Hanford City Council
February 4, 2025

City Council Meeting
Agenda
February 4, 2025
7:00 PM – Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
400 N. Douty St.

Council Members will meet in-person in the Council
Chambers. The meeting will also be lived streamed on the City’s website: http://livestream.hanford.city/

4:00 PM CALL TO ORDER STUDY SESSION:

ROLL CALL BY THE CITY CLERK:

PUBLIC COMMENT:

Study Sessions are considered Special Meetings under the Brown Act. Accordingly, comments from the public are limited to items listed on the agenda (GC 54954.3a). Public Comment will be accepted during each agenda item. A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.

STUDY SESSION:

A. Presentation by Greg Burns of Thorn Run Partners, the City of Hanford's contracted federal lobbying firm, with updates on national legislative matters and discussion of possible legislation and actions that Council should be aware of for the coming year.

B. Council discussion of the process to appoint members to the Measure H Oversight Board after the close of the initial application period.

CALL TO ORDER REGULAR SESSION:

ROLL CALL:

INVOCATION:

Cara Fleming
FLAG SALUTE:

RECOGNITION:

A. Recognition of Cara Fleming for her community contributions through "Operation Christmas Blessing".

COUNCIL REPORTS/GENERAL REPORTS:

Brief information-only reports from City Council and/or Staff, including committee reports and reports by City Council related to meetings attended at City expenses (AB1234).

PUBLIC COMMENT:

This is the time for citizens to comment on subject matters within the jurisdiction of the Hanford City Council. This is also the public’s opportunity to request an item from the Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion purposes or to comment on any item on the agenda. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code sec. 54954.2). A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.

CONSENT CALENDAR:

Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless a request is made and then the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar to be discussed and voted upon by a separate motion.

A. Waive reading in full of resolutions and ordinances and approval and adoption of same by reading the title only.

B. City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the December 3, 2024 Meeting C. City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the December 5, 2024 Special Meeting D. City Attorney: Approval of the Settlement Agreement in the matter of Tina Threadgill v.

City of Hanford et al.

E. Community Development: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 25-01, approving Prezone No. 0001-24 Parts 9, 12, 13, and 14 for the areas proposed to be annexed under Annexation 163 Parts 9, 12, 13, and 14 (Substantially Surrounded Island Annexations).

F. Community Development: Approval of an Appropriation of $118,530 in the General Fund for Energy Efficiency Equipment Purchases, to be reimbursed by the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program, to purchase an Electric Pickup Truck and Air Conditioning Unit, and Authorize the City Manager to Approve Purchases Following Competitive Quote Process.

G. Public Works: Approval of a change order to increase the limit of fiscal year 24/25 purchase order No. 22500168, with E.M. Tharpe Inc., from $26,430 to $99,430 to cover the cost of repairs related to State mandated smoke tests and required repairs, on four (4) Refuse trucks that previously failed annual smoke test and Appropriation of $73,000 from Fleet Maintenance Fund 0447.

H. Utilities and Engineering: Authorization for the Utilities and Engineering Director to send a letter to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), requesting the extension of water service for one commercial business in the County of Kings, without annexation by the City of Hanford. (APN 014-241-002, 8972 E. Lacey Boulevard).

I. Utilities and Engineering: Approval of a contract with Interwest Consulting Group for City Surveyor services, appointing Michael Long, PLS, as the designated Acting City Surveyor up to $200,000 annually; Approval of an extension of the existing Architectural and Engineering Services Agreement with QK through April 6, 2026 to provide as- needed survey and/or engineering services; and Authorization for the City Manager to award on-call survey, engineering, or specialty service contracts on a work order basis

within the City Manager’s purchasing authority of $50,000.

J. Finance: Approval of the addition of two (2) full-time positions to the City's position control budget, an Administrative Assistant position for City Hall (Administration) and an Administrative Analyst for the Fire Department and appropriate $46,000 from the General Fund for fiscal year 2024/2025 for the additions.

GENERAL BUSINESS:

A. Presentation to the City Council of the Draft Active Transportation Plan and direction from Council as warranted.

ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS:

At this time, any Council Member may ask a question for clarification or may request a matter, which is not otherwise scheduled on a City Council agenda, to be placed on a future agenda. The Council Member referring the item shall provide sufficient information as to the nature of the item. The City Council, by concurrence of a majority, may direct the City Manager to put the item on a future agenda. (GOV. CODE SEC. 54954.2) A. Council Future Agenda Items
B. Upcoming Events and Important Dates:

February 12: City/County Coordinating Meeting - City of Avenal February 17:City offices closed in observance of President's Day February 18: Regular City Council Meeting
March 4: Regular City Council Meeting
ADJOURNMENT:

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available to public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California 93230, during normal business hours. Such agendas are also available at the city’s website, www.cityofhanfordca.com subject to staff’s ability to post the agenda before the meeting. If you need a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s office, 559-585-2515, 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California 93230, at least 2 days prior to the meeting {28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II}

4.A.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: STUDY SESSION

SUBJECT:

Presentation by Greg Burns of Thorn Run Partners, the City of Hanford's contracted federal lobbying firm, with updates on national legislative matters and discussion of possible legislation and actions that Council should be aware of for the coming year.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: That the City Council receive the presentation and provide direction related to the firm's lobbying efforts on behalf of the City of Hanford.

BACKGROUND:

FISCAL IMPACT:

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Hanford Federal Legislative Review presentation

City of Hanford
Federal Advocacy Update

G R E G B U R N S , T H O R N R U N P A R T N E R S F E B R U A R Y 2 0 2 5

Introduction to Thorn Run Partners
➢ Founded in 2010 as boutique bi-partisan lobbying firm ➢ Grown to 50+ person government affairs and strategic
communications firm
• #3 “Standout Firm” out of more than 2,000 Federal lobbying firms reviewed by Bloomberg
• 7th largest firm by revenue (Politico); “Top Lobbyists” by The Hill & Washington Post
• Largest local government practice among the top DC firms ➢ ~ 270 clients in the corporate, association, non-profit, education, and public sector spaces

TRP Local Government Practice
➢ More than a century of combined experience
➢ Represent 50+ local governments in AZ, CA, CO, FL, IL, KS, MT, NC, OR, SC, and TX
• Have represented some clients for more than 20 years
• Large, urban communities to small, rural areas
• Handle a wide variety of complex issues and projects
➢ Bi-partisan team with deep Capitol Hill and
Administration relationships
• Collaborative firm structure
• Offer substantive policy expertise and political heft

2024 Election Results: House & Senate
IMPORTANT CAVEAT: With three House vacancies due to appointments to the Trump Administration, the real margin in the House for the first few months of 2025 will be 217-215 – a one vote margin!

F Y 2 0 2 5 G ove r n m e n t Fu n d i n g
Status of FY 2025 Appropriations Bills
Bill House Senate
Agriculture-FDA Floor Vote Postponed Passed Full Committee Commerce-Justice-Science Floor Vote Postponed Passed Full Committee Defense Passed House Passed Full Committee
Energy-Water Considered on the Floor,
Proceedings Postponed Passed Full Committee
Financial Services & General
Government Floor Vote Postponed Passed Full Committee
Homeland Security Passed House Passed Full Committee
Interior-Environment Passed House Passed Full Committee Labor-HHS-Education Floor Vote Postponed Passed Full Committee Legislative Branch Initial Passage Failed Passed Full Committee MilCon-VA Passed House Passed Full Committee
State-Foreign Ops Passed House Passed Full Committee
Transportation-HUD Floor Vote Postponed Passed Full Committee — Congress has until March 14, 2025,
to pass a government funding deal.
— The Continuing Resolution enacted
on December 20, 2024, included $300
million for the Army Corps of
Engineers Environmental
Infrastructure Program. Charleston
has projects eligible for this funding.

Policies to Watch in 119 th Congress
Government Funding
FY 2026 NDAA
Debt Ceiling
Health Extenders +
Physician Pay
Farm Bill
Water Resources
Development Act
National Flood Insurance
Program Reauthorization
Artificial Intelligence &
Data Privacy
Pandemic Preparedness
Reauthorization
Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF)
Reauthorization
Older Americans Act
Reauthorization
Digital Assets
340B Reform
Cannabis Banking
Legislation
Opioid
Treatment/Fentanyl
Tracking
Rail Safety

Trump 2.0 Legislative Agenda
Tax legislation to build on and codify the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017
Tariffs that could range from 10-20%
Immigration and migration policy
Repeal of Biden administration regulations ranging from health, banking, energy, climate, ESG, & DEI
Merger-friendly Antitrust policy
60% tariff on all Chinese goods
Boosting domestic energy production
Repeal effort of IRA & CHIPS
Drug importation
Affordable Care Act reform/repeal
College sport participation & NIL reform
Permitting Reform

First Legislative Task: Budget Reconciliation
Two 2025 reconciliation
opportunities (if R’s
want)
• Tax bill
• Border security, immigration,
energy policy, what else?
Past reconciliation bills
• Often tax bills (including
Trump and GW Bush tax bills)
• ARPA
• Inflation Reduction Act

The Secret to Effective Governing
BI-PARTISANSHIP!
Most meaningful bills are passed in a bi-partisan manner:
annual appropriations bills, CARES Act, Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, Chips Act, etc.

Future Opportunities and Challenges
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law expires at end of September 2026 • Still two years to help the City with grant applications, etc. • Debate on the future of the bill has begun.

Expect continuation of Community Funded Projects
Reauthorization of Farm Bill, Older Americans Act still needed Tax bill could threaten tax exempt municipal bonds
Department of Government Efficiency
• We’ve seen this before -- will it be successful this time? Expansion of Executive Authority
• Article 1 of the Constitution: “all legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested • in a Congress of the United States. ”
• Article 2 creates the Executive Branch.

Next election is in less than two years

Hanford Recent and Ongoing Federal Efforts
FY23: $561,000 for the
Veterans and Seniors
Building Renovation
FY24: $7.3M+ for East
Lacey Corridor
Improvement Project
$1M competitive grant
from USDA for
Hanford Goes Green
forestry program
$15.5M+ competitive
grant from DOT for
Fast Track Hanford
$1.6M+ competitive
grant from DOT for
Grangeville Boulevard
at BNSF Grade
Separation planning
FY26 projects could
include Grangeville
grade separation ROW
acquisition, among
others
Federal grant
engagement;
daylighting new
opportunities
Constant
monitoring/engaging
on a host of other
issues

Questions?
Thank you!

4.B.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: STUDY SESSION

SUBJECT:

Council discussion of the process to appoint members to the Measure H Oversight Board after the close of the initial application period.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: That the City Council discuss the process for appointing members to the Measure H Oversight Committee and provide direction for the final selection process BACKGROUND:

At City Council's January 21, 2025 meeting, Resolution 25-01-R was approved which formally established the parameters for a Measure H Oversight Board. This is required by Ordinance 2025-01 as approved by voters. As part of the resolution, appointment of members would be based on merit by application and interviews as desired by City Council.

Staff surveyed surrounding cities for potential examples of selection process for the type of composition and basis of merit that the City Council has established in Resolution 25-01-R and found no comparable processes. Based on the submittals so far (24 applications as of the posting of this agenda), staff anticipates approximately 30 or more applications, which is more than enough for the 11 positions established. As is typically done in interview processes, staff recommends that there be an initial screening process of the applicants based upon their written application and any submitted resumes, and then scored interviews of the applicants who advance to the interview round. After the scored interviews, the top 11 applicants could be established and appointed by council.

Should The Council desire to interview all applicants, staff would estimate the time needed for all interviews could be about 7 hours or more, based on 30 applicants with about 15 minute interviews (and transitioning through each interviewee), which staff believes would be an unreasonable expectation as this could take days to complete the entire process.

Proposed process

The following proposed selection process is outlined for Council's discussion:

A. Each councilmember shall review all of the applications and present their top 11 applicants, which will be based on their interpretation of merit of the applications, to the City Clerk before the appointment meeting. The lists shall be public record.

B. Staff would tabulate the lists, and create a list of applicants that were selected by at least three of

the five councilmembers. That list would represent the formal list of applicants to be interviewed. - In the event there are not at least 15 applicants to interview after the initial submittal of names, Council would nominate and vote on additional applicants to interview to obtain a pool of 15.

C. Interviews would be conducted with the selected candidates. Up to 15 minutes would be allowed for each interviewee. Interviewees would be interviewed by City Council in Council Chambers in a public meeting setting as required by the Brown Act. Other interviewees would be asked to wait in the Council lobby awaiting their turn. Applicants would be encouraged to refrain from cell phone use in order to provide an equitable process for all participants.

D. A score will be assigned by Councilmembers after each interview and provided to staff. The score will be based on a metric such as:

Interview Scoring
5: Outstanding – Exceeds expectations with comprehensive, insightful, and actionable responses. 4: Strong – Meets expectations with clear, relevant, and well-considered responses. 3: Competent – Satisfactory, with adequate responses that demonstrate a basic understanding. 2: Substandard – Shows minimal understanding, unable to answer responses in timely manner, or weak responses for the role.
1: Not recommended– Fails to demonstrate understanding or relevance to the role.

After tabulation of scores, staff will compile the results and present the top 11 interviewees. In the event of a tie where the number exceeds 11, the lowest ranking interviewees will be considered individually for nomination and selection by the Council into the top 11. The six candidates with the highest interview scores shall serve an initial 3 year term, and the remaining members shall serve an initial 2 year term. In event of a tie for the top ranked six, a coin can be flipped for placement between tied interviewees based on alphabetical order (if there are more than 2 applicants tied).

In order to be ready for an interview process, it is important to have interview questions established prior to the interviews. Due to time constraints, Staff recommends no more than five questions, and will draft questions to determine the interviewees understanding of the elements listed below.

Understanding their Role
Interviewees could be asked to sign an acknowledgement that the role of the members shall be to provide recommendations and comments to the City Council on the annual expenditure plans and review of annual audits of Measure H funds. Board review is done prior to any action by City Council.

Areas to be explored during Interview Session

1. Understanding Measure H

2. Relevant Experience

3. Commitment to Accountability

4. Community Representation

5. Commitment to the Role

Conclusion

Based on the proposed process for selection presented above, selection of an 11-member Oversight Board could take a minimum of 3 hours. Council could decide how to breakup the process as desired due to the potential length of the process. It would be recommended that the interview process be conducted in Study Session or Special Meetings as desired, and final (and formal) appointment of the top 11 applicants be voted on during General Business at a Regular Council meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Not applicable

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 25-01-R

12.B.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of the Minutes of the December 3, 2024 Meeting

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: Approve the Minutes of the December 3, meeting.

