natural causes in the decade 2011-2020, approximately 26 percent was sequestered through ocean uptake and approximately 29 percent was
12 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2015. Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy, Concept Paper. May. 13 Ibid.
14 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 2015. NASA—Global Climate Change, Vital Signs of a Planet. Website:
http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/. Accessed June 24, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-7
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx sequestered through land vegetation, whereas the remaining 45 percent of CO2 emissions is stored in the atmosphere.15
Similarly, effects of GHGs are borne globally, as opposed to the localized air quality effects of criteria air pollutants and hazardous air pollutants. The quantity of GHGs that it takes to ultimately result in climate change is not precisely known and cannot be quantified, and no single project would be expected to measurably contribute to a noticeable incremental change in the global average temperature, or to global or local climates or microclimate.
Emissions of GHGs have the potential to adversely affect the environment because such emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. A cumulative discussion and analysis of project impacts on global climate change is presented in this EIR because, although it is unlikely that a single project will contribute significantly to climate change, cumulative emissions from many projects affect global GHG concentrations and the climate system.
Global climate change has the potential to result in sea level rise (resulting in flooding of low-lying areas), to affect rainfall and snowfall (leading to changes in water supply), to affect temperatures and habitats (affecting biological resources and public health), and to result in many other adverse environmental consequences.
Although the international, national, State, and regional communities are beginning to address GHGs and the potential effects of climate change, worldwide GHG emissions will likely continue to rise over the next decades.
Climate and Topography
Climate is the accumulation of daily and seasonal weather events over a long period of time, whereas weather is defined as the condition of the atmosphere at any particular time and place. For a detailed discussion of existing regional and project site climate and topography, see Section 3.2, Air Quality.
Existing GHG Emissions
United States GHG Inventory
Total U.S. GHG emissions in 2019 were 6,558 million metric tons (MMT) CO2e, increasing overall by
1.8 percent from 1990 to 2019.16 Figure 3.8-1 presents the trend in U.S. GHG emissions by economic sector during this time. Since 1990, U.S. emissions have increased at an average annual rate of 0.3 percent. Transportation emissions also increased because of an increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Within the United States, fossil fuel combustion accounted for 92.4 percent of CO2 emissions in 2019. Transportation was the largest emitter of CO2 in 2019, accounting for 28.6 percent of emissions, followed by electric power generation, accounting for 25.1 percent.
16 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2021. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2019– Executive Summary.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-8 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx
Note: Emissions shown do not include carbon sinks such as change in land uses and forestry.
Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2021.
Figure 3.8-1: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2019 California GHG Inventory
As the second largest emitter of GHG emissions in the United States, California contributes a large quantity (418.2 MMT CO2e in 2019) of GHG emissions to the atmosphere.17,18 Human-related emissions of CO2 are largely byproducts of fossil fuel combustion and are attributable to transportation, industry/ manufacturing, electricity generation, natural gas consumption, and agriculture processes. In California, the transportation sector is the largest emitter at 41 percent of GHG emissions, followed by industrial at 24 percent of GHG emissions.19 Climate Change Trends and Effects
CO2 accounts for more than 75 percent of all anthropogenic GHG emissions, the atmospheric residence time of CO2 is decades to centuries, and global atmospheric concentrations of CO2 continue to increase at a faster rate than ever previously recorded. Thus, the warming impacts of CO2 will persist for hundreds of years after mitigation is implemented to reduce GHG concentrations.
California
Substantially higher temperatures, more extreme wildfires, and rising sea levels are just some of the direct effects experienced in California.
20,21 As reported by the California Natural Resources Agency in 2009, despite annual variations in weather patterns, California has seen a trend of increased average temperatures, more extreme hot days, fewer cold nights, longer growing seasons, less winter snow, and earlier snowmelt and rainwater runoff. Statewide average temperatures increased by about 1.7°F from 1895 to 2011, and a larger proportion of total precipitation is falling as rain
17 World Resources Institute (WRI). 2017. 8 Charts to Understand US State Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Website:
https://www.wri.org/insights/8-charts-understand-us-state-greenhouse-gas-emissions. Accessed June 24, 2022. 18 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. Current California GHG Emission Inventory Data, 2000-2019 Trends Figure Data.
Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data. Accessed June 24, 2022. 19 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2021. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2019. 20 California Natural Resources Agency (NRA). 2009. 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy: A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to Executive Order S-13-2008. 21 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2012. Our Changing Climate 2012: Vulnerability and Adaptation to the Increasing Risks from Climate Change in California.
2,500
2,000
t
"' 1,~00
8 ~ 1,000
500
0 0 .... "" "'
'<t ... ..:, I'- '°
a, 0 .... en 0,
"'
m
"'
m "" en °' "'
c:, 0 en
"'
en m "" m "" en °' "'
c:, 0 .. ,., ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... N N
"" ... '<t ..., -ti l's- Q) 0, s 0 0 0 0 c:, 0 0 0
0 0 a 0 Cl c:, 0 0 0
N
"'
N N N N N N N - s::l !::l :!
0 a 0 Cl
"'
N N N
l11dusbry
Agriculture
CommE!Kial (Ofange)
Residential (Blue)
~ ~ t:; ~ ~
D O O O CJ
N N N N N
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx instead of snow.22 Sea level rose by as much as 7 inches along the California coast over the last century, leading to increased erosion and adding pressure to the State’s infrastructure, water supplies, and natural resources.
These observed trends in California’s climate are projected to continue in the future. Research indicates that California will experience overall hotter and drier conditions with a continued reduction in winter snow (with concurrent increases in winter rains), as well as increased average temperatures and accelerating sea level rise. The frequency, intensity, and duration of extreme weather events such as heat waves, wildfires, droughts, and floods will also change.23 In addition, increased air pollution and spread of insects potentially carrying infectious diseases will also occur as the climate-associated temperature and associated species clines shift in latitude.
The following is a summary of climate change factors and predicted trends specific to California.
In California, climate change may result in consequences such as the following.24,25 • A reduction in the quality and supply of water from the Sierra snowpack. If heat-trapping emissions continue unabated, more precipitation will fall as rain instead of snow, and the snow that does fall will melt earlier, reducing the Sierra Nevada spring snowpack by as much as 70 to 90 percent. This can lead to challenges in securing adequate water supplies. It can also lead to a potential reduction in hydropower.
• Increased risk of large wildfires. If rain increases as temperatures rise, wildfires in the grasslands and chaparral ecosystems of Southern California are estimated to increase by approximately 30 percent toward the end of the 21st Century because more winter rain will stimulate the growth of more plant “fuel” available to burn in the fall. In contrast, a hotter, drier climate could promote up to 90 percent more Northern California fires by the end of the century by drying out and increasing the flammability of forest vegetation. • Reductions in the quality and quantity of certain agricultural products. The crops and products likely to be adversely affected include wine grapes, fruit, nuts, and milk. • Exacerbation of air quality problems. If temperatures rise to the medium warming range, there could be 75 to 85 percent more days with weather conducive to ozone formation in Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley, relative to today’s conditions. This is more than twice the increase expected if rising temperatures remain in the lower warming range. This increase in air quality problems could result in an increase in asthma and other health-related problems. • A rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of coastal businesses and residences. During the past century, sea levels along California’s coast have risen about 7 inches. If emissions continue unabated and temperatures rise into the higher anticipated warming range, sea level is
22 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2006. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 to 2004. Draft Final Report. CEC-600-2006-013-D.
23 California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). 2009. 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy: A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to Executive Order S-13-2008. 24 California Climate Change Center. (CCCC). 2006. Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California. 25 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2009. The Future Is Now: An Update on Climate Change Science Impacts and Response Options for California.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx expected to rise an additional 22 to 35 inches by the end of the century. Elevations of this magnitude would inundate coastal areas with salt water, accelerate coastal erosion, threaten vital levees and inland water systems, and disrupt wetlands and natural habitats. • An increase temperature and extreme weather events. Climate change is expected to lead to increases in the frequency, intensity, and duration of extreme heat events and heat waves in California. More heat waves can exacerbate chronic disease or heat-related illness. • A decrease in the health and productivity of California’s forests. Climate change can cause an increase in wildfires, an enhanced insect population, and establishment of non-native species.
Consequences of Climate Change in the Fresno Area
Source: Cal-Adapt. 2022. Local Climate Snapshots. Website: https://beta.cal-adapt.org/tools/local- climate-change-snapshot. Accessed June 24, 2022.
Figure 3.8-2 displays a chart of measured historical and projected annual average temperatures in the Fresno area. As shown in the figure, temperatures are expected to rise in the medium and high GHG emissions scenarios. The results indicate that temperatures are predicted to increase by 4.5°F (degrees Fahrenheit) under the medium emission scenario and 8.5°F under the high emissions scenario.
Temperature/Heat/Wildfire and Drought Events
Because of increasing GHG emissions and temperature increases, increasing large wildfires (greater than 25,000 acres) could become 50 percent more frequent by the end of the century. Incidences of extreme heat are expected to increase in both intensity and length as a result of climate change.26 Precipitation/Rainfall/Flooding Events
By 2050, the average water supply from snowpack is projected to decline to two-thirds from historical levels. If emissions reductions do not occur, water from snowpack could fall to less than one-third of historical levels by 2100.27
26 California Energy Commission. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment: California’s Changing Climate 2018. 27 Ibid.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx
Source: Cal-Adapt. 2022. Local Climate Snapshots. Website: https://beta.cal-adapt.org/tools/local-climate-change- snapshot. Accessed June 24, 2022.
Figure 3.8-2: Observed and Projected Temperatures for Climate Change in the City of Fresno Area
3.8.3 - Regulatory Framework
International
International organizations such as the ones discussed below have made substantial efforts to reduce GHGs. Preventing human-induced climate change will require the participation of all nations in solutions to address the issue.
Kyoto Protocol
In 1988, the United Nations established the IPCC to evaluate the impacts of global warming and to develop strategies that nations could implement to curtail global climate change. In 1992, the United States joined other countries around the world in signing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreement with the goal of controlling GHG emissions. As a result, the Climate Change Action Plan was developed to address the reduction of GHGs in the United States.
The Plan currently consists of more than 50 voluntary programs for member nations to adopt.
The Kyoto Protocol is a treaty made under the UNFCCC and was the first international agreement to regulate GHG emissions. Some have estimated that if the commitments outlined in the Kyoto Protocol were met, global GHG emissions could have been reduced an estimated 5 percent from Annual Average Maximum Temperature
Average of all the hottest daily temperatures in a year.
OBSERVED MEDIUM EMISSIONS (RCP 4.5) HIGH EMISSIONS (RCP 8.5) 94 Annual Average Maximum Temperature (°F)
92 90
88 86
84 82
80 78
76 74
1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx 1990 levels during the first commitment period of 2008-2012. Notably, while the United States is a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, Congress has not ratified the Protocol and the United States is not bound by the Protocol’s commitments. In December 2009, international leaders from 192 nations met in Copenhagen to address the future of international climate change commitments post-Kyoto.
On September 23, 2014, more than 100 heads of state and government, and leaders from the private sector and civil society met at the Climate Summit in New York hosted by the United Nations.
At the Summit, heads of government, business and civil society announced actions in areas that would have the greatest impact on reducing emissions, including climate finance, energy, transport, industry, agriculture, cities, forests, and building resilience.
Paris Climate Change Agreement
Parties to the UNFCCC reached a landmark agreement on December 12, 2015, in Paris, charting a fundamentally new course in the two-decade-old global climate effort. Culminating a 4-year negotiating round, the new treaty ends the strict differentiation between developed and developing countries that characterized earlier efforts, replacing it with a common framework that commits all countries to put forward their best efforts and to strengthen them in the years ahead. This includes, for the first time, requirements that all parties report regularly on their emissions and implementation efforts and undergo international review.