BACKGROUND:

FISCAL IMPACT:

ATTACHMENTS:

1. December 3, 2024 Meeting Minutes

12.C.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of the Minutes of the December 5, 2024 Special Meeting

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: Approve the Minutes of the December 5, 2024, Special City Council Meeting.

BACKGROUND:

FISCAL IMPACT:

ATTACHMENTS:

1. December 5, 2024 Special Meeting Minutes

12.D.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of the Settlement Agreement in the matter of Tina Threadgill v. City of Hanford et al.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: That the City Council, by motion, approve the Settlement Agreement with Plaintiff Tina Threadgill.

BACKGROUND:

Plaintiff made claims against City of Hanford and Brad Albert (City Employee) alleging personal injuries and/or losses arising as a result of a slip and fall accident that occurred on or about October 28, 2023, at the Hanford Soccer Complex located at 266 Gilkey Lane, Hanford, CA. Plaintiff, Tina Threadgill, filed a Complaint in the Kings County Superior Court, case number 24CU0210, alleging personal injuries and other damages. Ms. Threadgill sustained injuries to her leg, back, neck and shoulder.

The soccer complex where this incident occurred is leased by the City of Hanford.

An agreement to settle all current and future claims relating to this incident has been drafted. The terms of the agreement include the City of Hanford paying a one-time payment of eighty thousand dollars ($80,000.00) to Tina Threadgill in exchange for a complete dismissal of the suit and a waiver of all future claims by this Plaintiff related to the incident.

FISCAL IMPACT:
$80,000.00

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Settlement Agreement and Release

- 1 -

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
This General Release (the “Release”) is entered into by and between TINA THREADGILL (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”), and CITY OF HANFORD, and BRAD ALBERT (hereinafter referred to as “Defendants”).

RECITALS
A. Plaintiff has made claims against Defendants, alleging personal injuries and/or losses arising as a result of a slip and fall accident that occurred on or about October 28, 2023, at the Hanford Soccer Complex located at 266 Gilkey Lane, Hanford, CA. Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Kings County Superior Court, bearing case number 24CU0210, alleging personal injuries and other damages. These claims and the lawsuit are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Claims.”
B. Plaintiff and Defendants desire to enter into this Settlement Agreement and Release so as to provide for certain payments in full settlement and full discharge of all Claims which Plaintiff has or may have against Defendants, including, but not limited to, claims for compensatory and general damages, and all other out-of-pocket costs and expenses.

C. Defendants have agreed to settle the above Claims with Plaintiff on the terms and conditions set forth herein.

D. Plaintiff and Defendants desire to provide for a full and final settlement and discharge of any and all Claims of Plaintiff, and all other past, present and future damages, claims, causes of action and actions arising out of or due to any such action that could be asserted now or in the future and to discharge the released parties (as defined herein) of all liability on account thereof.

E. By virtue of negotiating, entering into and/or performing the terms of the Agreement, Plaintiff hereto agrees and acknowledges that each other Party does not make any admission of any wrongdoing or fault, and that each Party expressly denies any and all allegations of liability, fault and wrongdoing. This settlement, and the execution and performance of this Agreement are the result of the negotiated compromise of disputed claims, and are not intended to be and shall not be a finding or admission of any liability, fault, or wrongdoing, nor an admission of, or finding with respect to, any disputed fact or legal contention.

The parties hereto agree as follows:

1. PAYMENT
In consideration of the release set forth herein, Defendants hereby agrees to pay the total sum of Eighty Thousand Dollars ($80,000.00) to Plaintiff. This payment is being made in exchange for a dismissal of the entire lawsuit, with prejudice, and a mutual waiver of costs.

- 2 -

2. RELEASE AND DISCHARGE
In consideration for the payment called for herein, Plaintiff hereby completely releases and forever discharges Defendants, CITY OF HANFORD, and BRAD ALBERT, as well as their representatives, agents, officers, directors, employees, shareholders, and insurers (collectively referred to herein as the “Released Parties”) of and from any and all past, present or future claims, demands, obligations, actions, causes of action, rights, damages, costs, losses of services, expenses and compensation of any nature whatsoever on account of, or in any way growing out of, or which are the subject of any and all claims which Plaintiff has made or may make which has resulted or may result from the alleged acts or omissions of the Released Parties, including, without limitation, any and all known or unknown claims for personal injuries or property damage, past or future medical treatment costs, other out-of-pocket costs, emotional distress, loss of past or future employment wages and earnings, loss of past or future business lost opportunities, reputation harm, or other financial or non-financial harm arising from the subject matter of the claims and/or any future claims or liens of successors in interest respecting the claims against the Defendants and the Released Parties. This Settlement Agreement and Release, on the part of Plaintiff, shall be a fully binding and a complete settlement between Plaintiff and Defendants and the liability insurance carriers for the Defendants.

Plaintiff further agrees that she has accepted the sum specified herein as a complete compromise of matters involving disputed issues of law and fact and fully assumes the risk that the facts or the law may be otherwise than Plaintiff believes. Plaintiff also accepts payment of the sum specified herein as a full and final resolution in settlement of all claims arising from or in any way connected with the subject matter of this Settlement Agreement and the Claims.

3. UNKNOWN CLAIMS AND DAMAGES
Plaintiff acknowledges and understands that she may have suffered damages which are unknown to her at the present time and that this possibility has been considered by Plaintiff in entering into this Settlement Agreement, and she has determined that the consideration to be paid by Defendants is fair and adequate compensation with due regard for such future possibilities.

4. DISPUTED CLAIMS
Plaintiff acknowledges that the payment required by this Settlement Agreement and Release is being made to compromise and settle disputed claims and are being made to Plaintiff in settlement and release of all past, present and/or future claims against any and all of the Released Parties. Neither payment of the sum reflected herein nor any statements or communications made by Defendants or their attorneys or insurers during the negotiations leading to this Settlement Agreement and Release shall be considered admissions of liability or reasonableness of amount by or on behalf of any of the Released Parties.

5. INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
Plaintiff, through her attorney, represents and warrants that all bills, costs or liens resulting from or arising out of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries, claims and lawsuit are Plaintiff’s responsibility to pay. Plaintiff agrees to assume responsibility for satisfaction of any and all rights to payment, claims or liens of any kind, that arise from or are related to payments made or

- 3 -
services provided to Plaintiff, or on Plaintiff’s behalf. Plaintiff and her attorneys agree to assume responsibility for all expenses, costs or fees incurred by Plaintiff related to her alleged injuries, damages, lawsuit and claims including without limitation, any and all potential future Medicare conditional payments, subrogation claims, liens, or other rights to payment, relating to medical treatment or lost wages that have been or may be asserted by any health care provider, insurer, governmental entity, employer or other person or entity. Further, Plaintiff will indemnify, defend and hold the Released Parties harmless from any and all damages, claims and rights to payment, including any attorneys’ fees, brought by any person, entity or governmental agency to recover any of these amounts.

6. ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Each party hereto shall bear all attorneys’ fees and costs arising from the actions of their own counsel in connection with the Claims, this Settlement Agreement, and the matters and documents referred to herein and all related matters.

7. GENERAL RELEASE
Plaintiff hereby acknowledges and agrees that the release set forth herein is a general release and further expressly waives and assumes the risk for any and all claims for damages or injuries which exist but which Plaintiff does not know or suspect to exist whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or otherwise and which, if known, would have materially affected her decision to enter into this Settlement Agreement and Release. Plaintiff further acknowledges that she has read, or will have had read to her, the provisions of California Civil Code Section 1542 and waive all rights thereunder, which section provides:

A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.

Plaintiff further agrees that she has accepted the sum specified herein as a complete compromise of matters involving disputed issues of law and fact and fully assumes the risk that the facts or the law may be otherwise than Plaintiff believes. Plaintiff also accepts payment of the sum specified herein as a full and final resolution in settlement of all claims arising from or in any way connected with the subject matter of this Settlement Agreement and Release and the Claims.

8. GOVERNING LAW
This Settlement Agreement and Release shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

9. TAX CONSEQUENCES
Plaintiff acknowledges and agrees that Defendants and/or their representatives, predecessors, successors, assigns, agents, partners, joint venture partners, parent companies,

- 4 -
subsidiary companies, directors, officers, employees, insurers, shareholders and attorneys are not responsible for the tax consequences to Plaintiff, if any, related to the settlement payment.

10. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Release contains the entire agreement between Plaintiff, Defendants, and the Released Parties with regard to the matters set forth in it and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of each.

11. REPRESENTATION OF COMPREHENSION OF AGREEMENT
Plaintiff represents that she has relied upon the legal advice of her attorney, who is the attorney of her choice, and that the terms of this Release have been completely read and explained to her by her attorney and that these terms are fully understood and voluntarily accepted by Plaintiff.

Plaintiff also expressly warrants, represents and agrees that in executing this Settlement Agreement and Release, Plaintiff is not relying upon any representation or statements made by or on behalf of any other party or entity released by them with respect to any aspect of this Settlement Agreement and Release, except representations and statements as set forth herein. No promise or inducement has been made other than those set forth in this Settlement Agreement and Release.

12. SEVERABILITY
If any terms, rights, provisions, or duties of this Settlement Agreement and Release are deemed void or unenforceable, the remaining terms, rights, provisions and duties shall be unimpaired and shall remain valid and enforceable, so long as the same is consistent with the intention of the parties in entering into this Settlement Agreement and Release.

13. MATERIALITY
The representations and warranties made by Plaintiff in this Settlement Agreement and Release shall be deemed material to the rights and obligations of Defendants and the Released Parties under this Settlement Agreement and Release. Plaintiff agrees and acknowledges that her respective representations and warranties contained herein are essential and material terms of this Settlement Agreement and Release.

14. ENFORCEMENT
This Settlement Agreement and Release is hereby stipulated to be subject to enforcement by the Court in the Action pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6; and the Court shall retain jurisdiction for such purpose.

15. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION

This Settlement Agreement and Release was the result of a negotiated settlement and may not be construed as having been prepared by any one party. The parties and their counsel

- 5 -
have reviewed this Settlement Agreement and Release and specifically agree that any rule of construction, to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party, shall not apply to the interpretation of this Settlement Agreement and Release. The headings and numbering of the different paragraphs of this Settlement Agreement and Release are inserted for convenient reference only and are not to be taken as part of this Release to control or affect the meaning, construction or effect of the same.

BY EXECUTING THIS RELEASE, THE SIGNATOR ACKNOWLEDGES

THAT THEY HAVE READ THIS AGREEMENT AND UNDERSTANDS ITS TERMS

AND PROVISIONS AND THAT THEY HAVE CONSULTED WITH THEIR COUNSEL.

Dated:

Plaintiff TINA THREADGILL

Dated: _________________________ __________________________________ Edi Kristopher, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated:

Defendant, CITY OF HANFORD

Dated:

Defendant, BRAD ALBERT

Dated: _________________________ __________________________________ Christina Di Filippo Smith, Esq.

Attorney for Defendants

12.E.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 25-01, approving Prezone No. 0001-24 Parts 9, 12, 13, and 14 for the areas proposed to be annexed under Annexation 163 Parts 9, 12, 13, and 14 (Substantially Surrounded Island Annexations).

RECOMMENDATION

That the City Council waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance 25-01, approving Prezone 0001-24 Parts 9, 12, 13 and 14.

RECOMMENDED MOTION:

I move to waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance 25-01, approving Prezone 0001-24 Parts 9, 12, 13 and 14.

BACKGROUND

On January 21, 2025 the City Council held a public hearing for Annexation 163 and Prezone 0001-24 and introduced the ordinance and waived the first reading on the proposed project by a 3,0 vote 1 abstention, 1 recusal.

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 9, 12, 13 and 14

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 9, 12, 13 and 14 is a request to prezone the four substantially surrounded areas to be annexed consistent with the 2035 Hanford General Plan Land Use Map. The specific proposed prezoning is illustrated as they would be shown on the Zoning Map in Figures 1, 2, 3, and

4. Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 9

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 9 is a request to prezone Island #9, as MX-C Corridor Mixed Use, R-L-8 Low Density Residential (8,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size), and C-R Regional Commercial, Corridor Mixed Use, Low-Density Residential, and Regional Commercial.

Figure 1: Proposed Prezone Area #9 El Rancho

Proposed Prezoning MX-C Corridor Mixed Use, R-L-8 Low Density Residential (8,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size), and C-R Regional Commercial

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 12

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 12 is a request to prezone substantially surrounded island No. 12 Island #12, as R-L-12 Low-Density Residential and I-L Light Industrial, in accordance with the General Plan Designation for the area, Low-Density Residential and Light Industrial. On parcels 011-420-012 and - 013, staff proposes to change the prezoning of the two parcels from I-L Light Industrial to R-L-12 Low-Density Residential, to capture the existing use of the sites, which is residential. Following a meeting with residents in this island, it was brought to the attention of staff that there are residences on these two parcels and prezoning to I-L Light Industrial would render these parcels nonconforming, should the I-L zoning remain. In the event of destruction exceeding 75 percent, the residences would not be able to be reconstructed. As such, staff determined the prezoning should be changed to R-L- 12 for the parcels located at 011-420-012 and -013. The parcels total 0.88 acres, which represents a

4.4% change to the surrounding Light Industrial designation. Staff determined this change to be substantially consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan is meant to be a general guide of the designation of parcels, whereas zoning is parcel specific.

Figure 2: Proposed Prezone Area #12 10 ½ and Thompson

Proposed Prezoning I-L Light Industrial and R-L-12 Low-Density Residential

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 13

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 13 is a request to prezone substantially surrounded island #13, as a I-H Heavy Industrial, in accordance the General Plan land use designation for the island, Heavy Industrial.

Figure 3: Proposed Prezone Area #13 S 10th Avenue

Proposed Prezoning I-H Heavy Industrial

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 14

Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 14 is a request to prezone substantially surrounded Island #14 as R-L-12 Low-Density Residential, in accordance the General Plan land use designation for the island, Low Density Residential.