The agreement and a companion decision by parties were the key outcomes of the conference, known as the 21st session of the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties, or “COP 21.” Together, the Paris Agreement and the accompanying COP decision:28
• Reaffirm the goal of limiting global temperature increase well below 2 degrees Celsius, while urging efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees;
• Establish binding commitments by all parties to make “nationally determined contributions” (NDCs), and to pursue domestic measures aimed at achieving them; • Commit all countries to report regularly on their emissions and “progress made in implementing and achieving” their NDCs, and to undergo international review; • Commit all countries to submit new NDCs every five years, with the clear expectation that they will “represent a progression” beyond previous ones; • Reaffirm the binding obligations of developed countries under the UNFCCC to support the efforts of developing countries, while for the first time encouraging voluntary contributions by developing countries too;
• Extend the current goal of mobilizing $100 billion a year in support by 2020 through 2025, with a new, higher goal to be set for the period after 2025; • Extend a mechanism to address “loss and damage” resulting from climate change, which explicitly will not “involve or provide a basis for any liability or compensation;” • Require parties engaging in international emissions trading to avoid “double counting;” and
28 Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES). 2015. Outcomes of the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Paris.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx • Call for a new mechanism, similar to the Clean Development Mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol, enabling emission reductions in one country to be counted toward another country’s NDC.29
On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced the decision for the United States to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord and the United States officially filed its intent to withdraw on November 4, 2019. Following the 1-year grace period for withdrawal from the Agreement, the United States formally withdrew from the Agreement on November 4, 2020. President Biden rejoined the Agreement on his first day in office, January 20, 2021. The United States officially became a party to the Agreement once again on February 19, 2021, after a mandatory 30-day waiting period.30 Federal
Prior to the last decade, there were no concrete federal regulations of GHGs or major planning for climate change adaptation. Since then, federal activity has increased. The following are actions regarding the federal government, GHGs, and fuel efficiency.
Massachusetts et al. v. EPA (U.S. Supreme Court GHG Endangerment Ruling) Massachusetts et al. v. EPA (Supreme Court Case 05-1120) was argued before the United States (U.S.) Supreme Court on November 29, 2006, in which it was petitioned that the EPA regulate four GHGs, including CO
2, under Section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). A decision was made on April 2, 2007, in which the Supreme Court found that GHGs are air pollutants covered by the CAA.
The Court held that the Administrator must determine whether emissions of GHGs from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution, which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. On December 7, 2009, the EPA Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding GHGs under Section 202(a) of the CAA:
• Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases—CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6—in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations; and • Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution, which threatens public health and welfare.
These findings do not impose requirements on industry or other entities. However, this was a prerequisite for implementing GHG emissions standards for vehicles, as discussed under “Clean Vehicles” below. After a lengthy legal challenge, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review an Appeals Court ruling upholding that upheld the EPA Administrator findings.
29 Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES). 2015. Outcomes of the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Paris. 30 United States Department of State. 2021. The United States Officially Rejoins the Paris Agreement. https://www.state.gov/the- united-states-officially-rejoins-the-paris-agreement/. Accessed June 24, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx U.S. Consolidated Appropriations Act (Mandatory GHG Reporting) The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, passed in December 2007, requires the establishment of mandatory GHG reporting requirements. On September 22, 2009, the EPA issued the Final Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule, which became effective January 1, 2010. The rule requires reporting of GHG emissions from large sources and suppliers in the United States and is intended to collect accurate and timely emissions data to inform future policy decisions. Under the rule, suppliers of fossil fuels or industrial GHGs, manufacturers of vehicles and engines, and facilities that emit 25,000 MT or more per year of GHG emissions are required to submit annual reports to the EPA. The first annual reports for the largest emitting facilities, covering calendar year 2010, were submitted to EPA in 2011.
U.S. Clean Air Act Permitting Programs (New GHG Source Review) The EPA issued a final rule on May 13, 2010, that establishes thresholds for GHGs that define when permits under the New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Operating Permit programs are required for new and existing industrial facilities. This final rule “tailors” the requirements of these CAA permitting programs to limit which facilities will be required to obtain Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V permits. In the preamble to the revisions to the Federal Code of Regulations, the EPA states:
This rulemaking is necessary because without it the Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V requirements would apply, as of January 2, 2011, at the 100 or 250 tons per year levels provided under the Clean Air Act, greatly increasing the number of required permits, imposing undue costs on small sources, overwhelming the resources of permitting authorities, and severely impairing the functioning of the programs. EPA is relieving these resource burdens by phasing in the applicability of these programs to greenhouse gas sources, starting with the largest greenhouse gas emitters. This rule establishes two initial steps of the phase in. The rule also commits the agency to take certain actions on future steps addressing smaller sources, but excludes certain smaller sources from Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V permitting for greenhouse gas emissions until at least April 30, 2016.
The EPA estimates that facilities responsible for nearly 70 percent of the national GHG emissions from stationary sources will be subject to permitting requirements under this rule. This includes the nation’s largest GHG emitters—power plants, refineries, and cement production facilities.
Energy Independence and Security Act
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 created the Renewable Fuel Standard program. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 expanded this program by:
• Expanding the Renewable Fuel Standard program to include diesel in addition to gasoline. • Increasing the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into transportation fuel from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx • Establishing new categories of renewable fuel and setting separate volume requirements for each one.
• Requiring EPA to apply lifecycle GHG performance threshold standards to ensure that each category of renewable fuel emits fewer GHGs than the petroleum fuel it replaces.
This expanded Renewable Fuel Standard program lays the foundation for achieving substantial reductions of GHG emissions from the use of renewable fuels, reducing the use of imported petroleum, and encouraging the development and expansion of the nation’s renewable fuels sector.
Signed on December 19, 2007, by President George W. Bush, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) aims to:
• Move the United States toward greater energy independence and security. • Increase the production of clean renewable fuels.
• Protect consumers.
• Increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles. • Promote research on and deploy GHG emission capture and storage options. • Improve the energy performance of the federal government. • Increase U.S. energy security, develop renewable fuel production, and improve vehicle fuel economy.
EISA reinforces the energy reduction goals for federal agencies put forth in Executive Order 13423, as well as introduces more aggressive requirements. The three key provisions enacted are the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, the Renewable Fuel Standard, and the appliance/lighting efficiency standards.
The EPA is committed to developing, implementing, and revising both regulations and voluntary programs under the following subtitles in EISA, among others:
31 • Increased Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards • Federal Vehicle Fleets
• Renewable Fuel Standard
• Biofuels Infrastructure
• Carbon Capture and Sequestration
The EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards Final Rule Congress first passed the Corporate Average Fuel Economy law in 1975 to increase the fuel economy of cars and light-duty trucks. The law has become more stringent over time. On April 1, 2010, the EPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced a joint final rule establishing a national program that would reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel economy for new cars and trucks sold in the United States. The EPA and the NHTSA
31 United States Environment Protection Agency (EPA). Summary of the Energy Independence and Security Act. Website:
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-energy-independence-and-security-act. Accessed June 24, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-16 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx issued final rules on a second phase joint rulemaking, establishing national standards for light-duty vehicles for model years 2017 through 2025 in August 2012.32 The new standards for model years 2017 through 2025 apply to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles.
The final standards are projected to result in an average industry fleet wide level of 163 grams/mile of CO2 in model year 2025, which is equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon if achieved exclusively through fuel economy improvements.
The EPA and NHTSA issued final rules for the first national standards to reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel efficiency of heavy-duty trucks and buses on September 15, 2011, which became effective November 14, 2011. For combination tractors, the agencies are proposing engine and vehicle standards that began in the 2014 model year and achieve up to a 20 percent reduction in CO2 emissions and fuel consumption by the 2018 model year. For heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, the agencies are proposing separate gasoline and diesel truck standards, which phase in starting in the 2014 model year and achieve up to a 10 percent reduction for gasoline vehicles, and a 15 percent reduction for diesel vehicles by 2018 model year (12 and 17 percent respectively if accounting for air conditioning leakage). Lastly, for vocational vehicles, the engine and vehicle standards would achieve up to a 10 percent reduction in fuel consumption and CO2 emissions from the 2014 to 2018 model years.
The State of California has received a waiver from the EPA to have separate, stricter Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. Although global climate change did not become an international concern until the 1980s, efforts to reduce energy consumption began in California in response to the oil crisis in the 1970s, resulting in the incidental reduction of GHG emissions. In order to manage the State’s energy needs and promote energy efficiency, AB 1575 created the California Energy Commission (CEC) in 1975.
State
California Assembly Bill 32: Global Warming Solutions Act and Scoping Plan The California State Legislature enacted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.
AB 32 requires that GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. “Greenhouse gases” as defined under AB 32 include CO
2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. Since AB 32
was enacted, a seventh chemical, nitrogen trifluoride, has also been added to the list of GHGs. The ARB is the State agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of GHGs.
The State has made steady progress in implementing AB 32. The ARB’s initial Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) contained measures designed to reduce the State’s emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 to comply with AB 32.33 The Scoping Plan identified recommended measures for multiple GHG emission sectors and the associated emission reductions needed to achieve the year 2020 emissions target. In addition, the Scoping Plan differentiates between “capped” and “uncapped” strategies. Capped strategies are subject to the ARB’s Cap-and-Trade Program. The Cap-
32 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2012. EPA and NHTSA Set Standards to Reduce Greenhouse Gases and Improve Fuel Economy for Model Years 2017-2025 Cars and Light Trucks. 33 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan, a framework for change.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-17
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx and-Trade Program works with other direct regulatory measures and provides an economic incentive to reduce emissions.
The State achieved the 2020 target several years ahead of schedule.34 As further discussed below, the Scoping Plan has been subsequently updated to go beyond the emission reductions called for in the initial version, in line with more recent State policy directives.
California Senate Bill 32
Former Governor Brown signed SB 32 in September of 2016, giving ARB the statutory responsibility to include the 2030 emissions target previously contained in Executive Order B-30-15 in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update. SB 32 states, “In adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions authorized by this division, the state [air resources] board shall ensure that Statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the Statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit no later than December 31, 2030.” As such, SB 32 lays the foundation for the legislative reduction targets for 2030.
Assembly Bill 1279
AB 1279 (2022) establishes the policy of the State to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045 and maintain net negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter, and to ensure that by 2045 Statewide anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are reduced at least 85 percent below 1990 levels. The Bill requires ARB to ensure that the Scoping Plan identifies and recommends measures to achieve carbon neutrality, and to identify and implement policies and strategies that enable carbon dioxide removal and carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies to complement these emission reductions.
2022 Scoping Plan
The most recent version of the ARB’s Scoping Plan, the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan), addresses the new AB1279 targets and was adopted on December 15, 2022. This plan builds upon previously adopted Scoping Plans, including the 2017 Scoping Plan which originally addressed the emission reduction goals in SB 32, and provides a detailed sector-by- sector guide to address climate change by cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent and achieving carbon neutrality in 2045, with the main focus of emission reductions efforts being the transportation and energy sectors.35
California Executive Order S-3-05 (GHG Emissions Reduction Targets) Former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced on June 1, 2005, through Executive Order S-3-05, the following reduction targets for GHG emissions:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels.
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels.
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
34 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan, a framework for change. 35 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2022. The 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. Accessed December 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-18 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx The 2050 reduction goal represents what some scientists believe is necessary to reach levels that will stabilize the climate. The 2020 goal was established to be a mid-term target. Because this is an Executive Order, the goals are not legally enforceable for local governments or the private sector.
California AB 1493: Pavley Regulations and Fuel Efficiency Standards California AB 1493, enacted on July 22, 2002, required the ARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks. Implementation of the regulation was delayed by lawsuits filed by automakers and by the EPA’s denial of an implementation waiver. The EPA subsequently granted the requested waiver in 2009, which was upheld by the by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011. 36 The standards are to be phased in during the 2009 through 2016 model years. When fully phased in, the near-term (2009–2012) standards will result in an approximately 22 percent reduction compared with the 2002 fleet, and the mid-term (2013–2016) standards will result in about a 30 percent reduction. Several technologies stand out as providing significant reductions in emissions at favorable costs. These include discrete variable valve lift or camless valve actuation to optimize valve operation rather than relying on fixed valve timing and lift as has historically been done; turbocharging to boost power and allow for engine downsizing; improved multi-speed transmissions; and improved air conditioning systems that operate optimally, leak less, and/or use an alternative refrigerant.
37 The second phase of the implementation for the Pavley Bill was incorporated into Amendments to the Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program referred to as LEV III or the Advanced Clean Cars program.
The Advanced Clean Car program combines the control of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2017 through 2025.
The regulation will reduce GHGs from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025. The new rules will reduce pollutants from gasoline and diesel-powered cars, and deliver increasing numbers of zero-emission technologies, such as full battery electric cars, newly emerging plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell cars. The regulations will also ensure adequate fueling infrastructure is available for the increasing numbers of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles planned for deployment in California.38
California SB 1078: Renewable Electricity Standards
On September 12, 2002, Governor Gray Davis signed SB 1078, requiring California to generate 20 percent of its electricity from renewable energy by 2017. SB 107 changed the due date to 2010 instead of 2017. On November 17, 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S- 14-08, which established a Renewable Portfolio Standard target for California requiring that all retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020. Governor Schwarzenegger also directed the ARB (Executive Order S-21-09) to adopt a regulation by July 31, 2010, requiring the State’s load serving entities to meet a 33 percent renewable energy target by
36 Legislative Counsel's Digest. 2002. Assembly Bill No. 1493. 37 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2022. Advanced Clean Cars Program. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/about. Accessed June 30, 2022 38 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2011. Status of Scoping Plan Recommended Measures.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-19
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx 2020. The ARB approved the Renewable Electricity Standard on September 23, 2010 by Resolution 10-23.
California SB 375: Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act SB 375 was signed into law on September 30, 2008. According to SB 375, the transportation sector is the largest contributor of GHG emissions, which emits over 40 percent of the total GHG emissions in California. SB 375 states, “Without improved land use and transportation policy, California will not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32.” SB 375 does the following: (1) requires metropolitan planning organizations to include sustainable community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions, (2) aligns planning for transportation and housing, and (3) creates specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies.
Concerning California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), SB 375, as codified in Public Resources Code Section 21159.28, states that CEQA findings determinations for certain projects are not required to reference, describe, or discuss (1) growth inducing impacts or (2) any project-specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light-duty truck trips generated by the proposed project on global warming or the regional transportation network if the proposed project:
1. Is in an area with an approved Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or an alternative planning strategy that the ARB accepts as achieving the GHG emission reduction targets;
2. Is consistent with that strategy (in designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies); and
3. Incorporates the mitigation measures required by an applicable prior environmental document.
California SB 1368: Emission Performance Standards
In 2006, the State Legislature adopted SB 1368, which was subsequently signed into law by the Governor. SB 1368 directs the California Public Utilities Commission to adopt a performance standard for GHG emissions for the future power purchases of California utilities. SB 1368 seeks to limit carbon emissions associated with electrical energy consumed in California by forbidding procurement arrangements for energy longer than 5 years from resources that exceed the emissions of a relatively clean, combined cycle natural gas power plant. Because of the carbon content of its fuel source, a coal-fired plant cannot meet this standard because such plants emit roughly twice as much carbon as natural gas, combined cycle plants. Accordingly, the new law effectively prevents California’s utilities from investing in, otherwise financially supporting, or purchasing power from new coal plants located in or out of the State. The California Public Utilities Commission adopted the regulations required by SB 1368 on August 29, 2007. The regulations implementing SB 1368 establish a standard for baseload generation owned by, or under long-term contract to publicly owned utilities, of 1,100 pounds (lbs) CO
2 per megawatt-hour (MWh).
California Executive Order S-01-07: Low Carbon Fuel Standard The Governor signed Executive Order S 01-07 on January 18, 2007. The Executive Order mandates that a Statewide goal shall be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-20 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. In particular, the Executive Order established an Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and directed the Secretary for Environmental Protection to coordinate the actions of the CEC, the ARB, the University of California, and other agencies to develop and propose protocols for measuring the “lifecycle carbon intensity” of transportation fuels.
This analysis supporting development of the protocols was included in the State Implementation Plan for alternative fuels (State Alternative Fuels Plan adopted by CEC on December 24, 2007) and was submitted to the ARB for consideration as an “early action” item under AB 32. The ARB adopted the LCFS on April 23, 2009.
The LCFS was subject to legal challenge in 2011. Ultimately, on August 8, 2013, the Fifth District Court of Appeal (California) ruled that ARB failed to comply with CEQA and the Administrative Procedure Act when adopting regulations for Low Carbon Fuel Standards. In a partially published opinion, the Court of Appeal directed that Resolution 09-31 and two Executive Orders of ARB approving LCFS regulations promulgated to reduce GHG emissions be set aside. However, the Court tailored its remedy to protect the public interest by allowing the LCFS regulations to remain operative while ARB complies with the procedural requirements it failed to satisfy.
To address the Court ruling, ARB was required to bring a new LCFS regulation to the Board for consideration in February 2015. The proposed LCFS regulation was required to contain revisions to the 2010 LCFS as well as new provisions designed to foster investments in the production of the low carbon fuels, offer additional flexibility to regulated parties, update critical technical information, simplify and streamline program operations, and enhance enforcement. The second public hearing for the new LCFS regulation was held on September 24, 2015, and September 25, 2015, where the LCFS regulation was adopted. The Final Rulemaking Package adopting the regulation was filed with the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) on October 2, 2015. The OAL approved the regulation on November 16, 2015.
39 California Executive Order S-13-08
Executive Order S-13-08 states that “climate change in California during the next century is expected to shift precipitation patterns, accelerate sea level rise and increase temperatures, thereby posing a serious threat to California’s economy, to the health and welfare of its population and to its natural resources.” Pursuant to the requirements in the order, the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy was adopted, which is the “. . . first Statewide, multi-sector, region-specific, and information-based climate change adaptation strategy in the United States.” Objectives include analyzing risks of climate change in California, identifying and exploring strategies to adapt to climate change, and specifying a direction for future research.
California SBX 7-7: Water Conservation Act
This 2009 legislation directs urban retail water suppliers to set individual 2020 per capita water use targets and begin implementing conservation measures to achieve those goals. Meeting this
39 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2015. Low Carbon Fuel Standard Regulation. Website:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2015/lcfs2015/lcfs2015.htm. Accessed June 24, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-21
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Statewide goal of 20 percent decrease in demand will result in a reduction of almost 2 million acre- feet in urban water use in 2020.
California SB 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act In 2015, the State Legislature approved and the Governor signed SB 350 that reaffirms California’s commitment to reducing its GHG emissions and addressing climate change. Key provisions include an increase in the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS), higher energy efficiency requirements for buildings, initial strategies toward a regional electricity grid, and improved infrastructure for electric vehicle charging stations. Provisions for a 50 percent reduction in the use of petroleum Statewide were removed from the Bill due to opposition and concern that it would prevent the Bill’s passage.
Specifically, SB 350 requires the following to reduce Statewide GHG emissions:
• Increase the amount of electricity procured from renewable energy sources from 33 percent to 50 percent by 2030, with interim targets of 40 percent by 2024, and 25 percent by 2027. • Double the energy efficiency in existing buildings by 2030. This target will be achieved through the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC), the CEC, and local publicly owned utilities. • Reorganize the Independent System Operator (ISO) to develop more regional electrify transmission markets and to improve accessibility in these markets, which will facilitate the growth of renewable energy markets in the western United States.40
California Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, an Executive Order was issued by the Governor to establish a California GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The Governor’s Executive Order aligns California’s GHG reduction targets with those of leading international governments ahead of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris late 2015. The Executive Order sets a new interim Statewide GHG emission reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 in order to ensure California meets its target of reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 and directs the ARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of MMT CO2e. The Executive Order also requires the State’s climate adaptation plan to be updated every three years and for the State to continue its climate change research program, among other provisions. As with Executive Order S-3-05, this Executive Order is not legally enforceable against local governments and the private sector. Legislation that would update AB 32 to make post 2020 targets and requirements a mandate is in process in the State Legislature.
California Code of Regulations Title 20: Appliance Efficiency Regulations California Code of Regulations, Title 20: Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 4, Sections 1601-1608:
Appliance Efficiency Regulations regulates the sale of appliances in California. The Appliance Efficiency Regulations include standards for both federally regulated appliances and non-federally regulated appliances. Twenty-three categories of appliances are included in the scope of these regulations. The standards within these regulations apply to appliances that are sold or offered for
40 California Legislative Information (California Leginfo). 2015. Senate Bill 350 Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015. Website:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB350. Accessed June 24, 2022.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-22 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx sale in California, except those sold wholesale in California for final retail sale outside the State and those designed and sold exclusively for use in recreational vehicles or other mobile equipment.41 The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards went into effect on January 1, 2020.
California Code of Regulations Title 24: Energy Efficiency Standards California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6: California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy-efficient technologies and methods. Energy- efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases GHG emissions. The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards went into effect on January 1, 2023.
42 California Code of Regulations Title 24: California Green Building Standards Code California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11, is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial, and school buildings that went in effect January 1, 2011. The code is updated on a regular basis, with the most recent update consisting of the 2022 California Green Building Code Standards Code (CALGreen) which became effective January 1, 2023.43 Local jurisdictions are permitted to adopt more stringent requirements, as State law provides methods for local enhancements. The Code recognizes that many jurisdictions have developed existing construction and demolition ordinances and defers to them as the ruling guidance provided they provide a minimum 50 percent diversion requirement. The Code also provides exemptions for areas not served by construction and demolition recycling infrastructure. The California Building Standards Code (CBC) provides the minimum standard that buildings need to meet in order to be certified for occupancy, which is generally enforced by the local building official.
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11 requires the following:
• Short-term bicycle parking. If a commercial project is anticipated to generate visitor traffic, provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the visitors’ entrance, readily visible to passers-by, for 5 percent of visitor motorized vehicle parking capacity, with a minimum of one two-bike capacity rack (5.106.4.1.1).
• Long-term bicycle parking. For buildings with over 10 tenant-occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5 percent of tenant-occupied motorized vehicle parking capacity, with a minimum of one space (5.106.4.1.2).
• Designated parking. Provide designated parking in commercial projects for any combination of low-emitting, fuel-efficient and carpool/van pool vehicles as shown in Table 5.106.5.2 (5.106.5.2).
41 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2022. Appliance Energy Efficiency Regulations–Title 20. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/rules-and-regulations/appliance-efficiency-regulations-title-20. Accessed June 24, 2022. 42 California Energy Commission. 2023. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs- and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency. Accessed March 15, 2023. 43 State of California. 2022. California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). Website: https://calgreenenergyservices.com/.
Accessed March 21, 2023.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-23
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx • Recycling by Occupants. Provide readily accessible areas that serve the entire building and are identified for the depositing, storage and collection of nonhazardous materials for recycling (5.410.1).