Figure 4: Proposed Prezone Area #14 11th and Flint

Proposed Prezoning to R-L-12 Low-Density Residential (12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size)

FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:

All findings were made by the City Council in accordance with Section 17.86.030 of the Hanford Municipal Code.

In accordance with the Hanford Municipal Code Section 17.86.030, before a zone change may be approved, all of the following findings shall be made by the reviewing authority:

1. That the amendment is internally consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and the Municipal Code.

Analysis: Prezone No. 0001-24 Parts 9, 12, 13, and 14 is internally consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, specifically consistent with Land Use Policies L15, L16, and L17. There is not a plan for development at this time. Most of the parcels proposed for annexation are already developed.at the densities consistent with the proposed prezoning.

2. That the amendment would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the community.

ANALYSIS: There is no evidence that annexation of the county islands into the city limits would negatively affect health, safety, or welfare. On the contrary, the coordination of services between the City and County will be improved by reducing inefficiencies through annexation.

3. That the amendment would maintain the appropriate balance of land uses within the City.

Analysis: The proposed prezoning is consistent with the land use designations established in the

General Plan.

4. That the anticipated land uses on the subject site would be compatible with existing and future surrounding uses.

Analysis: It is anticipated that the few undeveloped sites in the substantially surrounded county island areas will eventually develop in a manner consistent with the proposed prezoning. Most of the sites are already developed, and those uses appear to be consistent with the proposed prezoning, with limited exceptions, where uses appear to be legally existing non-conforming, primarily in Island 13.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Staff recommends that the City Council waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance 25-01, approving Prezone 0001-24 Parts 9, 12, 13 and 14.

RECOMMENDED MOTION:

2. I move to waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance 25-01, approving Prezone 0001-24 Parts 9, 12, 13 and 14.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ordinance 25-01

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 1 of 9

ORDINANCE NO. 25-01

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD PREZONING ANNEXATION 163, PARTS 9, 12, 13, AND 14 CONSISTENT WITH THE 2035 HANFORD

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP

The City Council of the City of Hanford does ordain as follows:

Section 1: The following described territory situated in the City of Hanford is hereby prezoned under the terms of Chapter 17.86 of the Hanford Municipal Code:

Annexation 163, Part 9 filed by the City of Hanford
FROM: County zoning C-S Service Commercial, R-1-6 Low-Density Residential, and R- 1-8 Low-Density Residential
TO: City zoning R-L-8 Low-Density Residential, MX-C Corridor Mixed Use, and C- R Regional Commercial
On property described as follows:

Approximately 113.78 acres generally located on East Lacey Boulevard, South of Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks, as depicted in attached Exhibit A; and Annexation 163, Part 12 filed by the City of Hanford
FROM: County zoning IL Light Industrial and RRA Rural Residential TO: City zoning I-L Light Industrial and R-L-12 Low-Density Residential On property described as follows:

Approximately 60.46 acres generally located west of 10 ½ Avenue, north of Houston Avenue, as depicted in attached Exhibit B; and
Annexation 163, Part 13 filed by the City of Hanford
FROM: County zoning IH Heavy Industrial
TO: City zoning I-H Heavy Industrial
On property described as follows:

Approximately 6.01 acres generally located west of 10th Avenue, between Idaho and Iona Avenues, as depicted in attached Exhibit C; and
Annexation 163, Part 14 filed by the City of Hanford
FROM: County zoning AL-10 Limited Agriculture
TO: City zoning R-L-12 Low-Density Residential

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 2 of 9

On property described as follows:

Approximately 16.9 acres generally located west of 11th Avenue, south of Flint Avenue, as depicted in attached Exhibit D; and
Section 2: The Council does hereby find as a fact that this Ordinance has been recommended for passage by the Planning Commission of the City of Hanford after public hearing before the Planning Commission after notice required by Section 17.70.100 of the Hanford Municipal Code and Government Code Section 65854. The City Council that the Project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Categorical Exemption Class 19 (Annexation of areas containing existing public or private structures developed to the density allowed by the current prezoning) and because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). The City Council hereby finds that the prezoning is required to achieve the objectives of the zoning regulations as set forth in Section 17.06.010 of the Hanford Municipal Code, and that this Ordinance has been introduced by the City Council a fter public hearing held on the 21
st day of January 2025 at 7:00 p.m. of said day after notice required under the provisions of Section 65856 of the Government Code.

Section 3: This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage, and shall be published once in the Hanford Sentinel within fifteen (15) days after its passage, and the zoning will apply to such property in the event of subsequent annexation to the City under the provisions of Section 65859 of the Government Code.

Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on the ____ day of ________, by the following roll call vote:

ATTEST:

Natalie Corral

APPROVED

_________________________
MAYOR of the City of Hanford

CITY CLERK

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 3 of 9
STA

TE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ss

CITY OF HANFORD )
I
, NATALIE CORRAL , City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify the foregoing ordinance was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford on the 21 st day of January, 2025 and it was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the _______ day of ______________, 2025.

D
ated: _____________________ _____________________________ Natalie Corral
City Clerk

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 4 of 9
E
xhibit A
Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 9
From: County zoning C-S Service Commercial, R-1-6 Low-Density Residential, and R-1-8 Low-Density Residential
To
: City zoning R-L-8 Low-Density Residential, MX-C Corridor Mixed Use, and C-R Regional Commercial
Exhibit B

ZUMWALTHANSENINC.CompanyA

POINT OF BEGINNING
N 1

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 5 of 9
P
rezone No. 0001-24 Part 12
FROM: County zoning IL Light Industrial and RRA Rural Residential Exhibit B

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 6 of 9

TO: City zoning I-L Light Industrial and R-L-12 Low-Density Residential

1ZUMWALTHANSENINC.CompanyA

POINT OF BEGINNING
N

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 7 of 9

Exhibit C
Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 13
FROM: County zoning IH Heavy Industrial

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 8 of 9

TO: City zoning I-H Heavy Industrial

N POINT OF BEGINNING
1

CC Ordinance Prezone 0001-24, Page 9 of 9

Exhibit D
Prezone No. 0001-24 Part 14
FROM: County zoning AL-10 Limited Agriculture

TO: City zoning R-L-12 Low-Density Residential

1 N
DRAFT
1-10-2025

12.F.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of an Appropriation of $118,530 in the General Fund for Energy Efficiency Equipment Purchases, to be reimbursed by the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program, to purchase an Electric Pickup Truck and Air Conditioning Unit, and Authorize the City Manager to Approve Purchases Following Competitive Quote Process.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommended Motion:

1. Approve an appropriation of $118,530 in the General Fund for the purchase of energy efficiency equipment, including an electric pickup truck and air conditioning unit, to be reimbursed by the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program.

2. Authorize the City Manager to approve the purchase of an electric pickup truck following a competitive quote process.

BACKGROUND:

In October 2024, staff applied for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program through the U.S. Department of Energy. This program offers funding to state, local, and Tribal government agencies with the goal of reducing carbon emissions, enhancing energy efficiency, and decreasing energy consumption. These objectives align with the city’s electric vehicle readiness plan, which supports the state’s greenhouse gas reduction targets.

On December 31, 2024, staff was notified that the City of Hanford was awarded $118,530 in funding through the EECBG program. The funds will be used to purchase an electric pickup truck for the Code Compliance division to assist with graffiti abatement and to replace an air conditioning unit at the Veteran’s Memorial Building, the cost is anticipated to be over $50,000. The Veteran’s Memorial Building project will be supplemented with additional grant funding to facilitate other necessary upgrades

The Trump Administration issued a pause on federal grants and loans on January 27, 2025, that may affect the EECBG program. Subsequently on January 29, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memo was rescinded and the pause was lifted. If EECBG funding is unavailable, the City will not proceed with the electric vehicle purchase. The air conditioning unit replacement is part of a larger infrastructure project funded by a Community Project Funding grant. If EECBG funding is not available and the Community Project Funding Grant cannot cover the full cost of the air

conditioning unit, the City may need to identify an alternative funding source to purchase the unit.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This project has a net zero impact on the General Fund. The project cost will be reimbursed by the Department of Energy’s EECBG program.

ATTACHMENTS:

None

12.G.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of a change order to increase the limit of fiscal year 24/25 purchase order No. 22500168, with E.M. Tharpe Inc., from $26,430 to $99,430 to cover the cost of repairs related to State mandated smoke tests and required repairs, on four (4) Refuse trucks that previously failed annual smoke test and Appropriation of $73,000 from Fleet Maintenance Fund 0447.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: That the City Council, by motion, approve a change order to increase the fiscal year 2024/2025 purchase order limit with E.M. Tharpe Inc. by $73,0000 to fund necessary repairs and authorize the appropriation of $73,000 from the Fleet Maintenance Fund (0447) to fund an increase in BPO 22500168 to $99,430.

Recommended Motion: Motion, approve a change order to increase the fiscal year 2024/2025 purchase order limit with E.M. Tharpe Inc. by $73,0000 to fund necessary repairs and authorize the appropriation of $73,000 from the Fleet Maintenance Fund (0447) to fund an increase in BPO 22500168 to $99,430.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Hanford Municipal Code mandates City Council approval for all purchases exceeding $50,000.

City Fleet Services frequently outsources repairs due to specialized equipment needs, staffing limitations, or the infrequent nature of certain repairs. During a recent fleet-wide annual smoke test, as required by State regulations, an unusually high number of City Refuse vehicles failed to meet the compliance standards, necessitating immediate repairs.

Purchase Order BPO 22500168 was originally issued to E.M. Tharpe Inc. for $26,430.00. This request seeks approval to increase BPO 22500168 by $73,000.00 and to appropriate $73,000.00 from Fleet Maintenance Account (0447) to fund the required repairs.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Fleet Maintenance Account (0447) can fully fund the increase in PO 22500168. Costs are allocated out to funds based on vehicle use.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. E.M. Tharpe Quotes

12.H.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Authorization for the Utilities and Engineering Director to send a letter to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), requesting the extension of water service for one commercial business in the County of Kings, without annexation by the City of Hanford. (APN 014-241-002, 8972 E. Lacey Boulevard).

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council, by motion, authorize the Utilities and Engineering Director to send a letter to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) requesting an Extension of Water Services for one commercial building located in Kings County, prior to annexation by the City of Hanford. (APN 014-241-002, 8972 E. Lacey Boulevard)
BACKGROUND:

The City of Hanford has been approached by the commercial property owner located at 8972 E.

Lacey Avenue requesting to connect to the City of Hanford's Water System to service two existing buildings. The buildings are in current use by "Kings Saddlery" and "The Garage Tire and Auto Care" businesses. The property owner’s request is due to a failed water well currently servicing the property. The businesses are currently providing their own water for potable water and bathroom flushing needs, therefore, the request is urgent.

This parcel is within the County Island #9 (Annexation No. 163 boundary) that on January 21, 2025 was approved by City Council to proceed with the annexation process as requested.

Kings County LAFCO is expected to receive the annexation documents for review in April of 2025.

The annexation process will take several months to record once approved. Attached in this report supporting this request is 1). A letter from the property owner requesting water services, 2) site map of the property location.

Upon connection, the applicant would be subject to all applicable City of Hanford codes, regulations, fees and related requirements associated with the connection of City water services within the City of Hanford service area.

City staff recommends approval of the request letter to LAFCO for the connection of a 1-inch water service based upon the conditions below:

1. Applicant to pay for the LAFCO Connection of Services fees.

2. Approval by LAFCO for the applicant to connect to City Water lines without annexation into the City of Hanford.

3. The property owner will be required to pull a City of Hanford Encroachment Permit to cover the following:

a. All work to be done in accordance with currently adopted State and local Building Codes and Standards

b. Installation of a minimum 1" water tap and water service line per City of Hanford Improvement Standards, subject to approval by the County of Kings and the City of Hanford.

Service will connect from E. Lacey Boulevard

c. Installation of a minimum 1” water meter and a minimum 1” backflow device per City of Hanford Improvement Standards, at a location to be approved by both the County of Kings and the City of Hanford

d. All normal City of Hanford fees (including impact fees) associated with this project must be paid.

e. The applicant will enroll for City water service at the time the permit is pulled and issued.

4. The water connection will be located as close as possible to the water main in the same manner as others who have made similar connections to the City's mains for their individual water services, as approved by both the County of Kings and the City of Hanford. The City will in no way be responsible for the water line from the service connection at the tap into the main to the building.

5. Applicant shall additionally apply for a Kings County Building Permit for all work performed outside of right of way.

6. All work and materials are to be provided at the sole expense of the applicant.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no cost to the City. The property owner will hire a private contractor to perform the work and will pay the Water Impact Fees to the City.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. WaterRequestLetter

2. 8972 E. Lacey Boulevard

3. 8972 E. Lacey - Street View

4. Letter to LAFCO

CITY OF HANFORD
Department of Public Work
Focused On Our Community 24/7
900 South 10th Avenue • HANFORD, CA 93230-5234
• (559) 585-2550

January 22, 2025

Kings County Local Agency Formation Commission
Kings County Government Center
1400 W. Lacey Blvd.

Hanford, CA 93230

RE: City water service request for one commercial property located in unincorporated Kings County

The City of Hanford received a request from Mr. Jason Brandon (applicant) to provide one 1” water service to one parcel (APN 014-241-002) containing two commercial businesses. The parcel is located at 8972 E. Lacey Boulevard.

The applicant reported their commercial property cannot be facilitated by their existing shared water well that has gone dry. The applicant indicated that the water well is shared between parcels in the immediate area. The applicant would be subject to all applicable City of Hanford codes, regulations, fees and related requirements associate with the connection of City water services within the City of Hanford service area.

On February 4, 2025, the Hanford City Council approved the applicant's request to connect to City water. The applicant is requesting Local Agency Formation Commission's (LAFCO) approval. The applicant would require the construction of a minimum 1” water service line from the City Water Main on E. Lacey Boulevard to adequately service their units. The City is formally requesting LAFCO approval for Extension of Services under Government Code Section 56133 to provide City water services for the one parcel with two existing commercial units at the location; a property located within the City’s Primary Sphere of Influence.

This approval is subject to the following conditions which are normal to all parties connecting to the water and sewer system within the City of Hanford, except for the required approval by the LAFCO and the County of Kings, which is applicable in this case.

1. Applicant to pay for the LAFCO Extension of Services fees.

2. Approval by LAFCO for the applicant to connect to City Water Line without annexation into the City of Hanford.

3. The property owner will be required to pull a City of Hanford encroachment Permit to cover the following:
a. All work to be done in accordance with currently adopted State and local Building Codes and Standards.
b. Installation of a minimum 1" water service line per City of Hanford Improvement Standards, subject to approval by the County of Kings and the City of Hanford. c. Installation of a backflow preventer per City of Hanford Improvement Standards, subject to approval by the County of Kings and the City of Hanford. d. If water well will no longer be utilized, then the water well will need to be properly abandoned per County of Kings Water Well Standards and water line service from water well to dwelling unit needs to be capped.
d. All normal City of Hanford fees (including impact fees) associated with this project must be paid.
e. The applicant will enroll for City water service at the time the permit is pulled and issued.

4. The water connection will be located as close as possible to the water main in the same.

The City will in no way be responsible for the water line from the service connection manner as others who have made similar connections to the City's mains for their individual water services, as approved by both the County of Kings and the City of Hanford at the tap into the main to the business structure.

5. Applicant shall additionally apply for a Kings County Building Permit for all work performed outside of right of way.

6. All work and materials are to be provided at the sole expense of the applicant.

If you have any questions regarding this approval, please feel free to contact me at (559)585-2571.

Sincerely,

Frank Senteno, P.E.

Utilities and Engineering Director

12.I.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of a contract with Interwest Consulting Group for City Surveyor services, appointing Michael Long, PLS, as the designated Acting City Surveyor up to $200,000 annually; Approval of an extension of the existing Architectural and Engineering Services Agreement with QK through April 6, 2026 to provide as-needed survey and/or engineering services; and Authorization for the City Manager to award on-call survey, engineering, or specialty service contracts on a work order basis within the City Manager’s purchasing authority of $50,000.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation:

That the City Council, by motion,:

1. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Interwest Consulting Group, to provide city surveyor services for a three-year term, with the option for two one-year extensions, in an amount not to exceed $200,000 per year;

2. Adopt a resolution appointing Michael Long, PLS of Interwest Consulting Group, as City Surveyor for the City of Hanford;

3. Authorize the City Manager to extend the existing On-Call Architectural & Engineering (A & E) Contract with QK through April 2026 to provide as-needed Survey and/or Engineering Services, in an amount not to exceed $200,000 per year; and

4. Authorize the City Manager to award contracts to the identified firms for on-call surveying or other specialty services on a work order basis, with fees not exceeding the City Manager’s purchasing authority ($50,000).

BACKGROUND:

In 1982 California enacted a law that divided the role of a Registered Civil Engineer (RCE) into two distinct categories, the Professional Civil Engineer (PE) and the Professional Land Surveyor (PLS).

This legal change prohibited Professional Civil Engineers from determining property boundaries and related elements, making it essential to have licensed Professional Land Surveyors (PLS) to perform these tasks. Since the enactment of this law, there has been a decline in the number of individuals obtaining PLS licenses, while many individuals with the pre-1982 RCE license have retired.

The California Subdivision Map Act ("Map Act") contains provisions for processing, approving, and filing Final Maps and Parcel Maps for the subdivision of land. To carry out the provisions of the Map Act, the City must retain a qualified, licensed land surveyor as the City Surveyor. Furthermore, per

Government Code 66442 under the Subdivision Map Act, municipalities are mandated to provide these professional surveying services.

In the absence of having a staff City Surveyor, the City of Hanford has historically relied on the use of a consultant land surveyor for these services. The absence of a contracted licensed land surveyor has persisted for over a year. During this time the City has engaged Michael Southerland through work orders to meet its needs while preparing and advertising the RFQ for survey services. This City Surveyor service is different than the recently awarded A&E Services contract that included survey services. Those services were more oriented towards design and construction.

This contract is specifically to hire and appoint a designated City Surveyor to conduct duties in accordance with the Map Act; who will be primarily responsible for conducting accurate land surveys to establish property boundaries within proposed subdivisions, ensuring the maps submitted for approval by the local governing body are technically sound, comply with local ordinances, and accurately reflect the intended layout of the subdivision, including street alignments, lot lines, and easements, all while adhering to the standards of professional land surveying practice.

Based on Interwest’s qualifications as described in further detail below, Staff recommends that a contract for City Surveyor services be awarded to Interwest and to authorize the City Manager to enter into a three-year contract, with two optional one-year extensions, not exceeding $200,000 annually. Further, it also recommended that City Council by resolution appoint Michael Long, PLS of Interwest, as the designated Acting City Surveyor; and authorize the City Manager to award on-call or specialty service contracts on a work order basis within the City Manager’s purchasing authority of $50,000.

Additionally, this item also recommends extension of the existing A & E contract with QK through April 6, 2026. The contract length is consistent with the original contract agreement's terms not to exceed Five Years starting April 6, 2021. The scope of work will comprise of on-call survey services (per attached updated proposal, qualifications, and fees) and/or could include other services as identified in the attached original agreement (Zumwalt Hansen).

The original agreement was based on the proposal and qualifications submitted by Zumwalt Hansen, Inc. of Hanford, CA. Zumwalt Hansen was subsequently acquired by QK in the years following. It is Staff's intent that the work, per this agreement, will be generally performed by QK's Hanford Office as this is managed and operated by original Zumwalt Hansen Staff. The QK/Hanford Office has an at- least 40-year work history with the City of Hanford; providing a range of survey and engineering services. Additionally, QK is qualified to provide City Surveyor services in the event that Conflicts of Interest should arise with Interwest, or if additional support services are required.

Based on QK/Hanford's qualifications, deep-rooted institutional knowledge, and extensive archive of survey records, Staff recommends that QK's agreement be extended and to engage with QK as described herein and in their updated proposal (dated 01-22-2025).

City Surveyors.

Typical duties of a City land surveyor go beyond tasks that require licensure, such as supervisory duties, internal project coordination, Community Development Department’s mapping needs, CAD drawing for topographic maps, field surveying, and training. Although these tasks do not explicitly require a licensed land surveyor, they may necessitate technical expertise typically associated with a Professional Land Surveyor (PLS).

Currently, City engineering staff in combination with contract services are managing to meet some of these responsibilities. It would be of great benefit that the City hire its own City Surveyor for reasons such as the variety of tasks that can be performed in-house, cost savings, and operational efficiencies. Engineering is currently preparing to advertise an hourly position for a Land Surveyor in Training (LSIT). Once finalized and posted, the recruitment will remain open until the position is filled. This will support the City in expanding in-house capabilities, enabling survey-related tasks to be performed by the LSIT and completed under the responsible charge of the consultant city surveyor.

Tasks performed by the LSIT would be considered qualifying experience and prerequisite for licensure as a PLS.

The following list outlines the essential services requiring a licensed land surveyor to review and certify documents for the City:

Document Review:
• Final Subdivision and Parcel Maps
• Lot Line Adjustments
• Record of Surveys
• Preparation of Legal Descriptions:
• Easements
• Grant Deeds
• Quit Claims Deeds
• Irrevocable Offers of Dedications
• Boundary/ALTA Surveys
• Research and determination of rights of way
• Documents for Boundary Disputes
• Letter of Map Change (LOMC) Boundary Descriptions
• Preparation of Elevation Certificates
• Corner Records
• Annexation Documents/Maps
• Certificates of Corrections
• Other Documents/Items Requiring Professional Land Surveyor Review and Acceptance, or as requested by the city for review.

Right Of Way Acquisition:
• Drafting legal descriptions
• Preparing exhibits
• Providing closures
• Requesting title reports
• Finalizing acquisitions through Title Company (final title report approval) • Reviewing private land development dedication documents, including deeds, closures, exhibits, and title report review for City acceptance

Easements/Temporary Construction Easements:
• Similar requirements as Right of Way

Construction Survey:
• Establishing survey control
• Data processing through the Trimble Software (GPS calibration)

• Reviewing topos for consultants (survey control, basis of bearings) • Monument preservation and filing of corner records

Other Miscellaneous Tasks:
• Assisting with parcels for sale
• Creating lease site descriptions
• Preparing parcel descriptions for the sale of City land • Reviewing Title Reports for pending acquisitions and sales of City land • Maintaining the City's benchmark catalogue and setting/altering monuments • Coordinating with private land developers, contractors, Caltrans, Kings County representatives, or other public entities regarding land surveying inquiries • Processing Certificates of Corrections
• Training and Supervision of City staff

Selection Process:

The City of Hanford received four (4) proposals in response to the advertised Request for Proposals, RFQ 2025-05, seeking annual Professional Land Surveying services for the Engineering and Utilities Division. These proposals were received on October 7th, 2024, from the following:

Company: Location:

Interwest Consulting Group Fresno, CA
Central Valley Engineering Selma, CA
Bedrock Engineering Fresno, CA
4-Creeks Hanford, CA

All firms were found technically qualified to perform the work. The proposers demonstrated experience in providing survey services for municipalities, though not all had experience as consultant city surveyors. Interwest Consulting Group has served as a designated city surveyor for multiple municipalities, consistently maintaining their services as a consultant city surveyor.

To ensure a thorough and fair evaluation of the proposals, a proposal review committee was assembled. The committee diligently assessed and scored the submissions, providing detailed comments throughout the process. The primary objective was to select a city surveyor with proven experience as a consultant city surveyor, someone who could consistently fulfill the role without potential conflicts of interest or the need for reassignment.

Following the committee's evaluations, staff identified Interwest Consulting Group as the most qualified candidate due to their meticulously outlined and well-structured proposal, along with their extensive portfolio of municipal land surveying services, including consultant city surveyor roles for other municipalities.

Interwest Consulting Group has served as the consultant city surveyor or provided consultant survey services to several California municipalities, including:

1. City of Visalia

2. City of Galt

3. City of Woodland

4. City of Livermore

5. City of Mill Valley

Michael Long, the Licensed Land Surveyor proposed as the City's designated surveyor, has served as the city surveyor for all the municipalities listed above. With over 40 years of experience in surveying and mapping across public and private sectors, Michael Long will bring extensive expertise to the role.

Based on references, Interwest Consulting Group, and specifically Michael Long, comes highly recommended. They have been consistently praised for their commitment to meeting deadlines, responsiveness, and strong work ethic. Given their expertise, extensive experience, and excellent references, staff recommends that Michael Long of Interwest Consulting Group be designated as the Consultant Professional Land Surveyor for the City.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City is advancing multiple CIP projects that require survey services to support legal descriptions, boundary surveys, parcel reviews, and parcel research. To manage these services, the City’s Engineering & Utilities Department will charge each CIP project for the specific work performed by the consultant surveyor. Further, all this survey and completed infrastructure data is required to be archived and/or incorporated into the City's Geographic Information Systems (GIS) still in its infancy.

Additionally, private development projects submit documents to the City that must be reviewed and approved by the City Surveyor. Over the past year, the Engineering Department has processed more than 50 documents requiring surveyor review and approval, including parcel maps, subdivisions, final maps, parcel map waivers, and other submittals. A similar volume of submittals is anticipated in future years, with the potential for increased demand as Hanford continues to grow.

As detailed in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Master Fee Schedule, developers are required to pay the actual cost of surveyor reviews. The process involves the surveyor billing the City for services rendered, the City paying the surveyor, and developers subsequently reimbursing the City for the cost of the service.

Based on the above information, Staff does not anticipate the use of General Funds to compensate for any of Interwest's or QK's survey services therefore, no fiscal impacts at this time.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Fee Schedule

2. City of Hanford On-Call Survey Services

3. Zumalt A&E Consultant Agreement 04.02.21 - Executed

4. Resolution 25-02-R

www.interwestgrp.com
City of Hanford, CA
City Land Surveyor Consultant Services
RFQ #2025-05
October 8, 2024 | 2:00 PM
Via Bidnet Direct
www.interwestgrp.com
MAIN PROPOSAL CONTACT:

Elizabeth Alsky
Account Manager
949.731.4000
[email protected]
COST

PROPOSAL

LAPM 10-H2 Rate Sheet CITY OF HANFORD - RFQ NO. 2025-05

CITY SURVEYOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
Consultant or Subconsultant Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant Project No. Contract No. Date: 10/8/2024
For Combined Rate

40.078% Overhead % 53.822% General Administration % 0.000% 93.900% For Home Office Rate
Overhead % 0.000% General Administration % 0.000% 0.000% For Field Office Rate
Overhead % 0.000% General Administration % 0.000% 0.000% FEE % = 10.00%
% or $ increase Hourly
range - for
Straight OT(1.5x) OT(2x) From To classificatio
ns only
$61.00 N/A N/A 7/1/2024 6/30/2026 5.00%
$64.05 N/A N/A 7/1/2026 6/30/2028 5.00%
$67.25 N/A N/A 7/1/2028 6/30/2030 5.00%
$70.62 N/A N/A 7/1/2030 6/30/2032 5.00%
$74.15 N/A N/A 7/1/2032 6/30/2034
$75.00 N/A N/A 7/1/2024 6/30/2026 5.00%
$78.75 N/A N/A 7/1/2026 6/30/2028 5.00%
$82.69 N/A N/A 7/1/2028 6/30/2030 5.00%
$86.82 N/A N/A 7/1/2030 6/30/2032 5.00%
$91.16 N/A N/A 7/1/2032 6/30/2034
$67.36 N/A N/A 7/1/2024 6/30/2026 5.00%
$70.73 N/A N/A 7/1/2026 6/30/2028 5.00%
$74.26 N/A N/A 7/1/2028 6/30/2030 5.00%
$77.98 N/A N/A 7/1/2030 6/30/2032 5.00%
$81.88 N/A N/A 7/1/2032 6/30/2034
$35.50 N/A N/A 7/1/2024 6/30/2026 5.00%
$37.28 N/A N/A 7/1/2026 6/30/2028 5.00%
$39.14 N/A N/A 7/1/2028 6/30/2030 5.00%
$41.10 N/A N/A 7/1/2030 6/30/2032 5.00%
$43.15 N/A N/A 7/1/2032 6/30/2034
$77.98
$91.16
Dan Sutton, PE $67.36
Civil Engineer $70.73
$86.82
$41.10
$43.15
$81.88
Ray Santillan $35.50
Auto CAD Designer $37.28
$39.14
$74.26
Fringe Benefit % = Home Office ICR %
City Land Surveyor - Consultant $78.75
$82.69
Scott Harrison, CPRP $61.00
Project Manager $64.05
$67.25
$70.62
$74.15
Fringe Benefit % = Field Office ICR %
Michael E Long, PLS, CFedS $75.00
RFQ No. 2025-05 Participation Amount $

BILLING INFORMATION CALCULATION INFORMATION
Name/Job Title/Classification1
Hourly Billing Rates2 Effective date of hourly rate Actual or Avg. hourly rate3
Fringe Benefit % = Combined ICR %

Consultant or Subconsultant Prime Consultant Subconsultant Second-tier Subconsultant Project No: RFQ No. 2025-02 Contract No. Date:

Description of Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
Mileage Costs TBD Mile IRS RATE $TBD
Equipment Rental and Supplies TBD EA Actual $TBD
Permit Fees TBD TBD Actual $TBD
Plan Sheets TBD TBD Actual $TBD
Test TBD TBD Actual $TBD
Vihicle TBD TBD Actual $TBD
TBD TBD Actual $TBD
NOTES:

9. The cost proposal format shall not be amended. All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles.

4. Items such as special tooling, will be reimbursed at actual cost with supporting documentation (invoice).

6. Travel related costs should be pre-approved by the contracting agency and shall not exceed current State Department of Personnel Administration rules.