• Construction waste. A minimum 65 percent diversion of construction and demolition waste from landfills. (5.408.1, A5.408.3.1 [nonresidential], A5.408.3.1 [residential]). All (100 percent) of trees, stumps, rocks and associated vegetation and soils resulting from land clearing shall be reused or recycled (5.408.3).
• Wastewater reduction. Each building shall reduce the generation of wastewater by one of the following methods:
1. The installation of water conserving fixtures or
2. Using nonpotable water systems (5.303.4).
• Water use savings. 20 percent mandatory reduction in indoor water use with voluntary goal standards for 30, 35, and 40 percent reductions (5.303.2, A5303.2.3 [nonresidential]). • Water meters. Separate water meters for buildings in excess of 50,000 square feet or buildings projected to consume more than 1,000 gallons per day (5.303.1). • Irrigation efficiency. Moisture-sensing irrigation systems for larger landscaped areas (5.304.3). • Materials pollution control. Low-pollutant emitting interior finish materials such as paints, carpet, vinyl flooring and particleboard (5.404).
• Building commissioning. Mandatory inspections of energy systems (i.e., heat furnace, air conditioner, mechanical equipment) for nonresidential buildings over 10,000 square feet to ensure that all are working at their maximum capacity according to their design efficiencies (5.410.2).
California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance
The Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Ordinance) was required by AB 1881 Water Conservation Act. The Bill required local agencies to adopt a local landscape ordinance at least as effective in conserving water as the Model Ordinance by January 1, 2010. Reductions in water use of 20 percent consistent with (SBX-7-7) 2020 mandate are expected for Ordinance. Governor Brown’s Drought Executive Order of April 1, 2015 (Executive Order B-29-15) directed the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to update the Ordinance through expedited regulation. The California Water Commission approved the revised Ordinance on July 15, 2015, which became effective on December 15, 2015. New development projects that include landscaped areas of 500 square feet or more are subject to the Ordinance. The update requires:
• More efficient irrigation systems
• Incentives for graywater usage
• Improvements in on-site stormwater capture
• Limiting the portion of landscapes that can be planted with high water use plants • Reporting requirements for local agencies.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-24 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx California SB 97 and the CEQA Guidelines Update
Passed in August 2007, SB 97 added Section 21083.05 to the Public Resources Code. The Code states “(a) On or before July 1, 2009, the Office of Planning and Research shall prepare, develop, and transmit to the Resources Agency guidelines for the mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions as required by this division, including, but not limited to, effects associated with transportation or energy consumption. (b) On or before January 1, 2010, the Resources Agency shall certify and adopt guidelines prepared and developed by the Office of Planning and Research pursuant to subdivision (a).”
Section 21097 was also added to the Public Resources Code, which provided an exemption until January 1, 2010, for transportation projects funded by the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 or projects funded by the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, in stating that the failure to analyze adequately the effects of GHGs would not violate CEQA. The Natural Resources Agency completed the approval process and the Amendments became effective on March 18, 2010.
The 2010 CEQA Amendments provide guidance to public agencies regarding the analysis and mitigation of the effects of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. The CEQA Amendments fit within the existing CEQA framework by amending existing CEQA Guidelines to reference climate change.
Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines provides direction for lead agencies for assessing the significance of impacts of GHG emissions:
• The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas 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.
• The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a Statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such regulations or requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must include specific requirements that reduce or mitigate the project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project.
The CEQA Guidelines amendments do not identify a threshold of significance for GHG emissions, nor do they prescribe assessment methodologies or specific mitigation measures. Instead, they call for a “good-faith effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate, or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project.” The amendments encourage lead agencies to consider many factors in performing a CEQA analysis and preserve lead agencies’ discretion to make their own determinations based upon substantial evidence. The amendments also encourage public agencies to make use of programmatic mitigation plans and programs from which to tier when they perform individual project analyses.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-25
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Also amended were CEQA Guidelines Sections 15126.4 and 15130, which address mitigation measures and cumulative impacts, respectively. GHG mitigation measures are referenced in general terms, but no specific measures are championed. The revision to the cumulative impact discussion requirement (Section 15130) simply directs agencies to analyze GHG emissions in an EIR when a project’s incremental contribution of emissions may be cumulatively considerable; however, it does not answer the question of when emissions are cumulatively considerable.
Section 15183.5 permits programmatic GHG analysis and later project-specific tiering, as well as the preparation of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plans. Compliance with such plans can support a determination that a project’s cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable, according to Section 15183.5(b).
California Supreme Court GHG Ruling
In a November 30, 2015, ruling, the California Supreme Court in Center for Biological Diversity v.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife on the Newhall Ranch project concluded that whether the project was consistent with meeting Statewide emission reduction goals is a legally permissible criterion of significance, but the significance finding for the project was not supported by a reasoned explanation based on substantial evidence. The Court offered potential solutions on pages 25-27 of the ruling to address this issue summarized below:
Specifically, the Court advised that:
• Substantiation of Project Reductions from Business as Usual (BAU). A lead agency may use a BAU comparison based on the Scoping Plan’s methodology if it also substantiates the reduction a particular project must achieve to comply with Statewide goals (page 25). • Compliance with Regulatory Programs or Performance Based Standards. A lead agency “might assess consistency with AB 32’s goal in whole or part by looking to compliance with regulatory programs designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from particular activities” (page 26). • Compliance with GHG Reduction Plans or Climate Action Plans. A lead agency may utilize “geographically specific GHG emission reduction plans” such as Climate Action Plans (CAPs) or GHG emission reduction plans to provide a basis for the tiering or streamlining of project-level CEQA analysis (page 26).
• Compliance with Local Air District Thresholds. A lead agency may rely on “existing numerical thresholds of significance for greenhouse gas emissions” adopted by, for example, local air districts (page 27).
Regional
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Climate Change Action Plan On August 21, 2008, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Valley Air District) Governing Board approved a proposal called the Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP). The CCAP began with a public process bringing together stakeholders, land use agencies, environmental groups, and business groups to conduct public workshops to develop comprehensive policies for City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-26 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx CEQA Guidelines, a carbon exchange bank, and voluntary GHG emissions mitigation agreements for the Governing Board’s consideration. The CCAP contains the following goals and actions:
• Develop GHG significance thresholds to address CEQA projects with GHG emission increases. • Develop the San Joaquin Valley Carbon Exchange for banking and trading GHG reductions. • Authorize use of the Valley Air District’s existing inventory reporting system to allow use for GHG reporting required by AB 32 regulations.
• Develop and administer GHG reduction agreements to mitigate proposed emission increases from new projects.
• Support climate protection measures that reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as toxic and criteria pollutants. Oppose measures that result in a significant increase in toxic or criteria pollutant emissions in already impacted areas.
On December 17, 2009, the Valley Air District Governing Board adopted “Guidance for Valley Land- use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA,” and the policy “District Policy—Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency.” The Valley Air District concluded that the existing science is inadequate to support quantification of the impacts that project-specific GHG emissions have on global climatic change. The Valley Air District found the effects of project-specific emissions to be cumulative, and without mitigation, their incremental contribution to global climatic change could be considered cumulatively considerable. The Valley Air District found that this cumulative impact is best addressed by requiring all projects to reduce their GHG emissions, whether through project design elements or mitigation.
The Valley Air District’s approach is intended to streamline the process of determining whether project-specific GHG emissions would have a significant effect. Projects exempt from the requirements of CEQA, and projects complying with an approved plan or mitigation program would be determined to have a less than significant cumulative impact. Such plans or programs must be specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources and must have a certified final CEQA document. For non-exempt projects, those projects for which there is no applicable approved plan or program, or those projects not complying with an approved plan or program, the lead agency must evaluate the project against performance-based standards and would require the adoption of design elements, known as a Best Performance Standard, to reduce GHG emissions. The Best Performance Standards (BPS) have not yet fully been established, though they must be designed to result in a 29 percent reduction when compared with the BAU projections identified in the ARB AB 32 Scoping Plan.
For stationary source permitting projects, BPS means, “The most stringent of the identified alternatives for control of GHG emissions, including type of equipment, design of equipment and operational and maintenance practices, which are achieved-in-practice for the identified service, operation, or emissions unit class.” The Valley Air District has identified BPS for the following sources: boilers; dryers and dehydrators; oil and gas extraction, storage, transportation, and refining operations; cogeneration; gasoline dispensing facilities; volatile organic compound control City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-27
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx technology; and steam generators. For development projects, BPS means, “Any combination of identified GHG emission reduction measures, including project design elements and land use decisions that reduce project-specific GHG emission reductions by at least 29 percent compared with business as usual.”
Projects not incorporating BPS would require quantification of GHG emissions and demonstration that BAU GHG emissions have been reduced or mitigated by 29 percent. As stated earlier, the ARB’s adjusted inventory reduced the amount required by the State to achieve 1990 emission levels from 29 percent to 21.7 percent to account for slower growth experienced since the 2008 recession.
According to Valley Air District guidance, quantification of GHG emissions would be required for all projects for which the lead agency has determined that an EIR is required, regardless of whether the project incorporates BPS.
San Joaquin Valley Carbon Exchange
The Valley Air District initiated work on the San Joaquin Valley Carbon Exchange in November 2008.
The purpose of the carbon exchange is to quantify, verify, and track voluntary GHG emissions reductions generated within the San Joaquin Valley. However, the Valley Air District has pursued an alternative strategy that incorporates the GHG emissions into its existing Rule 2301—Emission Reduction Credit Offset Banking that formerly only addressed criteria pollutants. The Valley Air District is also participating with the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), of which it is a member, in the CAPCOA Greenhouse Gas Reduction Exchange (GHG Rx). The GHG Rx is operated cooperatively by air districts that have elected to participate. Participating districts have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with CAPCOA and agreed to post only those credits that meet the Rx standards for quality. The objective is to provide a secure, low-cost, high-quality, GHG exchange for credits created in California. The GHG Rx is intended to help fulfill compliance obligations, or mitigation needs of local projects subject to environmental review, reducing the uncertainty of using credits generated in distant locations.
Rule 2301
While the CCAP indicated that the GHG emission reduction program would be called the San Joaquin Valley Carbon Exchange, the Valley Air District incorporated a method to register voluntary GHG emission reductions into its existing Rule 2301—Emission Reduction Credit Banking through amendments of the rule. Amendments to the rule were adopted on January 19, 2012. The purposes of the amendments to the rule include the following:
• 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.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-28 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Fresno Council of Governments 2022 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy
SB 375 requires the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) to prepare a SCS in their regional transportation plan. The SCS establishes a development pattern for the region, which, when integrated with the transportation network and other transportation measures and policies, would reduce GHG emissions from transportation (excluding goods movement). The SCS provides growth strategies to achieve the regional GHG emissions reduction targets. It does not require that local general plans, specific plans, or zoning be consistent with the SCS, but provides incentives for consistency. The eight counties of the San Joaquin Valley are coordinating on development of their SCS to maximize resources through the Valley Vision SCS process. However, each MPO is developing a separate SCS. The Fresno Council of Governments’ (Fresno COG) 2022 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) was adopted on July 28, 2022. The RTP/SCS includes modeling and quantification of GHG emissions and carbon sequestration in natural and working lands and 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 what can be completed with anticipated available funding for the projects and programs included within it. The SCS is intended to show how integrated land use and transportation planning can lead to lower GHG emissions from autos and light trucks in support of ARB’s GHG emission reduction targets. 44 Local
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan contains the following goals and policies related to GHG emissions:
Resource Conservation and Resiliency Element
Objective RC-2 Promote land uses that conserve resources.
Policy RC-2-a Link Land Use to Transportation. Promote mixed-use, higher density infill development in multi-modal corridors. Support land use patterns that make more efficient use of the transportation system and plan future transportation investments in areas of higher-intensity development. Discourage investment in infrastructure that would not meet these criteria.