11. . Subconsultants must provide their own cost proposals.

NOTES:

3. Billing rate = actual hourly rate * (1+ ICR) * (1+ Fee). Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant’s annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans. All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles for reimbursement

4. For named employees and key personnel enter the actual hourly rate. For classifications only, enter the Average Hourly Rate for that classification.

EXHIBIT 10-H2 COST PROPOSAL
SCHEDULE OF OTHER DIRECT COST ITEMS (Add additional pages as necessary)

1. List other direct cost items with estimated costs. These costs should be competitive in their respective industries and supported with appropriate documentation

2. Proposed ODC items should be consistently billed regardless of client and contract type.

3. Items when incurred for the same purpose, in like circumstance, should not be included in any indirect cost pool or in the overhead rate.

10. Add additional pages if necessary.

1. Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**).All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

2. The cost proposal format shall not be amended

5. Items listed above that would be considered "tools of the trade" are not reimbursable as other direct cost

7. If mileage is claimed, the rate should be properly supported by the consultant's calculation of their actual costs for company vehicles. In addition, the miles claimed should be supported by mileage logs.

8. If a consultant proposes rental costs for a vehicle, the company must demonstrate that this is its standard procedure for all of their contracts and that they do not own any vehicles that could be used for the same purpose.

1. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

2. Terms and conditions of the contract

3. Title 23 United States Code Section 112 - Letting of Contracts

4. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Proceedures

5. 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 172 - Procurement, Management and Administration of Engineering and Design Related Service

6. 48 Ccode of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contracts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the project files and be in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state requirements are not eligible for reimbursement.

Local governments are responsible for applying only cognizant agency or Caltrans accepted Indirect Cost Rate(s).

Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:

Title *:

Paul Meschino President
Date of Certification:
10/8/2024
[email protected] 619-372-9962
9320 Chesapeake Dr. Ste 208, San Diego, CA, 92123
List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:

Professional Land Surveying Services
Address:
* An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant's or subconsultant's organization at a level no lower than a Vice President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish the cost proposal for the contract.

Certification of Direct Costs:

I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements:

Name:

Signature:

Email: Phone number:

ITHOUGHTFUL SOLUTIONS. THRIVING COMMUNITIES.

Hourly Rate Schedule
Effective July 1, 2024
Beginning on the 1st anniversary of the Effective Date of the Agreement and annually thereafter, the hourly rates listed below shall be automatically increased based upon the annual increase in the Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics or successor thereof, Consumer Price Index (United States City Average, All Items (CPI-U), Not Seasonally adjusted, All Urban Consumers, referred to herein as the “CPI”). Such increase shall not exceed 4% per annum. The increase will become effective upon publication of the applicable CPI data. If the index decreases, the rates listed shall remain unchanged.

Classification Hourly Billing Rate
Engineering
Principal in Charge ..................................................................................................................................$255 Principal Engineer ......................................................................................................................................230 City Surveyor ..............................................................................................................................................220 City Engineer .............................................................................................................................................225 Project Manager ........................................................................................................................................210 Senior Traffi c Engineer ..............................................................................................................................200 Traffi c Engineer III ......................................................................................................................................190 Traffi c Engineer II ...................................................................................................................................... 180 Traffi c Engineer I ....................................................................................................................................... 170 Traffi c Engineering Associate II ................................................................................................................160 Traffi c Engineering Associate I ..................................................................................................................150 Transportation Engineer .......................................................................................................................... 210 Supervising Engineer ............................................................................................................................... 205 Senior Engineer ........................................................................................................................................ 200 Licensed Land Surveyor ........................................................................................................................... 190 Engineering Associate III ......................................................................................................................... 160 Engineering Associate II ...........................................................................................................................150 Engineering Associate I ............................................................................................................................140 Survey Technician ......................................................................................................................................130 Senior Engineering Technician .................................................................................................................130 Engineering Technician III .........................................................................................................................130 Engineering Technician II .......................................................................................................................... 115 Engineering Technician I ...........................................................................................................................105 Student Trainee ........................................................................................................................................... 50 Grading Plans Examiner ........................................................................................................................... 165 Building Safety Services
Certifi ed Building Offi cial ..........................................................................................................................165 Licensed Plan Review Engineer (structural, civil, electrical, mechanical) / Architect ...........................160 Supervising Structural Engineer ...............................................................................................................200 Senior Structural Engineer ........................................................................................................................185 Senior Plans Examiner ...............................................................................................................................145 CASp ...........................................................................................................................................................135 Inspector III .................................................................................................................................................115 Inspector II ..................................................................................................................................................105 Inspector I .....................................................................................................................................................95 Permit Technician .........................................................................................................................................80 Fire Protection Engineer ...........................................................................................................................160

IITHOUGHTFUL SOLUTIONS. THRIVING COMMUNITIES.

Senior Fire Plans Examiner .......................................................................................................................135 Fire Plans Examiner / Fire Inspector .........................................................................................................125 ICC Building Plans Examiner ....................................................................................................................125 Senior Code Enforcement Offi cer .............................................................................................................140 Code Enforcement Offi cer ....................................................................................................................... 130 Trainee ..........................................................................................................................................................75 Construction Management*
Construction Manager ..............................................................................................................................180 Assistant Construction Manager ..............................................................................................................160 Supervising Public Works Observer .........................................................................................................175 Senior Public Works Observer ..................................................................................................................170 Public Works Observer III ..........................................................................................................................160 Public Works Observer II ...........................................................................................................................145 Public Works Observer I ............................................................................................................................130 *Where prevailing wage is required, there is a supplemental charge per hour Real Estate
Supervising Corporate Broker ..................................................................................................................260 Senior Project Manager ............................................................................................................................200 Project Manager ........................................................................................................................................180 Senior Acquisition / Relocation Agent ....................................................................................................140 Acquisition / Relocation Agent ................................................................................................................125 ROW Technician .........................................................................................................................................115 ROW Coordinator ......................................................................................................................................100 Administrative Support ...............................................................................................................................80 Landscape Design Review Services
Project Manager ........................................................................................................................................185 Senior Landscape Design Reviewer .........................................................................................................165 Landscape Design Reviewer .....................................................................................................................150 Landscape Maintenance Inspector ..........................................................................................................130 Landscape Field Supervisor ......................................................................................................................130 Planning Services
Community Development Director ..........................................................................................................220 Project Manager ........................................................................................................................................190 Planning Manager .....................................................................................................................................200 Principal Planner .........................................................................................................................................180 Senior Planner ............................................................................................................................................165 Associate Planner .....................................................................................................................................135 Assistant Planner .........................................................................................................................................110 Planning Technician .....................................................................................................................................90 Administrative
Grant Manager ...........................................................................................................................................165 Grant Writer ...............................................................................................................................................155 Management Analyst II .............................................................................................................................125 Management Analyst I ..............................................................................................................................115 Senior Administrative ................................................................................................................................115 Administrative III ........................................................................................................................................100 Administrative II ...........................................................................................................................................90 Administrative I ............................................................................................................................................75

COST PROPOSAL 2
Note: Mark-ups are Not Allowed
Consultant Prime Consultant Subconsultant 2nd Tier Subconsultant

Project No. Contract No. Participation Amount $ Date 09/10/24 Fringe Benefit % + General &Administrative % =
For Home Office Rate
Fringe Benefit % + General &Administrative % =
For Field Office Rate
Fringe Benefit % + General &Administrative % =
Fee =
Straight3 OT(1.5x) From To
Rob Markes – Suvey Engineer * $241.95 7/1/2025 6/30/2026 Not Applicable $254.05 7/1/2026 6/30/2027
$266.75 7/1/2027 6/30/2028
$280.09 7/1/2028 6/30/2029
$294.09 7/1/2029 6/30/2030
Ryan Ming – Senior Land $193.42 $228.60 Contract Start 6/30/2025 Not Applicable $203.09 $240.03 7/1/2025 6/30/2026
$213.25 $252.03 7/1/2026 6/30/2027
$223.91 $264.63 7/1/2027 6/30/2028
$235.11 $277.86 7/1/2028 6/30/2029
$192.46 $227.46 Contract Start 6/30/2025 $60-$80
$202.08 $238.83 7/1/2025 6/30/2026 $63.50-$83.50
$212.19 $250.78 7/1/2026 6/30/2027 $67.18-$87.18
$222.80 $263.32 7/1/2027 6/30/2028 $70.54-$81.54
$233.94 $276.48 7/1/2028 6/30/2029 $74.07-$96.12
$138.85 $164.10 Contract Start 6/30/2025 $40.50-$60.50
$145.79 $172.30 7/1/2025 6/30/2026 $42.53-$63.53
$153.08 $180.92 7/1/2026 6/30/2027 $44.65-66.70
$160.73 $189.96 7/1/2027 6/30/2028 $46.88-$70.04
$168.77 $199.46 7/1/2028 6/30/2029 $49.23-$73.54
$219.96 $259.96 Contract Start 6/30/2025 $70-$90
$230.95 $272.95 7/1/2025 6/30/2026 $73.50-$94.50
$242.50 $286.60 7/1/2026 6/30/2027 $77.18-$99.23
$254.63 $300.93 7/1/2027 6/30/2028 $81.03-$104.19
$267.36 $315.98 7/1/2028 6/30/2029 $85.09-$109.40
$200.71 $237.21 Contract Start 6/30/2025 $63-$83
$210.75 $249.07 7/1/2025 6/30/2026 $66.15-$87.15
$221.28 $261.52 7/1/2026 6/30/2027 $69.46-$91.51
$232.35 $274.60 7/1/2027 6/30/2028 $72.93-$96.08
$243.96 $288.33 7/1/2028 6/30/2029 $76.58-$100.89
$115.48 $136.48 Contract Start 6/30/2025 $32-$52
$121.25 $143.30 7/1/2025 6/30/2026 $33.60-$54.60
$127.31 $150.47 7/1/2026 6/30/2027 $35.28-$57.33
$133.68 $157.99 7/1/2027 6/30/2028 $37.04-$60.20
$140.36 $165.89 7/1/2028 6/30/2029 $38.90-$63.21
$332.70
$364.60
$319.02
$320.62
$262.46 $70.00
$208.76 $55.68 5.00%
$219.19 $58.46 5.00%
$230.15 $61.38 5.00%
$330.70 $88.20 5.00%
$347.24 $92.61 5.00%
Party Chief ** $299.96 $80.00
$316.85 $84.51 5.00%
Rodman ** $273.71 $73.00
$287.40 $76.65 5.00%
$191.41 $51.05 5.00%
COST PROPOSAL 2

SPECIFIC RATE OF COMPENSATION (USE FOR ON-CALL OR AS-NEEDED CONTRACTS) (CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION CONTRACTS)
UNICO Engineering
TBD
Name/Job Title/Classification1 Hourly Billing Rates2 Effective Date of Hourly Rate Actual or Avg.

BILLING INFORMATION CALCULATION INFORMATION
Home Office ICR%
% or $

53.41%

0.00%

96.54%

0.00%
$301.77 $80.48
149.95%

0.00%
Field Office ICR%

10.00%
Hourly Range - for
Classifications Only
$305.35
$303.83
$92.40
$97.02
$263.77 $70.35
$73.87
$290.81 $77.56
$275.58 $73.50
$289.36 $77.18
$106.96
OT(2x) Hourly Rate4
Survey Technician/Drafter $157.48
$48.62 5.00%$182.30
$42.00

5.00%

5.00%
$165.35 $44.10 5.00%
$173.62 $46.31 5.00%
$81.03

$189.35 $50.50
$198.81 $53.03 5.00%
$314.95 $84.00

5.00%

5.00%

5.00%

5.00%

5.00%

5.00%
$101.87
$81.44

5.00%

5.00%
$85.51
$85.09

5.00%

5.00%
$97.24
$88.73

5.00%

5.00%
Senior Land Surveyor
Land Surveyor

0.00% 0.00%
OR
For Combined Rate
Combined ICR%

0.00%

5.00%

5.00%
$88.00
$276.96
Increase

10/8/2024

Consultant or Subconsultant Prime Consultant Subconsultant Second-tier Subconsultant Project No: RFQ No. 2025-02 Contract No. Date:

Description of Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total
Mileage Costs TBD Mile IRS RATE $TBD
Equipment Rental and Supplies TBD EA Actual $TBD
Permit Fees TBD TBD Actual $TBD
Plan Sheets TBD TBD Actual $TBD
Test TBD TBD Actual $TBD
Vihicle TBD TBD Actual $TBD
TBD TBD Actual $TBD
NOTES:

9. The cost proposal format shall not be amended. All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles.

4. Items such as special tooling, will be reimbursed at actual cost with supporting documentation (invoice).

6. Travel related costs should be pre-approved by the contracting agency and shall not exceed current State Department of Personnel Administration rules.

11. . Subconsultants must provide their own cost proposals.

NOTES:

3. Billing rate = actual hourly rate * (1+ ICR) * (1+ Fee). Indirect cost rates shall be updated on an annual basis in accordance with the consultant’s annual accounting period and established by a cognizant agency or accepted by Caltrans. All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles for reimbursement

4. For named employees and key personnel enter the actual hourly rate. For classifications only, enter the Average Hourly Rate for that classification.

EXHIBIT 10-H2 COST PROPOSAL
SCHEDULE OF OTHER DIRECT COST ITEMS (Add additional pages as necessary)

1. List other direct cost items with estimated costs. These costs should be competitive in their respective industries and supported with appropriate documentation

2. Proposed ODC items should be consistently billed regardless of client and contract type.

3. Items when incurred for the same purpose, in like circumstance, should not be included in any indirect cost pool or in the overhead rate.

10. Add additional pages if necessary.

1. Key personnel must be marked with an asterisk (*) and employees that are subject to prevailing wage requirements must be marked with two asterisks (**).All costs must comply with the Federal cost principles. Subconsultants will provide their own cost proposals.

2. The cost proposal format shall not be amended

5. Items listed above that would be considered "tools of the trade" are not reimbursable as other direct cost

7. If mileage is claimed, the rate should be properly supported by the consultant's calculation of their actual costs for company vehicles. In addition, the miles claimed should be supported by mileage logs.

8. If a consultant proposes rental costs for a vehicle, the company must demonstrate that this is its standard procedure for all of their contracts and that they do not own any vehicles that could be used for the same purpose.

COST PROPOSAL 2
Certification of Direct Costs:

All costs must be applied consistently and fairly to all contracts. All documentation of compliance must be retained in the project Prime Consultant or Subconsultant Certifying:

Name: Title *:

Signature Date of Certification (mm/dd/yyyy):

Email:

Address:
files and be in compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Costs that are noncompliant with the federal and state

7. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

8. Terms and conditions of the contract

9. Title 23 United States Code Section 112 - Letting of Contracts

10. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 31 - Contract Cost Principles and Procedures

11. 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 172 - Procurement, Management, and Administration of Engineering and Design

12. 48 Code of Federal Regulations Part 9904 - Cost Accounting Standards Board (when applicable) COST PROPOSAL 2
I, the undersigned, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that all direct costs identified on the cost proposal(s) in this contract are actual, reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the contract in accordance with the contract terms and the following requirements:
requirements are not eligible for reimbursement.

Phone Number:

Cesar Montes de Oca
[email protected]
* An individual executive or financial officer of the consultant’s or subconsultant’s organization at a level no lower than a Vice President or a Chief Financial Officer, or equivalent, who has authority to represent the financial information utilized to establish the cost proposal for the contract.

Land Surveying Services
80 Blue Ravine Road, Suite 250, Folsom, CA 95630
916.900.6623
President
List services the consultant is providing under the proposed contract:
09/10/24

10/8/2024

80 Blue Ravine Rd – Suite 250
Folsom, CA 95630
916-900-6623
www.unicoengineering.com
247.45$ 302.44$ 259.82$ 317.56$ 272.81$ 333.44$ 286.45$ 350.11$ 300.78$ 367.62$ 315.82$ 386.00$ 219.96$ 274.95$ 230.95$ 288.69$ 242.50$ 303.13$ 254.63$ 318.28$ 267.36$ 334.20$ 280.73$ 350.91$ 164.97$ 219.96$ 173.22$ 230.95$ 181.88$ 242.50$ 190.97$ 254.63$ 200.52$ 267.36$ 210.54$ 280.73$ 109.98$ 192.46$ 115.48$ 202.08$ 121.25$ 212.19$ 127.31$ 222.80$ 133.68$ 233.94$ 140.36$ 245.64$ 211.71$ 266.70$ 222.29$ 280.03$ 233.41$ 294.03$ 245.08$ 308.73$ 257.33$ 324.17$ 270.20$ 340.38$ 109.98$ 164.97$ 115.48$ 173.22$ 121.25$ 181.88$ 127.31$ 190.97$ 133.68$ 200.52$ 140.36$ 210.54$ 192.46$ 247.45$ 202.08$ 259.82$ 212.19$ 272.81$ 222.80$ 286.45$ 233.94$ 300.78$ 245.64$ 315.82$ Chainman/Rodman (Non-Prevailing Wage) 77.00$ 154.00$ 80.85$ 161.70$ 84.89$ 169.79$ 89.14$ 178.27$ 93.59$ 187.19$ 98.27$ 196.55$

82.48$ 137.47$ 86.61$ 144.35$ 90.94$ 151.56$ 95.48$ 159.14$ 100.26$ 167.10$ 105.27$ 175.45$ 151.22$ 178.71$ 158.78$ 187.65$ 166.72$ 197.03$ 175.06$ 206.88$ 183.81$ 217.23$ 193.00$ 228.09$ • Reimbursement for per diem and mileage expenses shall be per the current federal reimbursement rate. • Cost of normal survey stakes and other field supplies are included in the above rates. Special monuments, iron stakes, etc. will be charged at cost. • Outside reproductions, services, and consultants will be charged at cost plus 10%. • Per prevailing wage, a shift differential of 12.5% applies for any covered work shift beginning after 2PM. • Yearly prevailing wage anticipates a 5% escalation, however increases in DIR rate determinations will be charged accordingly. • Overtime rate will be billed at 1.5 times the hourly rate for non-exempt employees Draftsman/Survey Technician
Drone Pilot/Technician
Chainman/Rodman (Prevailing Wage)
Senior Land Surveyor
Staff Land Surveyor
Party Chief (Non-Prevailing Wage)
Party Chief (Prevailing Wage)
Survey Manager
Principal Land Surveyor

FULLY LOADED

HOURLY RATE RANGE
2029
UNICO Engineering, Inc.
2024-2029

RATE SCHEDULE

FULLY LOADED

HOURLY RATE RANGE
2027

FULLY LOADED

HOURLY RATE RANGE
2026

FULLY LOADED

HOURLY RATE RANGE
2024

FULLY LOADED

HOURLY RATE RANGE
2025CLASSIFICATION

FULLY LOADED

HOURLY RATE RANGE
2028

QKINC.COM | (559) 582-1056
609 North Irwin Street | Hanford, CA 93230
PROPOSAL + QUALIFICATIONS

ON-CALL LAND SURVEYING SERVICES

609 North Irwin Street | Hanford, CA 93230 | (559) 582-1056 Engineering | Land Surveying | Planning | Environmental | Landscape Architecture | Construction Management QKINC.COM January 23, 2024
Frank Senteno, Utilities & Engineering Director
City of Hanford
900 South 10th Avenue
Hanford, CA 93230
The City of Hanford (City) intends to contract on-call land surveying services to support its various projects over the next few years. From our discussions, we understand that this role entails providing technical and local support to the City Surveyor and providing professional surveying services directly to the City. QK’s extensive history of working with Hanford positions us to deliver these services effectively, leveraging our deep understanding of City standards, regulatory compliance, and project management to deliver successful outcomes for your projects.

PARTNERING WITH HANFORD: LEVERAGING QK’S LOCAL EXPERTISE Local support will be a key component of our services throughout this contract. With a well-staffed Hanford office, QK can respond quickly to the City’s needs. Our team has a deep-rooted history of supporting the City of Hanford, beginning as Zumwalt Hansen & Associates and continuing that legacy as QK. We pride ourselves on being a trusted partner, helping the City meet tight timelines and stay within budget while delivering accurate, high-quality survey data to facilitate efficient project completion.

TAILORED SOLUTIONS FOR HANFORD’S NEEDS
QK understands that every project is unique, and our approach is built around flexibility and collaboration to meet the City’s specific goals. By providing a wide range of land surveying services (including topographic and boundary surveys, construction staking, and map and plan review) we will support the City in maintaining infrastructure, preparing for growth, and complying with applicable regulations.

We bring decades of experience working on similar projects in the Hanford region, so our deliverables will align well with City standards. Furthermore, our extensive archive of survey and reference materials housed in our Hanford office enables us to provide rapid and accurate historical data that minimizes redundant work and speeds up the decision-making process.

A COMMITMENT TO VALUE, ACCURACY , AND RESPONSIVENESS
At QK, we understand the importance of delivering high-quality services efficiently. By choosing to work with us, the City will benefit from cost-effective services, timely project completion, and a commitment to compliance and accuracy. Our multidisciplinary team, proximity to Hanford, and licensed surveyors mean we can meet the City’s needs effectively and professionally.

QK is eager to continue our legacy of service to Hanford, building on decades of collaboration to deliver the expertise and local knowledge the City needs to succeed. We look forward to the opportunity to support the City in achieving its vision.

Sincerely,
Alex T. Dwiggins, PE
Hanford Branch Manager / Senior Engineer
Amber Aguayo

CFO/COO

1 SCOPE OF WORK

ON-CALL SURVEY

SCOPE OF WORK

TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYS
QK will perform field and office services
as directed by the City.  Qualified field
crews will perform the field work,
and a licensed surveyor (or other
appropriately licensed professional)
will direct office work.

BOUNDARY SURVEYS
QK will perform field and office services
as directed by the City. This work will
include, but not be limited to:
• Monument preservation
• Preparing right-of-way legal
descriptions
• Preparing exhibit maps

CONSTRUCTION STAKING
QK will perform construction staking
services as directed by the City
for City-administered construction
projects. We will review plans provided
by the City and use them to create fee
proposals.

MAP AND PLAN REVIEW +

RESEARCH
QK will assist the City with map and
plan reviews as needed.  Our Hanford
office has an extensive archive of
reference material that we will leverage
to elevate these services.

ADDITIONAL SERVICES
QK will assist the City with any
additional professional surveying or
engineering services on an as-needed
basis.

BENEFITS TO

HANFORD

COST -EFFECTIVE SERVICES
By working with QK, the City gains
access to a multidisciplinary team
under one roof. Our ability to manage
projects from survey to engineering
increases efficiency and reduces
administrative overhead.

TIMEL Y PROJECT COMPLETION
Our team’s proximity and familiarity
with Hanford allow us to be
exceptionally responsive to City
needs, minimizing delays and
maximizing productivity.

COMPLIANCE AND ACCURACY
We will conduct all survey work
under the direction of our licensed
surveyors, who will verify regulatory
compliance, precision, and
professionalism at every stage.

SUPPORT FOR THE CITY

SURVEYOR
Our team will serve as an extension of
the City Surveyor, providing technical
expertise and alleviating workload
pressures to help the City achieve its
objectives.

FULL SURVEY

SERVICES
Plan and map checking
Tentative map, parcel map, and
subdivision reviews
Boundary surveys
Topographic surveys
Construction staking
Right-of-way surveys and maps
Parcel and subdivision maps
Geodetic control surveys
Aerial photo control surveys
Legal descriptions
AL TA surveys
Low-altitude high-resolution
aerial photogrammetry
3D modeling
Record of survey
WOODLAKE CASTLE ROCK + SIERRA ROUNDABOUT
Surveying | Civil Eng. | Environmental | Const. Mgmt. | Landscape Arch.

2 NAME | TITLE ROLE | QUALIFICATIONS

ALEX DWIGGINS, PE
HANFORD BRANCH MANAGER +

SENIOR ENGINEER
Professional Engineer - Civil
California, No. 61523
Alex has been a member of the Hanford branch for over 20 years and serves as a senior engineer and branch manager. He has extensive experience with local engineering projects and regularly coordinates survey tasks.  As the Hanford Branch Manager, Alex manages day-to-day office operations, coordinates surveying services, and provides leadership and engineering services for all Hanford projects.

RON ROSELIUS, PLS

SENIOR LAND SURVEYOR

PRIMARY POINT OF CONTACT
Professional Land Surveyor
California, No. 8167
Ron has been a QK’s Hanford branch member for over 40 years and will be the primary licensed land surveyor assigned to the City’s projects. Ron has vast experience in construction staking and boundary surveying and will be the main point of contact for the City.

MICK PADGETT , PLS

SENIOR LAND SURVEYOR
Professional Land Surveyor
California - No. 8165
Mick is an experienced land surveyor who will be critical to the City’s on-call survey projects. He discovered his passion for surveying through his love for working outdoors and his aptitude for math. Throughout his career, Mick has contributed to a diverse array of educational, municipal, and private projects across the Central Valley.

MATT VALOV

SENIOR ASSOCIATE SURVEYOR

SURVEY PARTY CHIEF
Matt has been a member of the Hanford branch for over 20 years and will be the survey party chief for the City’s projects.

His experience includes boundary surveying, construction staking, right-of-way, topographic, and construction surveys.

He operates survey measuring instruments, including level, theodolite, electronic measuring devices, total stations with electronic data collecting capabilities, and GPS receivers.  His office survey duties include data reduction, field note reduction, calculations, data checks, and staking computations using Trimble Business Center and Civil3D.

KEY PERSONNEL

PERSONNEL RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THE CITY
7 Professional Land Surveyors (PLS) 10 CADD Technicians & Designers 21 Professional Engineers (PE) 14 FAA-Certified Drone Pilots 10 Assistant & Associate Engineers 3 Geographic Information System Specialists

ADDITIONAL STAFF RESOURCES
The key personnel listed above will be primarily responsible for performing the work; however QK has extensive resources to provide additional assistance if the scope of a task requires it. Overall the firm has seven licensed surveyors and can field multiple field crews. We will discuss any changes to the key personnel with City staff and make appropriate introductions.

3 SURVEY SERVICES OVERVIEW
QK’s team of seasoned, licensed land surveyors handles
diverse projects with expertise and efficiency. Many of our clients are public agencies seeking support for capital projects, legal matters, and construction activities.

As the Surveyor of Record for numerous cities across the San Joaquin Valley, we are committed to delivering a wide range of high-quality surveying services. These include topographic, AL TA, boundary, and construction control
surveys. Our extensive experience working with different types of projects allows us to address any surveying need, no matter the scale or complexity.

Our blend of in-office and field environment expertise allows us to respond rapidly to clients’ needs, minimizing delays and providing a seamless project experience. By leveraging advanced technologies, such as GPS and drones, our skilled team collects precise, accurate, and usable data.

We are dedicated to maintaining our reputation as a trusted provider of exceptional surveying services throughout
California. By combining cutting-edge technology with our team’s vast experience, we deliver accurate, efficient, and cost-effective solutions to our clients.

CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES

OVERVIEW
QK is a leader in providing civil engineering services in the San Joaquin Valley. We’ve helped public and private sector clients for over 50 years, and our team of licensed professionals has expertise in all critical subdisciplines of civil engineering.

Our team focuses on planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining various infrastructures and facilities, including roads, water supply and treatment systems, sewer systems, dams, and buildings. We aim to help our clients create and maintain a sustainable built environment while considering public safety, cost-effectiveness, and resource optimization.

QK’s engineers play a crucial role in shaping communities by designing and managing the infrastructure systems that support everyday life. They work closely with other QKers to design a built environment that meets community needs while minimizing its impact on the natural environment.

4 FEES
QK will treat each request by the City of Hanford as a separate task for which we will provide a tailored proposal and scope of work. These proposals will include fees based on the following fee schedule. We understand that the City has limits on the cost of each task and an overall annual fee limit.

TECHNICAL SERVICES
Project Administrator $103 / hour
Assistant CADD Technician / Assistant CADD Designer / GIS Technician $103 / hour Associate CADD Technician / Associate CADD Designer / Associate GIS Analyst $118 / hour Senior Associate CADD Technician/ Senior Associate CADD Designer / Senior Associate GIS Analyst $129 / hour Senior CADD Technician / Senior CADD Designer / Senior GIS Analyst $159 / hour Landscape Architect Technician $118 / hour
Assistant Engineer $129 / hour
Associate Engineer $159 / hour
Senior Associate Engineer $185 / hour
Project Engineer $210 / hour
Senior Engineer / City Engineer / District Engineer $245 / hour Senior Air Quality Engineer $275 / hour
Principal Engineer $275 / hour
Senior Principal Engineer: VP/ President $290 / hour
Assistant Environmental Scientist $105 / hour
Assistant Planner $115 / hour
Associate Planner / Associate Environmental Scientist $129 / hour Senior Associate Environmental Scientist $149 / hour
Senior Associate Planner $155 / hour
Senior Environmental Scientist $185 / hour
Senior Planner / Senior Landscape Architect $185 / hour Principal Planner / Principal Environmental Scientist $210 / hour Field Construction Observer $140 / hour
Senior Field Construction Observer $165 / hour
Assistant Construction Manager / Assistant Project Manager $129 / hour Associate Project Manager $143 / hour
Associate Construction Manager / Associate Field Construction Observer $155 / hour Project Manager $155 / hour
Senior Associate Construction Manager / Senior Associate Project Manager $170 / hour Senior Project Manager $199 / hour
Senior Construction Manager $199 / hour
Principal Construction Manager / Principal Project Manager $225 / hour Assistant Surveyor $125 / hour
Associate Surveyor $139 / hour
Senior Associate Surveyor $169 / hour
Project Surveyor $195 / hour
Senior Surveyor $210 / hour
Principal Surveyor $249 / hour
One-Person Survey Crew $185 / hour
Two-Person Survey Crew $290 / hour
Three-Person Survey Crew $385 / hour
One-Person Survey Crew - Prevailing Wage (Kings County; through 09/30/2025)* $240 / hour Two-Person Survey Crew - Prevailing Wage (Kings County; through 09/30/2025)* $420 / hour Three-Person Survey Crew - Prevailing Wage (Kings County; through 09/30/2025)* $600 / hour UAV Pilot $199 / hour
UAV Flight Observer $165 / hour
Fees are based on the median hourly pay rate for employees in each classification, plus indirect costs, overhead, and profit.

Plotting, Printing and Reproduction, Equipment Rental, Postage and Shipping 1.15 x Cost Transportation and per diem (QK will provide documented evidence of business travel, travel outside of work areas shall be pre-approved by Client) 1.15 x Cost Mileage $0.81 / mile
Other Expenses – Including Subconsultants & Purchased Services through Subcontracts 1.15 x Cost Rates are effective through December 31, 2025. If contract assignment extends beyond that date, a new rate schedule may be added to the contract.

Expert Witness/ Litigation support will be billed as quoted. “Prevailing Wage” (PW) rates for Kings County will be updated when mandatory union updates are received.

Rates based on “Prevailing Wage” (PW) for Construction Surveying will be determined by project and County per California law. 1/15/2025 2025 CHARGE RATE SCHEDULE
Construction and Project Management
Planning / Environmental / Landscape Architecture

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Engineering
Surveying

EXPENSES

(800) 955-7599 | QKinc.com
Engineering | Land Surveying | Planning | Environmental | Landscape Architecture | Construction Management

BAKERSFIELD
(661) 616-2600
5080 California Avenue, Suite 220
Bakersfield, California 93309

PORTERVILLE
(559) 781-2700
150 West Morton Avenue
Porterville, California 93257

VISALIA (HQ)
(559) 733-0440
901 East Main Street
Visalia, California 93292
CLOVIS
(559) 449-2400
601 Pollasky Avenue, Suite 301
Clovis, California 93612
MERCED
(209) 7230-2066
2816 Park Avenue
Merced, California 95348

HANFORD
(559) 582-1056
609 North Irwin Street
Hanford, California 93230

RESOLUTION NO. 25-02-R

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD APPOINTING

MICHAEL LONG AS ACTING CITY SURVEYOR
At a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on February 04, 2025, at 7:00pm in the Council Chambers of the Civic Auditorium, it was moved by council member , and seconded by Council Member , and duly carried, that the following resolution be adopted.

WHEREAS, the City of Hanford is responsible for ensuring accurate and professional surveying services to maintain public infrastructure and property records; and WHEREAS, Michael Long of Interwest Consulting Group has demonstrated qualifications, expertise, and licensure as a Professional Land Surveyor in accordance with the laws of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to appoint Michael Long as the City Surveyor to perform such duties as required under the laws of the State of California and the municipal code of the City of Hanford.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hanford as follows:

1. Appointment: The City Council hereby appoints Michael Long, a licensed Professional Land Surveyor (License No. 6815), as the City Surveyor for the City of Hanford, effective February 04, 2025.

2. Duties: The City Surveyor shall perform all duties as prescribed by state law, including but not limited to:
o Conducting surveys and providing professional oversight for public works projects.
o Reviewing subdivision maps and other land surveying-related documents in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act.
o Certifying survey-related records.
o Advising the City Council, Public Works Department, and other city staff on survey matters.

3. Term: Michael Long shall serve as City Surveyor for a term of three-years, with the option for two one-year extensions

4. Compensation: The City Surveyor will be compensated in accordance with the fee schedule submitted by Interwest Consulting Group for City Surveyor Consultant Services.

5. Severability: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.

PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on the ____ day of __________, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Lou Martinez
MAYOR of the City of Hanford

ATTEST:

Natalie Corral
City Clerk

State of California )
County of Kings ) ss
City of Hanford )

I, Natalie Corral, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the day of , 2025.

Date: City Clerk .

12.J.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of the addition of two (2) full-time positions to the City's position control budget, an Administrative Assistant position for City Hall (Administration) and an Administrative Analyst for the Fire Department and appropriate $46,000 from the General Fund for fiscal year 2024/2025 for the additions.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: That the City Council, by motion, approve the addition of two fulltime positions to the City's position control budget, an Administrative Assistant position for City Hall (Administration) and an Administrative Analyst for the Fire Department and appropriate $46,000 from the General Fund for fiscal year 2024/2025 for the additions.

BACKGROUND:

The addition of two full-time positions, an Administrative Assistant for City Hall (Administration) and an Administrative Analyst for the Fire Department, is recommended due to impending vacancies and to enhance operational efficiency, improve service delivery, and address increasing administrative demands. The financial impact to the General Fund is offset by cost reductions and efficiencies that greatly reduce the impact to maintain viability long-term. Typically, new position requests would be included in formal budget adoptions or reviews, however, due to the timing of looming vacancies/need this is brought to Council for earlier consideration. Below is the justification for each role:

1. Administrative Assistant for City Hall (Administration) The Administrative Assistant position will provide critical support to City Hall's administrative operations directly with the City Manager/City Clerk's offices and Parks as well as Community Services, ensuring smooth and efficient workflows for various department's in city hall.

Key Justifications:
• Continuity in service: The City can maintain reliable continuity in service at the City Hall front counter in order to provide guidance to public visitors and customer service for Parks and Community Services, passport assistance, and needed support to city administrative functions.
• Cost-Effectiveness: By hiring a full-time Administrative Assistant, the City can avoid over-

reliance on higher-salaried staff for routine administrative tasks, optimizing resource allocation, with a relatively. Part-time salaries currently budgeted in Parks and Community Services for admin support will be eliminated as this position would take on some tasks to assist. • Improved Responsiveness: The addition of this role will enable more timely responses to public inquiries, interdepartmental coordination, and documentation needs, enhancing overall resident satisfaction.
• Operational Support: The position will support key functions such as scheduling, correspondence management, record-keeping, and facilitating communication between departments and external stakeholders.
• Increased Workload: As the City continues to grow, administrative demands on City Hall staff have risen significantly. This position will alleviate workload pressures on current staff, allowing them to focus on higher-level tasks such as economic development, public records, risk and internal services.

2. Administrative Analyst for the Fire Department (future Measure H position) The Administrative Analyst position will strengthen the Fire Department's administrative and operational capabilities, enabling the department to focus more effectively on public safety. In the upcoming months there will be clerical/administrative vacancy in the department which warrants a need for administrative support functions. Staff recommends that this position look to be filled and paid for initially by the General Fund, before the implementation date of Measure H (July 1, 2025).

Upon final review and adoption of Measure H funds, this position would then be funded by Measure H (according to the voter approved expenditure plan).

Key Justifications:
• Future funding with Measure H: This is a position that was identified in the Measure H Expenditure Plan. Accordingly it is anticipated to be funded July 1, 2025 with Measure H funds (after review by the Measure H Oversight Board, and approval by City Council). This would not be a long term impact to the General Fund and would not negatively impact future General Fund budget.
• Complex Reporting Requirements: The Fire Department faces increased reporting and compliance requirements, including grant management, performance metrics tracking, and budget reporting. An analyst will ensure these tasks are handled accurately and efficiently. • Strategic Planning Support: This position will assist in long-term planning, data analysis, and resource allocation, helping the department meet community safety goals and prepare for future challenges.
• Grant Opportunities and Budget Management: The analyst will identify and secure grant funding opportunities and provide detailed analysis to ensure the department operates within budget constraints.
• Operational Efficiency: By taking on these responsibilities, the analyst will free up senior fire department staff to focus on core operational priorities, such as training, emergency response, and community engagement.

Conclusion
Adding these two positions will not only enhance the City's administrative capacity but also improve overall efficiency, service quality, and responsiveness to the needs of residents and staff. These roles represent a proactive investment in the City’s ability to sustain growth, meet increasing demands, and maintain high-quality service delivery across departments.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Table 1: Additional Cost to the General Fund, summarizes the financial impact to the city. In short, there is a $46,000 impact fiscal year 2024/2025, and an ongoing impact of $181,500 (Measure H $115,000, General Fund $88,618). The General Fund final financial impact will be limited to approximately $34,000, due to the allocation of costs to other funds because of the administrative nature of the position. The impact to the General Fund for fiscal year 2024/2025 is projected to be higher than future years, as it is proposed to be temporary funding of the Administrative Analyst position by the General Fund (future funded with Measure H). All costs are estimated based on a hiring date of April 1, 2025. It could be proposed in the future to the Measure H Oversight Board (once formed) to reimburse the General Fund for the position, and if so, considered by the City Council at future budget adoption.

Although there is a long-term costs to the assistant position for the City, in compliance with budget objectives it does lead to other operating cost savings, potential increase in passport revenues and operational efficiencies for city operations.

Table 1: Additional Cost to the General Fund

ATTACHMENTS:

None

13.A.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 2/4/2025 AGENDA SECTION: GENERAL BUSINESS

SUBJECT:

Presentation to the City Council of the Draft Active Transportation Plan and direction from Council as warranted.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: That the Council receive the presentation and provide input on the Draft Plan as appropriate.

BACKGROUND:

The 2020 Parks and Recreation Master Plan was developed through extensive community engagement. The plan strongly indicated the priority and need for walking and biking trails, which Hanford lacks. Throughout the past 133 years, the City has been developed as a car-centric community. As the City continues to expand, the need for a comprehensive Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is critical to the City's future plan for growth.

In 2022, the City received the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant for $224,423 to update the 2016 Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan. With unanimous council approval, Alta Transportation + Planning was awarded the contract to develop the ATP through a competitive bid process. Since March 2023, Alta has engaged with the public through community outreach, online and paper surveys, public meetings, a dedicated webpage, and pop-up events. On January 13, 2025, the Draft ATP was presented to the Parks and Recreation Committee for input. The draft ATP will be given to the City Council on February 4th to receive Council input. On February 10th, the ATP will return to the Parks and Recreation Commission as a voting agenda item. The plan will then be returned to the City Council on February 18th to propose the adoption of the plan.

If adopted, the ATP provides the framework to improve the safety and well-being of Hanford residents by enhancing their active transportation options. The ATP strategically positions the City with the ability to apply for grant funding to support the plan's implementation financially. The Administrative Draft of the ATP is attached for your review. Below is the Executive Summary of the Draft ATP.

Executive Summary

Hanford is well positioned to increase walking and bicycling for transportation. The city has a flat topography, and most destinations are within a 20-minute bicycle ride. The many quiet, tree-shaded streets offer pedestrians and cyclists shade from the intense summer heat. The City has initiated

efforts to improve pedestrian safety in the Downtown area and commenced planning for a cross-city trail, The People’s Trail, with a bike and pedestrian crossing over Highway 198 linking north and south Hanford. The future High-Speed Rail station and the Cross Valley Corridor will be transformative projects that will significantly expand mobility options, and this Plan recommends non- motorized connections to those anticipated stations.

These future investments and natural assets provide the foundation upon which the City can continue to build a high-quality citywide network for walking and bicycling – accessible and comfortable for everyday use by residents and visitors of all ages and abilities.

Developed through a robust two-phase engagement process, the Plan Update 2024 is organized around four overarching goals:

1. Access, Connectivity, and Multi-modal Consistency: Provide a well-connected multi-modal transportation network that offers safe, comfortable, and convenient mobility options for all residents and visitors of the City of Hanford.