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.
44 Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG). 2017. Regional Transportation Plan Sustainable Communities Strategy 2022-2046.
July.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-29
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Policy RC-5-b Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. As is consistent with State law, prepare and adopt a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan as part of the Master Environmental Impact Report to be concurrently approved with the Fresno General Plan in order to achieve compliance with State mandates, assist development by streamlining the approval process, and focus on feasible actions the City can take to minimize the adverse impacts of growth and development on global climate change. The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan shall include, but not be limited to:
• A baseline inventory of all known or reasonably discoverable sources of GHGs that currently exist in the City and sources that existed in 1990. • A projected inventory of the GHGs that can reasonably be expected to be emitted from those sources in the year 2035 with implementation of this General Plan and foreseeable community-wide and municipal operations.
• A target for the reduction of emissions from those identified sources. • A list of feasible GHG reduction measures to meet the reduction target, including energy conservation and “green building” requirements in municipal buildings and private development.
• Periodically update municipal and community-wide GHG emissions inventories to determine the efficacy of adopted measures and to guide future policy formulation needed to achieve and maintain GHG emissions reduction targets.
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.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-30 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx • 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 projects’ design, conditions of approval, and mitigation measures.
Policy RC-5-f Toolkit. Provide residents and project applicants with a “toolkit” of feasible measures that can be used to reduce GHG emissions, including educational materials on energy-efficient and “climate-friendly” products.
Policy RC-6-d Recycled Water. Prepare, Adopt, and implement a City of Fresno Recycled Water Master Plan.
Objective RC-7 Promote water conservation through standards, incentives, and capital investments.
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 US Bureau of Reclamation Best Management Practices for water consideration 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.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-31
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx • Expand efforts to educate the public about water supply issues and water conservation techniques.
Policy RC-7-b Water Pricing and Metering. Develop a tiered water cost structure for both residential and commercial users that will properly price water based on its true cost; require all new development to be metered for water use; and charge all customers the true, full cost of their water supply, including costs of acquisition, initial treatment, conveyance, wastewater treatment, operations, maintenance, and remediation.
Policy RC-7-c Best Practices for Conservation. Require all City facilities and all new private development to follow US 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.
Policy RC-7-h Landscape Water Conservation Standards. Refine landscape water conservation standards that will apply to new development installed landscapes, building on the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and other State regulations:
• Evaluate and apply, as appropriate, augmented xeriscape, “water wise,” and “green gardening” practices to be implemented in public and private landscaping design and maintenance.
• Facilitate implementation of the State’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance by developing alternative compliance measures that are easy to understand and observe.
Objective RC-8 Reduce the consumption of nonrenewable energy resources by requiring and encouraging conservation measures and the use of alternative energy sources.
Policy RC-8-a Existing Standards and Programs. Continue existing beneficial energy conservation programs, including adhering to the California Energy Code in new construction and major renovations.
Policy RC-8-b Energy Reduction Targets. Strive to reduce per capita residential electricity use to 1,800 kWh per year and nonresidential electricity use to 2,700 kWh per year per capita by developing and implementing incentives, design and operation standards, promoting alternative energy sources, and cost-effective savings.
Policy RC-8-c Energy Conservation in New Development. Consider providing an incentive program for new buildings that exceed California Energy Code requirements by 15 percent.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-32 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Policy RC-8-d - Incentives. Establish an incentive program for residential developers who commit to building all of their homes to ENERGY STAR performance guidelines.
Policy RC-8-h Solar Assistance. Identify and publicize information about financial mechanisms for private solar installations and provide over-the-counter permitting for solar installations meeting specified standards, which may include maximum size (in kV) of units that can be so approved.
Policy RC-8-I Renewable Target. Adopt and implement a program to increase the use of renewable energy to meet a given percentage of the City’s peak electrical load within a given time frame.
Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan
The Fresno Southeast Development Area (SEDA) Specific Plan is framed within three significant and interrelated goals: fiscal responsibility, social equity, and environmental sustainability. The proposed Plan and policies that form its implementation framework are formulated and coordinated to meet the criteria of these overlapping goals. The proposed Specific Plan contains the following objectives and policies related to greenhouse gas emissions:
Urban Form
Objective UF-1 Create complete neighborhoods in the Southeast Development Area that integrate housing, business and retail amenities. Implement a Southeast Development Area plan that balances and mixes housing, jobs, commercial businesses, services, and public facilities to help meet existing thresholds for lower vehicle miles traveled, reduced air pollution, and the efficient use of groundwater resources in compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014.
Policy UF-1.2 Jobs-Housing Balance. Maintain a target jobs-housing balance of at least one job to
1.25 housing units within the Plan Area.
Objective UF-2 Provide a mix of Regional, Community, and Neighborhood Town Centers where individuals can live, work and play.
Policy UF-2.1 Network of Town Centers. The SEDA will include Mixed-Use Districts of Regional, Community and Neighborhood Town Centers that form a network of complementary employment, commercial, cultural and civic opportunities linked by multimodal transportation systems.
Objective UF-5 Provide a well-balanced transportation network accessible to all users.
Policy UF-5.2 Transit Service. Safe, convenient and frequent transit service will be provided to and within the SEDA via regional transit connections along Kings Canyon Boulevard alignment and potentially, along existing rail right-of-ways. Local service will be provided along primary internal circulation corridors, including Arterials and Collectors.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-33
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx a) Regional Transit Planning. Thoughtful transit planning must occur in order to incorporate the primary centers, particularly the Regional Town Center along Kings Canyon. A Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) extension study including planning, design and environmental analysis should be completed to evaluate the potential costs and benefits of extending the BRT to the SEDA Plan Area. b) Station Location. The location of transit stations and stops will better serve local community members if they are placed within or adjacent to major activity centers, schools, medical facilities, public places such as libraries, parks, senior centers, and recreation facilities, commercial uses and high-density residential and employment areas.
c) Station Connectivity and Accessibility. To provide opportunities for the highest possible transit use, stations will feature a convenient and accessible path of travel and will include pedestrian and bicycle connections to the surrounding street network and transit transfer points. Bus stops and stations will be oriented toward major streets and public spaces, with primary commercial entrances opening directly toward bus stops. Important to ensuring all members within the SEDA community have access to transit opportunities, bus stops and stations will comply with the accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Policy UF-5.3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel. Promoting a network of pedestrian and bicycle routes, including dedicated trails, multi-purpose paths, and priority Bicycle Boulevards throughout the Plan Area will serve work, school, and recreational trips and provide options for healthier outcomes within the community. In addition, both existing and proposed regional trails will be coordinated in tandem within this walkable and bikeable network. The Fresno General Plan Figure MT-2: Paths and Trails and the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) identify active trails.
Policy UF-5.4 Safe Streets. Streets are designed for drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users within the Southeast Fresno Development Area and will enhance safety within the community. SEDA street design will reflect best practice standards as included in the City of Fresno Complete Streets Policy, adopted by the City in 2019.
Policy UF-5.5 Ranking of Travel Modes. In order to create a cohesive network between all modes of travel within the SEDA, the Plan will prioritize the following travel modes:
1. Pedestrian
2. Bicycle
3. High-capacity transit
4. Automobile
Policy UF-5.6 Performance Standards & Evaluation. Transit will be provided as demand warrants.
Upon Plan, buildout or when warranted, 10-minute peak-period headways will be provided along the BRT corridor (e.g., Kings Canyon), and 15-minute peak-period headways shall be provided for high-priority transit routes (e.g., De Wolf, Clovis).
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-34 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx In addition, all other transit routes in the planning area shall be operated at 30- minute headways upon Plan completion. Extended hour or late-night service shall be provided at 60-minute headways.
• Bus stop locations are generally placed at ¼ mile spacing. Bus stop placement will be prioritized at:
- Schools and medical facilities
- Libraries, parks, senior centers, and recreation facilities - Concentrated commercial areas
- Concentrated residential and employment areas
1. Bicycles: A user-friendly bicycle network will be provided to welcome all riders throughout the entire Plan Area. Bicycle lanes including Class II and Class IV facilities should be provided on all Super Arterials, Arterials, and Local Streets. A Bicycle network should be designated on Neighborhood or Local Streets.
Ensuring the safety of vulnerable users will be an important priority, as the Plan will seek to create a network of easy to use, lower stress amenities that provide the ability to connect riders to key destinations throughout the City, as descripted in the Fresno Active Transportation Plan (2017).
2. Pedestrians: A first-class pedestrian system shall be provided, including sidewalks on all streets, bicycle/pedestrian trails, and other design elements that prioritize safety and convenience for pedestrians, as described in the Fresno Active Transportation Plan (2017).
3. Vehicles: A highly connected, grid-based roadway system shall be provided for efficient vehicular travel. Please see the Streets and Circulation Standards in the Development Code and the City of Fresno's Department of Public Works Standard Drawings.
Policy UF-7.2 Parking Provisions. Encourage tight knit, walkable communities by capping the quantity of parking a development is required to provide based on accurate calculations representative of parking demand for future development.
Housing Choice and Affordability
Objective HC-3 Link housing and transportation together to limit family expenditures on both housing and transportation. The multimodal transportation network connects housing and jobs within the Southeast Development Area and to other major regional centers, facilitating internal travel by non-automobile means. The Urban Form Chapter addresses the location, distribution, and standards for transportation infrastructure investment, combining transportation options with land use development to ultimately lower travel costs for SEDA residents and employees.
Policy HC-3.2 Travel. Encourage accessible, mixed-use development that incorporates housing and jobs, while lowering daily vehicle miles traveled.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-35
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Policy HC-3.3 Smart Land Uses. Build smaller lot single-family and multifamily housing types which use less energy and water than larger units.
Open Space, Schools, and Public Facilities
Objective OS-2 Create and maintain an open space network that serves multiple purposes, including recreation, stormwater management, community farming, and environmental preservation.
Policy OS-2.5 Renewable Energy Generation. Support renewable energy technology systems in open spaces, where appropriate.
a) Pursue arrangements with public agencies and private partners to accommodate renewable energy systems, such as solar arrays, in areas that can serve a joint use as passive open space.
Objective OS-6 Ensure that all park, trail, and recreational facilities make the most efficient use of energy, water, and other natural resources.
Policy OS-6.1 Green Building. As important civic structures, park buildings shall conform to green building standards for energy and water efficiency.
Policy OS-6.3 Renewable Energy Systems. Explore developing renewable energy systems to provide power to park facilities.
Objective OS-10 Civic facilities, such as libraries, community centers, senior centers, post offices, and other civic buildings, will be integrated into the urban fabric of centers and communities, and will be well-served by public transit, paths, and trails.
Policy OS-10.5 On-Site Renewable Energy Generation. Pursue opportunities to develop renewable energy systems for civic facilities.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Conservation
Objective RC-1 Meet Statewide targets set for greenhouse gas emissions reductions as set forth in the City’s updated GHG Reduction Plan, adopted in 2021.
Policy RC-1.1 Land Use Strategies. Link land use and transportation by incorporating the following components into SEDA’s land use plan:
a) Compact Development. Maximize opportunities in the SEDA for compact, higher density development to provide more housing, conserve resources, and reduce travel distances.
b) Design the Neighborhood, Community, and Regional Town Centers in the SEDA as Mixed-Use Districts that include ground floor retail, civic and other commercial uses and upper floors of office and residential uses. Locate mixed-use development along high-quality transit corridors such as the Ventura/Kings Canyon Corridor that will serve SEDA’s Regional Town Center. Incentivize City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-36 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx developments that are mixed use, defined as pedestrian-friendly development that blends two or more residential, commercial, cultural or institutional uses, one of which must be residential.
c) Pedestrian-Oriented Development. Providing pedestrian-friendly infrastructure such as sidewalks, paths, and direct connections to neighboring uses such as shopping, schools, libraries, and parks increases the potential for people to make trips on foot, bicycle, or transit instead of by car. New development should include all sidewalks, paths, trails, and facilities required by the General Plan, the Active Transportation Plan and the SEDA.
d) Incentives for Pedestrian-Oriented Anchor Retail. Consider adopting and implementing incentives for new pedestrian-friendly anchor retail to be applied within the SEDA’s Regional, Community, and Neighborhood Town Centers. e) Complete Streets. Ensure that all streets in the SEDA comply with the City’s Complete Streets Policy.
f) Transit Oriented Development. Design land uses and integrate development site plans along high-quality transit corridors such as the Ventura/Kings Canyon Corridor, with transit oriented development that supports transit ridership and convenient pedestrian access to bus stops and station stops.
Policy RC-1.2 Transportation Facilities Strategies. Provide the following interconnected transportation facilities to encourage use of alternative modes of transportation and reduce vehicle trips:
a) Transit Facilities. Ensure adequate transit routes and facilities are provided in the SEDA through coordination between the Planning and Development and FAX [Fresno Area Express] Departments. Planned facilities should include bus stops, multimodal transfer centers and information kiosks.
b) Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure. Ensure the SEDA is well-served by pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, including sidewalks, bicycle lanes, bicycle paths and trails, and safe crossing infrastructure pursuant to the Active Transportation Plan.
c) Traffic Calming Measures. Design features and strategies to reduce vehicle speeds and reduce conflicts with pedestrians to encourage more walking. Slower speeds encouraged by traffic calming can also improve safety and increase bicycling. Where appropriate, provide on-street parking, or street trees and landscaping to separate vehicles from pedestrians to improve walkability.
Policy RC-1.3 Transportation Demand Strategies. Transportation Demand Strategies focus on commute trips and provide both incentives for using alternative modes of transportation and disincentives for use of the gas powered single-occupant vehicles. Examples include Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs, parking strategies, and electric vehicle charging stations. The following strategies should be considered for implementation in the SEDA:
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-37
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx a) Support the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s Rule 9410 by encouraging a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy at employer sites with 100 or more employees. TDM programs include making physical improvements to work sites, such as adding showers and lockers to encourage biking to work, free transit passes, carpool services, and preferential parking.
b) Consider requiring employers with 50 or more employees to implement TDM programs in the SEDA.
c) The City of Fresno and the San Joaquin Valley Air District should jointly fund a TDM Coordinator that would assist large employers in Fresno to develop and maintain TDM programs. This position would also support the creation of maintenance of these programs in the SEDA.
d) Develop a trip reduction parking strategy in the SEDA that would encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. Such a program might include parking pricing at worksites, paid parking structures, and limited parking requirements. e) Develop minimum requirements for electric vehicle charging stations to be installed at worksites over a given size (50-100 employees).
Policy RC-1.4 Energy Conservation Strategies. Although new residential development now must meet zero-net-energy requirements, there is still a need to conserve energy to reduce GHG emissions. Energy use in buildings is the second largest generator of GHG emissions after transportation. The following policies will help accomplish needed GHG reductions:
a) Consider developing an incentive program in SEDA for new buildings that exceed the California Energy Code requirements by 15 percent.
b) Encourage and reward compliance with voluntary energy conservation certification programs such LEED®, EnergyStar, or Greenpoint Rating systems. c) Promote compliance with State law mandating disclosure of a building’s energy data and rating of the previous year to prospective buyers and lessees of the entire building or lenders financing the entire building. d) Partner with PG&E [Pacific Gas and Electric Company] or other organization to offer a home energy retrofit program to existing homeowners in the SEDA.
Ensure that solar retrofits are made available to existing homeowners.
Policy RC-1.5 Waste Diversion, Recycling, and Energy Recovery. Establishing programs and actions that promote recycling and diversion of waste from landfills can reduce energy consumed in the transport and handling of waste material and can reduce the greenhouse gases that are emitted during the decomposition of organic waste.
The State of California has adopted increasingly stringent mandates for the percentage of solid waste that can be disposed in landfills. In addition, certain landfills have been mandated to install methane capture systems to result in greenhouse gas reductions from these sources. The effects of methane are City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-38 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx powerful—as it is 21 times more effective than carbon dioxide in retaining heat in the atmosphere. Methane can be flared, producing mainly carbon dioxide or used in combustion devices to generate heat or power that can be used for productive purposes displacing the use of fossil fuels. The following policies are recommended in the SEDA to reduce GHGs and conserve energy:
1. 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:
a) Continue to require recyclable material collection and storage areas in all residential development.
b) 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.
c) Provide educational materials to residents on how and what to recycle and how to dispose of hazardous waste.
d) Provide recycling canisters and collection in public areas where trash cans are also provided.
e) Institute a program to evaluate major waste generators and identify recycling opportunities for their facilities and operations.
f) Continue to partner with the California Integrated Waste Management Board on waste diversion and recycling programs and the CalMax (California Materials Exchange) program.
g) 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.
h) Evaluate the feasibility of “carbon footprinting” for the City’s wastewater treatment facilities, biomass and composting operations, solid waste collection and recycling programs.
i) Expand yard waste collection to divert compostable waste from landfills. j) 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.
2. Create a strategic and operations plan for fulfilling the City Council Resolution committing the City of Fresno to a Zero Waste goal.
3. Continue to pursue opportunities to reduce air pollution by using methane gas from the old City landfill and the City’s wastewater treatment process.
Policy RC-1.6 Municipal Facilities. SEDA will include a range of municipal facilities from streetlights to parks and open spaces to community centers and police and fire facilities will be constructed. It is important to include greenhouse gas reductions and energy conservation at City facilities, over which the City has direct control and can allocate City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-39
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx resources for this purpose. In addition, implementing these measures at City facilities also establishes the City as a leader in GHG reduction and conservation, which is important as it implements these measures on a citywide basis. The following potential citywide actions that can be initiated within the SEDA as opportunity allows:
a) Improve energy efficiency in City operations.
b) Exceed Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for new City buildings. c) Install renewable energy systems on City facilities. d) Implement City operated Transportation Demand Management for City employees.
e) Purchase green vehicles for City fleets.
f) Enhance reduction, reuse, and recycling efforts at City facilities. g) Implement water efficient landscaping in City parks and facilities. h) Establish a green purchasing program.
Policy RC-1.7 Urban Forestry Program. Encouraging the integration and protection of new and existing mature trees within our communities can lead to significant reductions in the urban heat island effect and energy required for cooling. As another significant benefit, trees also store harmful carbon as they grow, in a process known as sequestration. As these trees continue to grow, mature and sequester carbon, it is also important for urban forestry projects to consider potential tree emissions that result from the maintenance and ultimate disposition of trees to ensure a net decrease in greenhouse gas emissions occurs.
Maintaining trees, vegetation and plants throughout City parks is important to the success and longevity of these publicly owned spaces. In addition, these areas provide opportunities for new tree planting and replacement of tree species that possess a low potential to store carbon, with tree species that possess higher carbon storage potential. To better understand how to achieve these opportunities, there are many tools that communities can utilize. The Climate Action Reserve, Urban Forest Project Reporting Protocol (CAR 2019) provides criteria for generating greenhouse gas emission offsets with tree planting along with procedures for project monitoring.
Development of the SEDA will present many opportunities for the strategic planting of trees with high carbon storage potential, as noted below:
a) Develop a tree palette for the SEDA that reinforces its sense of place, reflects native species, and includes tree species with high carbon storage potential. b) Meet parks shading targets noted in the Parks Master Plan. c) Plant shade trees to delineate corridors and the boundaries of urban areas, and to provide tree canopy for bike lanes, sidewalks, parking lots, and trails.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-40 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx
3.8.4 - Thresholds of Significance
The Lead Agency utilizes the criteria in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist to determine whether greenhouse emissions impacts are significant environmental effects. The project would have a significant impact on the environment if it would:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
The vast majority of individual projects do not generate sufficient GHG emissions to create a project- specific impact through a direct influence to climate change; therefore, the issue of climate change typically involves an analysis of whether a project’s contribution toward an impact is cumulatively considerable. As defined in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15355, “cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. For future projects, the significance of GHG emissions may be evaluated based on locally adopted quantitative thresholds, or consistency with a regional GHG Reduction Plan (such as a CAP).
The City of Fresno developed its first GHG Plan in 2014, which includes GHG reduction targets and emissions inventories for the years 2020 and 2035. An updated GHG Plan (the GHG Plan Update) was adopted on September 30, 2021, pursuant to a certified General Plan Program EIR (State Clearinghouse Number 2019050005). The GHG Plan Update was developed by the City to ensure conformity with the mandates of California Supreme Court in the Newhall Ranch case and the State of California’s latest GHG regulations. However, in 2024, the Court rejected the City’s GHG Plan Update because it did not substantiate its analytical assumption that the State’s GHG emission targets were appropriate for Fresno itself. The City’s previously adopted GHG Reduction Plan (2014) has not been the subject of a legal challenge and has not been invalidated by the court. As stated, the 2014 GHG Plan includes reduction targets for 2035; however, the full 25 year buildout of the proposed project goes beyond the year 2035 and is anticipated to be fully operational in the year 2050. Therefore, this analysis will evaluate the consistency of the proposed project with ARB’s latest 2022 Scoping Plan, including the proposed project’s consistency with relevant Scoping Plan measures and the latest RTP/SCS for the region within which the Plan is located. The 2022 Scoping Plan is consistent with the State’s longer-term AB 1279 GHG reduction targets of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and reducing GHG emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045. Therefore, consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan would also demonstrate consistency with the State’s long- term GHG reduction targets encapsulated by AB 1279.
The analysis provides a qualitative assessment of the proposed project’s compliance with the applicable plans, policies and regulations for the purposes of reducing GHG emissions to determine whether the proposed project would have a significant impact on the environment relative to GHGs.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-41
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx
3.8.5 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the project and provides mitigation measures where necessary.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1: The proposed project could generate direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions, and these emissions would result in a significant impact on the environment.
Impact GHG-2: T he proposed project could conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Impact Analysis
The proposed project’s GHG emissions impact determination is based on 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. Implementation of the proposed project would contribute to global climate change through direct emissions of GHG from on-site area sources and vehicle trips generated by the proposed project, and indirectly through off-site energy production required for on-site activities, water use, and waste disposal.
Construction
Construction activities associated with future development under the proposed project would generate temporary short-term GHG emissions from heavy-duty construction equipment, worker trips, and material delivery and hauling. On-site activities would consist of the operation of off-road construction equipment as well as on-site truck travel (e.g., haul trucks, dump trucks, and concrete trucks). Off-site sources would include emissions from construction vehicles used for hauling materials and worker vehicle trips. The proposed project’s short-term construction-related GHG emissions were estimated using the California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod). CalEEMod is a Statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify GHG emissions from land use projects.
Estimated unmitigated GHG emissions associated with construction of the proposed project are summarized in Table 3.8-2 for informational purposes. These emissions include all worker vehicle, vendor vehicle, hauler vehicle, and off-road construction vehicle GHG emissions. For the purposes of this analysis, based on the anticipated buildout year, future development facilitated by the proposed project is assumed to commence construction in 2024 and continue construction over an approximately 25-year buildout schedule. This schedule is an approximation and may change over time. A regularized construction schedule was utilized for modeling purposes for the sake of simplicity.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-42 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Table 3.8-2: Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Construction Year Emissions (MT CO2e)
Construction 2024 155,615
Construction 2025 141,996
Construction 2026 133,150
Construction 2027 129,805
Construction 2028 126,230
Construction 2029 123,855
Construction 2030 121,323
Construction 2031 119,041
Construction 2032 117,479
Construction 2033 114,823
Construction 2034 113,256
Construction 2035 112,307
Construction 2036 112,737
Construction 2037 112,307
Construction 2038 112,307
Construction 2039 111,877
Construction 2040 107,665
Construction 2041 107,665
Construction 2042 107,665
Construction 2043 35,476
Total1 2,316,578
Notes:
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
1 Figures may not appear to add exactly due to rounding.
Source: CalEEMod Output (see Appendix B).
Future development under the proposed project would comply with the requirements of the City’s General Plan policies and programs related to GHG emissions as well as applicable Valley Air District regulations. Short-term construction GHG emissions are a one-time release of GHGs and are not expected to significantly contribute to global climate change. Additionally, the implementation of the mitigation measures presented in Section 3.3, Air Quality, of this Recirculated Draft PEIR would further reduce the overall annual GHG emissions associated with the proposed project. For instance, MM AIR-1a would require the use of “super compliant” architectural coatings during construction to reduce the generation of VOC emissions, which are also GHGs with low GWP . MM AIR-1b would potentially require the use of electric-powered construction equipment, which could serve to reduce City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-43
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx GHG emissions related to the use of construction equipment. Therefore, future development under the proposed project at construction would not result in significant adverse effects related to GHG emissions. As such, the construction of proposed project would result in a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
Operation
Operational or long-term emissions occur over the life of the project. Sources of emissions may include motor vehicles and trucks, energy usage, water usage, waste generation, and area sources, such as landscaping activities. Operational GHG emissions were calculated using CalEEMod and include direct as well as indirect emissions (including those from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use). It should be noted that CalEEMod does not account for Governor Newsom’s Zero-Emission by 2035 Executive Order (N-79-20), which requires that all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles by 2035; CalEEMod also does not account for the new ARB rules related to truck electrification (e.g., Advanced Clean Trucks Regulation). This is anticipated to substantially reduce the operational emissions associated with vehicles (i.e., mobile emissions) over time. The operational emissions results provided in Table 3.8-3 are likely an overestimate for mobile emissions, given the State’s ongoing effort to increase use of electric vehicles and trucks. As shown in Table 3.8-3, operation of the proposed project would result in a net increase of GHG emissions by 510,791 MT CO 2e per year
compared to the existing conditions in the project area.
Table 3.8-3: Operational GHG Emissions at Project Buildout Source Category
Emissions with Proposed Project
Buildout (MT CO2e)
Area Sources 18,945
Energy Usage 111,179
Transportation 432,219
Solid Waste 25,336
Water and Wastewater 14,233
Annual Total1 601,912
Existing Land Use Emissions 91,121
NET Total Annual Emissions 510,791
Notes:
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
1 F igures may not appear to add exactly due to rounding.
Source: CalEEMod Output (see Appendix B).
While implementation of the proposed project would generate an increase in GHG emissions, its guiding principles, design guidelines, and proposed land use designations for the Plan Area would contribute to minimizing emissions on a per capita basis to the extent feasible. Guiding principles and objectives of the proposed project include providing for a balanced mix of uses, boosting the economy, and promoting sustainable development. Additionally, objectives of the proposed project City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-44 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx include encouraging a balanced mix of uses and promoting development that reduces VMT and encourages active transportation. Applicable General Plan policies, which are listed in greater detail below, support the installation of electric infrastructure to support electric vehicles at residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. Future developments consistent with the proposed project would be subject to myriad State regulations that will reduce emissions from project construction and operation, including Title 24 and CALGreen standards and the California Code of Regulations, which the City has adopted, as well as the California Energy Code, the Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance, and State regulations on refrigerants and consumer products. In addition, as detailed in the Regulatory section, GHG emissions from mobile sources will be reduced by State regulations, including the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, the Pavley Standard, the Advanced Clean Car and Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) programs, and the Heavy-Duty Vehicle GHG Emission Reduction Regulation.
Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan
ARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan (which is the latest version of the Scoping Plan) provides policies that are considered needed to meet the State’s mid-term and long-term GHG emissions reduction targets.
Specifically, ARB’s Final 2022 Scoping Plan identifies that it “. . . lays out the sector-by-sector roadmap for California, the world’s fifth largest economy, to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier . . . .” The 2022 Scoping Plan addresses recent legislation and direction from Governor Newsom by extending and expanding upon earlier Scoping Plans with a target of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 and adding carbon neutrality as a science-based guide and touchstone for California’s climate work. Under the 2022 Scoping Plan, local government plays a supporting role through its land use authority and control over local transportation infrastructure. The 2022 Scoping Plan includes reductions from implementation of SB 375 that apply to VMT from passenger vehicles. Fresno County targets for SB 375 are a 5 percent per capita reduction by 2020 and a 10 percent per capita reduction by 2035 relative to 2005 levels. (SB 375 is implemented with the Fresno COG RTP/SCS). The RTP/SCS envisions an increase in development density that would encourage fewer and shorter trips and more trips by transit, walking, and bicycling in amounts sufficient to achieve the SB 375 targets. The strategies included in the proposed Fresno SEDA Specific Plan are consistent with the measures included in the RTP/SCS and would serve to support a per capita reduction in VMT in the Plan Area after the implementation of the proposed project.
The proposed project’s consistency with the applicable 2022 Scoping Plan policies is discussed in Table 3.8-4 below:
Table 3.8-4: Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan
Scoping Plan Measure Project Consistency
Convert local government fleets to ZEVs [Zero-
Emission Vehicles] and provide EV [electric vehicle]
charging at public sites.
Not applicable. While this goal is not applicable to
private development plans or projects, the proposed
project includes a commitment to preference EV parking
spaces, and development pursuant to the proposed
project will comply with the requirements of the _J
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-45
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Scoping Plan Measure Project Consistency
California Energy Code (CCR Title 24, Part 6) as it relates to EV charging and parking spaces.
Create a jurisdiction-specific ZEV ecosystem to
support deployment of ZEVs statewide (such as
building standards that exceed state building
codes, permit streamlining, infrastructure siting,
consumer education, preferential parking policies,
and ZEV readiness plans).
Not applicable. While this goal is not applicable to
private development plans or projects, the proposed
project includes a commitment to preference EV parking
spaces, and development pursuant to the proposed
project will comply with the requirements of the
California Energy Code (CCR Title 24, Part 6) as it relates to EV charging and parking spaces.
Reduce or eliminate minimum parking standards. Consistent. The proposed project includes Objective UF- 7 to support a variety of transportation options with
parking requirements that encourage non-automotive
travel modes within the Fresno Southeast Development
Area (SEDA). Policy UF-7.2 provides for parking
provisions that cap the quantity of parking a
development is required to provide. Additionally, the
proposed project calls for a parking study to be
completed by the City to establish and adopt parking
reduction standards to encourage a variety of
transportation options.
Implement Complete Streets policies and
investments, consistent with general plan
circulation element requirements.
Consistent. Policy RC-1.1 of the proposed project
ensures that all streets in the SEDA comply with the
City’s Complete Streets Policy.
Increase access to public transit by increasing
density of development near transit, improving
transit service by increasing service frequency,
creating bus priority lanes, reducing or eliminating
fares, microtransit, etc.
Consistent. Policy RC-1.1 of the proposed project calls for transit-oriented development that is integrated to
design land uses and for development along high-
quality transit corridors to supports transit ridership and convenient pedestrian access to bus stops and station
stops. Policy RC-1.2: Transportation Facilities Strategies of the proposed project calls for provision of
interconnected transportation facilities to encourage
use of alternative modes of transportation to reduce
vehicle trips, including transit facilities, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and traffic calming measures.
Policy RC-1.3: Transportation Demand Strategies of the
proposed project calls for strategies to focus on
commute trips and provision of incentives for using
alternative modes of transportation.
Increase public access to clean mobility options by
planning for and investing in electric shuttles, bike
share, car share, and walking.
Consistent. Policy RC-1.1 of the proposed project calls for transit-oriented development to design land uses
and integrate development along high-quality transit
corridors that supports transit ridership and convenient pedestrian access to bus stops and station stops. Policy RC-1.2: Transportation Facilities Strategies of the
proposed project calls for provision of interconnected
transportation facilities to encourage use of alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicle trips,
including transit facilities, pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure, and traffic calming measures. Policy RC-L r
L
L
L
_J
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-46 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Scoping Plan Measure Project Consistency
1.3: Transportation Demand Strategies of the proposed
project calls for strategies to focus on commute trips
and provision of incentives for using alternative modes of transportation.
Implement parking pricing or transportation
demand management pricing strategies.
Consistent. Policy RC-1.3: Transportation Demand
Strategies of the proposed project calls for strategies to focus on commute trips and provision of incentives for
using alternative modes of transportation. Trip
reduction programs to promote single-trip reduction
include parking pricing at worksites, paid parking
structures, and limited parking requirements.
Amend zoning or development codes to enable
mixed-use, walkable, transit-oriented, and
compact infill development (such as increasing the
allowable density of a neighborhood).
Consistent. Policy RC-1.1 of the proposed project calls for transit-oriented development to design land uses
and integrate development that are integrated along
high-quality transit corridors that supports transit
ridership and convenient pedestrian access to bus stops and station stops.
Preserve natural and working lands by
implementing land use policies that guide
development toward infill areas and do not
convert “greenfield” land to urban uses (e.g., green
belts, strategic conservation easements).
Consistent. The proposed project is one of several
growth areas identified in the City’s General Plan and
aligns with the General Plan’s policy of balancing growth with infill development. Small farms and community
gardens will be integrated into neighborhoods, schools, and town centers and a buffer that includes rural
homes, organic farming. and open spaces serves to
transition the proposed project and commercial
agriculture to the east. In addition, the General Plan
includes a number of policies to support agriculture and preserve natural and working lands within the Resource
Conservation and Resilience chapter. Furthermore, the
proposed project would be required to implement
Mitigation M
easures related to agricultural resources, as
identified in Section 3.2, Agricultural Resources and
Forestry Resources of this document.
Adopt all-electric new construction reach codes for
residential and commercial uses.
Consistent. Although this goal is not applicable to an
individual residential or commercial development
project, the proposed project would be consistent with
the applicable Energy 24 Building Efficiency Standards, which ensure highly energy-efficient development.
Additionally, the proposed project would utilize
electricity from PG&E, which has been increasing its
overall supply of renewable energy as part of its overall energy portfolio, consistent with the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard.
Adopt policies and incentive programs to
implement energy efficiency retrofits for existing
buildings, such as weatherization, lighting
upgrades, and replacing energy-intensive
appliances and equipment with more efficient
Consistent. Policy RC-1.4: Energy Conservation
Strategies of the proposed project considers adopting
an incentive program for new buildings that exceed
California Energy Code requirements by 15 percent;
encouraging and rewarding compliance with voluntary
energy conservation programs; promoting compliance
L
_J
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-47
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx Scoping Plan Measure Project Consistency
systems (such as Energy Star-rated equipment and
equipment controllers).
with State law mandating disclosure of a building’s
energy data and rating of the previous year to
prospective buyers and lessees of the entire building or lenders financing the entire building; and partnering
with PG&E or other organizations to offer a home
energy retrofit program to existing homeowners and
ensuring that solar retrofits are made available to
existing homeowners.
Adopt policies and incentive programs to electrify
all appliances and equipment in existing buildings
such as appliance rebates, existing building reach
codes, or time of sale electrification ordinances.
Consistent. Policy RC-1.4: Energy Conservation
Strategies of the proposed project considers adopting
an incentive program for new buildings that exceed
California Energy Code requirements by 15 percent;
encouraging and rewarding compliance with voluntary
energy conservation programs; promoting compliance
with State law mandating disclosure of a building’s
energy data and rating of the previous year to
prospective buyers and lessees of the entire building or lenders financing the entire building; and partnering
with PG&E or other organizations to offer a home
energy retrofit program to existing homeowners and
ensuring that solar retrofits are made available to
existing homeowners.
Facilitate deployment of renewable energy
production and distribution and energy storage on
privately owned land uses (e.g., permit
streamlining, information sharing).
Consistent. Policy EO-3.1: Collaboration with the San
Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJCVEO) of
the proposed project commits to working with the
SJVCEO to attract projects and investments to SEDA,
including renewable energy projects such as solar and
biomass.
Deploy renewable energy production and energy
storage directly in new public projects and on
existing public facilities (e.g., solar photovoltaic
systems on rooftops of municipal buildings and on
canopies in public parking lots, battery storage
systems in municipal buildings).
Not applicable. This measure does not directly relate to private development projects.
Source: California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2012. Appendix D Local Actions. November. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/2022-sp-appendix-d-local-actions.pdf. Accessed December 20, 2024.
Overall, the proposed project would not conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan measures as shown in Table 3.8-4. The proposed project’s operational emissions would be reduced as regulations are implemented by the ARB and other State agencies to comply with the statewide GHG reduction targets. Many of these regulations are already identified in the 2022 Scoping Plan. These Statewide actions are anticipated to reduce operational GHG emissions even further below those identified in Table 3.8-2 and Table 3.8-3. For example, the proposed project’s transportation emissions would be expected to decline as vehicle efficiency standards are implemented beyond the Advanced Clean Cars II program and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard is strengthened. Furthermore, CalEEMod does not account for Governor Newsom’s Zero-Emission by 2035 Executive Order (N79-20) or ARB’s r
L
J
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-48 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx subsequent regulations, which requires that all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles by 2035. This is anticipated to substantially reduce the operational emissions associated with passenger vehicles (i.e., mobile emissions) further over time. In addition, the proposed project would be developed according to the latest State and federal regulatory requirements those associated with operational building energy efficiency. Therefore, the proposed project would be considered consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan. Based on this, recognizing the ARB as an authoritative substantial evidence source in evaluating post-2020 GHG impacts, since the proposed project would be consistent with the ARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan, buildout of the proposed project would not interfere with the main programs the ARB has identified to support its conclusions that the State is on a trajectory to meet the 2045 GHG target. Overall, the proposed project would not impede the 2022 Scoping Plan and would help the State to progress toward this target.
Consistency with Fresno COG’s 2022 RTP/SCS
The Fresno COG’s 2022 RTP/SCS includes five goals with corresponding policies for improving mobility and accessibility, connecting communities with accessible transportation options, creating a safe, well-maintained, efficient, and climate-resilient multimodal transportation network, adding to a transportation network that supports a sustainable and vibrant economy, and embracing clean transportation, technology, and innovation. These goals include similar measures to the 2022 Scoping Plan. The proposed project’s consistency with the applicable 2022 RTP/SCS strategies is discussed in Table 3.8-5, below.
Table 3.8-5: Consistency with Fresno COG’s 2022 RTP/SCS RTP/SCS Measure Project Consistency
Goal 1: Improved mobility and accessibility for all. Consistent. The proposed project would include many project features that improve mobility and accessibility, including providing pedestrian network improvements.
The proposed project includes high-quality transit
connections, including convenient and frequent transit
service to connect the Fresno Southeast Development
Area (SEDA) town center to jobs and housing inside the
Plan Area and across the region. The proposed project
promotes walkable neighborhoods and will provide for
nearly all residences to be located within walking
distance of a Neighborhood Town Center with an
elementary school, recreation areas, community
gardens, and small shops. The proposed project will
create a trail system and bicycle paths that make
traveling without a car safe and convenient. Overall, the proposed project would be well-connected to the rest of the City of Fresno and the region, as well as provide a wide variety of multimodal and sustainable
transportation options.
Goal 2: Vibrant communities that are accessible by
sustainable transportation options.
Consistent. The proposed project is a specific plan
calling for residential, commercial, and mixed-use
development which would create a vibrant new
community adjacent to existing residential communities _J City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-49
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx RTP/SCS Measure Project Consistency
with pedestrian network, roadway, transit and bicycle
improvements. Overall, the proposed project would be
well-connected to the rest of the City of Fresno and the region, as well as provide a wide variety of multimodal and sustainable transportation options.
Goal 3: A safe, well-maintained, efficient, and
climate-resilient multimodal transportation
network.
Consistent. The proposed project is a specific plan
calling for residential, commercial, and mixed-use
development which would provide a wide variety of
multimodal and sustainable transportation options,
thereby reducing impacts on climate due to greenhouse
gas emissions.
Goal 4: A transportation network that supports a
sustainable and vibrant economy.
Consistent. The proposed project would create local
jobs as well as provide new shopping options for local
and regional residents, thereby supporting a sustainable and vibrant economy.
Goal 5: A region embracing clean transportation,
technology, and innovation.
Consistent. The proposed project would provide for
preferential EV parking spaces and mixed-use
development, would create a modern and vibrant
pedestrian trail system and bicycle network, and would
provide for transit connections to the proposed project area (including the potential for low- or no emissions
bus services). This would ensure that the proposed
project would help support the region in embracing
clean transportation, technology, and innovation.
Source: Fresno COG. 2022. RTP/SCS.
The State’s executive branch adopted several Executive Orders related to GHG emissions. Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-30-15 are two examples. Executive Order S-3-05 sets goals to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. The goal of Executive Order S-3-05 to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 was codified by AB 32. The proposed project, as analyzed above, is consistent with AB 32. Therefore, the proposed project does not conflict with this component of Executive Order S-3-05. Executive Order B-30-15 establishes an interim goal to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
The Executive Order S-3-05 2050 target has not been codified by legislation. Studies have shown that, in order to meet the 2050 target, aggressive pursuit of technologies in the transportation and energy sectors, including electrification and the decarbonization of fuel, will be required. Because of the technological shifts required and the unknown parameters of the regulatory framework in 2050, quantitatively analyzing the proposed project’s impacts further relative to the 2050 goal is speculative for purposes of CEQA.
45 45 California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan. Website: http:// ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/board/books/2014/022014/14-2-4pres.pdf. Accessed June 24, 2022.
L
L
J
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-50 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx The ARB recognizes that AB 32 establishes an emissions reduction trajectory that will allow California to achieve the more stringent 2050 target: “These [GHG emission reduction] measures also put the State on a path to meet the long-term 2050 goal of reducing California’s GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. This trajectory is consistent with the reductions that are needed globally to stabilize the climate.” In addition, the ARB’s First Update “lays the foundation for establishing a broad framework for continued emission reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050,” and many of the emission reduction strategies recommended by ARB would serve to reduce the proposed project’s post-2020 emissions level to the extent applicable by law:
• Energy Sector: Continued improvements in California’s appliance and building energy efficiency programs and initiatives, such as the State’s zero-net-energy building goals, would serve to reduce the proposed project’s emissions level. Additionally, further additions to California’s renewable resource portfolio would favorably influence the proposed project’s emissions level.
• Transportation Sector: Anticipated deployment of improved vehicle efficiency, zero-emission technologies, lower carbon fuels, and improvement of existing transportation systems all will serve to reduce the project’s emissions level.
• Water Sector: The proposed project’s emissions level will be reduced as a result of further desired enhancements to water conservation technologies. • Waste Management Sector: Plans to further improve recycling, reuse, and reduction of solid waste will beneficially reduce the proposed project’s emissions level.
For the reasons described above, the proposed project’s post-2020 emissions trajectory is expected to follow a declining trend, consistent with the 2030 and 2050 targets. The trajectory required to achieve the post-2020 targets is shown in Figure 3.8-3.
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Recirculated Draft Program EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.8-51
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx
Source: California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2017. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update. January 20. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2030sp_pp_final.pdf. Accessed June 30, 2022.
Figure 3.8-3: California’s Path to Achieving the 2050 Target In his January 2015 inaugural address, Governor Brown expressed a commitment to achieve “three ambitious goals” that he would like to see accomplished by 2030 to reduce the State’s GHG emissions:
• Increasing the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard from 33 percent in 2020 to 50 percent in 2030;
• Cutting the petroleum use in cars and trucks in half; and • Doubling the efficiency of existing buildings and making heating fuels cleaner.
These expressions of executive branch policy may be manifested in adopted legislative or regulatory action through the State agencies and departments responsible for achieving the State’s environmental policy objectives, particularly those relating to global climate change. 46 Further, recent studies show that the State’s existing and proposed regulatory framework will allow the State to reduce its GHG emissions level to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Even though these studies did not provide an exact regulatory and technological roadmap to achieve the 2030 and 2050 goals, they demonstrated that various combinations of policies could allow the Statewide emissions level to remain very low through 2050,
46 Brown, Edmund G. Jr. 2015. Press Release: California Establishes Most Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Goal in North America. April 29.
Website: https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2015/04/29/news18938/index.html. Accessed June 24, 2022. 500
450
- 2020 Target (11
N
0 400
'
u I-
' :E 350
:E
' Ill 300 C:
'
Executive 0 2030Target 'iii 250 Ill
• • E • ••
w 200 • • ••
c.::, .
I c.::, 150 •• . ltJ . •• :::,
100 ••
C:
• ?OSO Target • C:
<(
so . . .
0 .
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
City of Fresno—Fresno Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recirculated Draft Program EIR
3.8-52 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN -JN)/3168/31680037/EIR/1 - Recirculated Draft PEIR/31680037 Sec03-08 GHG.docx suggesting that the combination of new technologies and other regulations not analyzed in the studies could allow the State to meet the 2050 target.47 Given the proportional contribution of mobile source-related GHG emissions to the State’s inventory, recent studies also show that relatively new trends—such as the increasing importance of web- based shopping, the emergence of different driving patterns, and the increasing effect of web-based applications on transportation choices—are beginning to substantially influence transportation choices and the energy used by transportation modes. These factors have changed the direction of transportation trends in recent years and will require the creation of new models to effectively analyze future transportation patterns and the corresponding effect on GHG emissions. For the reasons described above, the proposed project’s post-2020 emissions trajectory is expected to follow a declining trend, consistent with the 2030 and 2050 targets.
Consistency with SB 32
The 2030 goal was codified under SB 32 and is now addressed by the 2022 Scoping Plan. The new plan provides a strategy that is capable of reaching the SB 32 target if the measures included in the plan are implemented and achieve reductions within the ranges expected. The most recent version of the ARB’s Scoping Plan, the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan), addresses the AB1279 targets and was adopted on December 15, 2022. It provides a detailed sector-by-sector guide to address climate change by cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent and achieving carbon neutrality in 2045. The elements of the framework proposed to achieve the new targets are as follows:
• Transportation
- Achieve 100 percent Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) sales of light-duty vehicles by 2035 and medium heavy-duty vehicles by 2040.
- Achieve a 20 percent zero-emission target for the aviation sector. - Prioritize and increase funding for clean transportation equity programs. - Accelerate the reduction and replacement of fossil fuel production and consumption in California.
- Increase the stringency and scope of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). - Achieve a per capita VMT reduction of at least 25 percent below 2019 levels by 2030 and 30 percent below by 2045.
• Clean Electricity Grid
- Per SB 350, double Statewide energy efficiency savings by 2030. - Use long-term planning processes to support grid reliability and expansion of renewable and zero-carbon development.
- Per SB 100 and 1020, achieve 90 percent, 95 percent, and 100 percent renewable and zero-carbon retail sales by 2035, 2040, and 2045, respectively. • Sustainable Manufacturing and Buildings