2. Health, Wellbeing, and Sustainability: Advance public health, environmental quality, and economic prosperity by providing inviting sidewalks, bikeways, and trails that encourage frequent usage and improve access to other non-vehicle modes of travel.

3. Public Safety and Comfort: Provide a safer and more comfortable environment for people walking, bicycling, and using other active modes.

4. Collaboration and Community Partnerships: Develop a network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities through a collaborative process that builds and maintains community trust.

The Plan Update 2024 calls for a significant expansion of Hanford’s existing bicycle network and pedestrian infrastructure, using a data-driven approach using the bicycle- and pedestrian-involved collision data and active travel demand data.

Nearly 93 miles of new bikeways are proposed in the Plan Update 2024, which would be triple the current 31 miles of bikeways in the city. The proposed bike network projects significantly enhance the existing bike network by adding Shared-Use Path (Class I) – including the People’s Trail) – Buffered Bike Lanes (Class IIB) and Separated Bikeways (Class IV) facilities to the city. The Plan Update 2024 also recommends improvements to the pedestrian infrastructure at 59 locations centralized around 3 Pedestrian Priority Zones in North and South Hanford and Downtown Hanford. Four Pedestrian Priority Corridors are recommended for sections of Hanford Armona Road, E Lacey Boulevard, 11th Avenue, and N Douty Street. The Plan calls for these improvements to be phased over time. Phase 1 improvements include a backbone network of 16 miles of enhanced bikeways and 33 locations where pedestrian improvements are urgently needed.

In addition to infrastructure improvements, the Plan Update 2024 recommends policies and programs to support active transportation. Among these recommendations, an expanded partnership with the city’s school districts would enhance Safe Routes to School programs for K-12 children. At the same time, temporary car-free street events, a bike lending library, and bicycling skills courses could encourage more Hanford residents to walk or bike to their destinations.

The Plan Update 2024 establishes a vision for the future of active transportation in Hanford that ties into the city’s General Plan and Parks and Recreation Plan. As recommendations are implemented, the City will improve health and safety, encourage mode shift, and enhance the quality of life for residents and visitors of Hanford.

FISCAL IMPACT: THE FISCAL IMPACT OF IMPLEMENTING THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN (ATP) IS UNKNOWN. WITHIN THE PLAN, FUTURE FUNDING SOURCES ARE IDENTIFIED FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Hanford-ATP Public-Draft

JANUARY 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE

CHAPTER TWO

CHAPTER THREE
Introduction 3
Purpose of the Plan 4
Benefits of Walking and Bicycling 5
Relationship To Other Documents 6
Plan Organization 8
Summary 9
Visions, Goals, and Objectives 10
Overview 11
Vision 11
Goals and Objectives 12
Hanford Today 17
Local Context 18
Transit Access 18
Equity 19
Land Use 21
Existing Bicycle Network 23
Existing Pedestrian Network 27
Barriers to Active Transportation 29
Active Trip Density 29
Active Trip Potential 31
Safety 33
User Experience & Perceived Comfort 36
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress 37
Pedestrian Barriers 40

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Outreach 42
Online Survey 44
Online Interactive Mapping Tool 45
City Website and Social Media 46
Phase 1 Events: Community Workshops
and Pop-up Events 47
Walk Audit 49
Phase 2 Events: Community
Open Houses and Pop-Up Events 51
Recommendations 54
Recommendations Process 55
Pedestrian Recommendations 56
Pedestrian Improvement Toolbox 57
Bicycle Recommendations 66
Non-Infrastructure Policy
and Program Recommendations 74
Programmatic Recommendations 76
Safe Routes to School Programs 80
Evaluation Programs 84
Implementation 86
Prioritization 87
Appendices 93
Design Guides 94
Concept Designs 96
Funding Sources 98
Bicycle Recommendations 111
Pedestrian Recommendations 114

CHAPTER FOUR

CHAPTER FIVE

CHAPTER SIX

CHAPTER SEVEN

Introduction

CHAPTER ONE

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 5

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN
The Active Transportation Plan Update 2024
establishes a long-term vision for improving
walking and bicycling in Hanford by updating
the previous plan adopted by the City Council
in 2016.

The Plan Update 2024 provides a strategy to
develop a comprehensive bicycle and walking
network to connect Hanford residents across
Highway 198 and improve access to transit,
schools, and downtown alongside support
facilities like bicycle parking and pedestrian
amenities. The plan also recognized the
transformative transportation changes the
new High-Speed Rail (HSR) station and the
Cross Valley Corridor will bring to Hanford.

The Plan integrates the new HSR station with
the City’s long-term active transportation
network. These transportation and trail
recommendations are paired with education,
encouragement, enforcement, and evaluation
programs. This document also identifies a plan
to implement these projects and programs
through prioritization and phasing to ensure
implementation is manageable and fundable.

This Plan Update 2024 represents a long-term,
aspirational vision for walking and bicycling in
Hanford. It recognizes that limited funding and
resources will require phased implementation of
the proposed improvements over many years.

The Plan Update 2024 process provided
opportunities for elected and appointed
members of the City’s Boards and Commissions,
as well as the public, to participate in the
development process of the Plan Update 2018
by evaluating, commenting, and suggesting
ideas for walking and bicycling. Updates to
the Plan are necessary as a progressive city
is rarely static, and the needs of a viable city
are dynamic. Ideally, the Plan Update 2024
should be reviewed every two years to update
maps, project lists, and priorities as facilities
are completed and to keep pace with the
development landscape.

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 6

BENEFITS OF WALKING

AND BICYCLING
Public Health
Physical inactivity is now widely understood to play a significant role in the most common chronic diseases in the United States, including heart disease, stroke, and diabetes, and each year, approximately 280,000 adults in the United States die prematurely due to obesity-related illnesses.

A 2004 study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine by Frank et al. reported that for each additional 60 minutes spent in a car daily, there is a six percent increase in the chances of being obese1. Creating a physical environment that encourages walking and bicycling and improves access to parks and active recreation opportunities in other neighborhoods is a key strategy to fight obesity and inactivity. It has been shown to impact health substantially with a relatively small public investment. Hanford is well-positioned to encourage active travel because the small city size makes most destinations accessible within a 20-minute bike ride. collision reduction
Conflicts between people walking, bicycling, and driving can result from poor behavior as well as insufficient or ineffective design. Encouraging development and redevelopment in which bicycling and walking are supported can enhance safety and comfort levels for all users. Designated bicycling and walking facilities, well-designed crossings, and continued education and enforcement can reduce the risk of crashes and injuries.

Equity
Bicycling and walking are inexpensive and broadly accessible forms of transportation. A bicycle’s average annual operating cost is $308, compared to $8,220 for the average car. Bicycling and walking are affordable means of transportation for low-income and disadvantaged residents. Access to active transportation provides added freedom and independence for youth and parents (who may otherwise be transporting their children) as well as for some people who cannot drive and those who have chosen not to drive.

Quality of Life
Creating conditions where walking and bicycling are accepted and encouraged increases a community’s livability in ways that are difficult to measure but should not be overlooked. The built environment (i.e., architectural design, land use patterns, and transportation systems) profoundly impacts quality-of-life issues. The aesthetic quality of a community improves when visual and noise pollution caused by automobiles is reduced and green space is reserved for facilities that allow people of all ages to recreate and travel in pleasant settings. 1Frank, Lawrence D et al. “Obesity relationships with community design, physical activity, and time spent in cars.” American journal of preventive medicine vol. 27,2 (2004)

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 7

RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DOCUMENTS
Hanford’s 2016 Pedestrian and Bicycle
Master Plan guides the development of the
City’s Active Transportation Network and
sets out a vision:

Hanford – A city where walking and cycling
are fully integrated into daily life, providing
environmentally-friendly transportation
alternatives that are both safe and convenient
for people of all ages and abilities.

The Active Transportation Plan Update 2024
helps the City realize this ambitious vision
along with implementing goals, policies,
and recommendations adopted through
complementary City planning efforts such as the
Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Downtown
Pedestrian Safety & Traffic Circulation Project
Update, Downtown East Precise Plan and Local
Roadway Safety Plan.

The Active Transportation Plan Update 2024
also helps the City do its part to achieve larger
regional and state goals embraced in:
⊲ Kings County’s General Plan 2035
⊲ Regional Climate Action Plan 2014
⊲ Kings County Association of Governments
2019 Regional Active Transportation Plan
⊲ Cross Valley Corridor Plan
⊲ Kings-Tulare High-Speed Rail Station Plan
⊲ Toward an Active California: State Bicycle
and Pedestrian Plan.

This Plan Update 2024 will help Hanford
continue to meet the following goals.

Hanford
2016 PE dEStrIAn And BI cYcLE
MAS tEr PLA n
⊲ Prepare and maintain a Pedestrian and Bicycle
Master Plan that identifies existing and future
needs, provides specific recommendations for
facilities and programs, and identifies priorities
and funding sources for implementation.
⊲ Develop a safe, convenient, and continuous
network of pedestrian sidewalks and
pathways that link neighborhoods with
schools, parks, shopping areas, employment
centers, and the future High-Speed Rail
station.
⊲ Improve roadway safety and integrate
pedestrian and bicycle facilities with public
transit.

HAnFord doWntoWn EAS t
PrEcISE PLAn
⊲ Promote equitable, affordable housing and
revitalization within downtown for residential
and commercial purposes.
⊲ Providing more mixed uses, increasing
residential density, personal services, and
entertainment, with shared streets for safer,
more pedestrian-friendly experiences.

KInGS-tuLA rE HIGH-SPEE d
rAIL S tAtIon trAnSIt-
orIE ntEd dEVEL oPME nt And
connE ctIVItY PLA n
⊲ Connect transit services from downtown
Hanford to the Kings-Tulare HSR Station along
Lacey Boulevard.
⊲ Promote transit-oriented and economic
development and encourage context-
appropriate development in areas surrounding
the Kings-Tulare HSR Station.

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 8
Kings county
2019 r EGIonAL A ctIVE
trAnSPortAtIon PLA n
⊲ Support the goals under the Kings County
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and
Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS)
of a more balanced transportation system
and serve as the foundation for the non-
motorized transportation chapter of the 2018
update of the RTP/SCS.
rEGI onAL c LIMAtE ActIon
PLA n
⊲ Reduce regional greenhouse gas emissions
by 15% below 2005 levels by 2020.
california
toWArdS An ActIVE
cALIF ornIA: S tAtE BI cYcLE
And PE dEStrIAn PLA n
⊲ Triple bicycling and double walking and
transit trips statewide by 2020 (relative
to 2010).

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 9

PLAN ORGANIZATION
chapter 01
Introduction
Outlines the Plan Update 2024’s purpose
and explains its place in the context of other
planning efforts and initiatives.
chapter 02
Vision & Goals
Captures the vision and policy framework for
Hanford’s Active Transportation Plan Update
2024. The chapter includes performance
metrics because what fails to be measured fails
to get done.
chapter 03
Hanford today
Provides an inventory of present-day walking
and bicycling in Hanford, including physical
conditions of facilities as well as education,
enforcement, and encouragement programs.
chapter 04
outreach
Chronicles how stakeholders, businesses, and
thousands of community members shaped the
Plan Update 2024 through a comprehensive
engagement process.
chapter 05
Projects, Programs
& Policies
Describes and maps the specific projects,
programs, and policy changes recommended
to meet the active transportation needs of
Hanford’s residents and visitors.
chapter 06
Implementation Plan
Presents a strategy to evaluate and prioritize
projects and provides details on funding
opportunities to advance the Plan Update 2024
through phased implementation. Presents the
People’s Trail as a priority project for the City.

Appendices
Recommendations Table: Provides a list of
the recommendations with details on specific
locations and priorities.

Design Guidelines: Provides the City with
information on dimensions, materials, and
other relevant engineering considerations
when designing and constructing walking and
bicycling infrastructure.

Funding Sources: Provides the City with a list
of funding mechanisms to help implement the
recommendations in the plan.

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 10

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Hanford is well positioned to increase walking
and bicycling for transportation. The city has a
relatively flat topography, and most destinations
within a 20-minute bicycle ride. The many
quiet, tree-shaded streets offer pedestrians
and cyclists shade from the intense summer
heat. The City has initiated efforts to improve
pedestrian safety in the Downtown area and
initiated planning for a cross-city trail, The
People’s Trail, with a bike and pedestrian
crossing over Highway 198 linking north and
south Hanford. The future High-Speed Rail
station and the Cross Valley Corridor will be
transformative projects that will significantly
expand mobility options, and this Plan
recommends non-motorized connections to
those anticipated stations.

These future investments and natural assets
provide the foundation upon which the City
can continue to build a high-quality citywide
network for walking and bicycling – one that is
accessible and comfortable for everyday use by
residents and visitors of all ages and abilities.

Developed through a robust two-phase
engagement process, the Plan Update 2024 is
organized around four overarching goals:

1. Access, Connectivity, and Multi-modal
Consistency: Provide a well-connected
multi-modal transportation network that
offers safe, comfortable, and convenient
mobility options for all residents and visitors
of the City of Hanford.

Introduct Io n
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 11

2. Health, Wellbeing, and Sustainability:

Advance public health, environmental
quality, and economic prosperity by
providing inviting sidewalks, bikeways, and
trails that encourage frequent usage and
improve access to other non-vehicle modes
of travel.

3. Public Safety and Comfort: Provide a safer
and more comfortable environment for
people walking, bicycling, and using other
active modes.

4. Collaboration and Community
Partnerships: Develop a network of
pedestrian and bicycle facilities through
a collaborative process that builds and
maintains community trust.

The Plan Update 2024 call for a significant
expansion of Hanford’s existing bicycle
network and pedestrian infrastructure,
using
a data-driven approach using the bicycle- and
pedestrian-involved collision data and active
travel demand data.

Nearly 93 miles of new bikeways are proposed
in the Plan Update 2024, which would triple the
current 31 miles of bikeways in the city. The
proposed bike network projects sig
nificantly
enhance the existing bike network by adding
Shared-Use Path (Class I) – including the
People’s Trail – Buffered Bike Lanes
(C
lass IIB), and Separated Bikeways (Class IV)
facilities to the city. The Plan Update 2024
also recommends improvements to pedestrian
infrastructure at 59 locations centralized around
3 Pedestrian Priority Zones in North and South
Hanford as well as Downtown Hanford. Four
Pedestrian Priority Corridors are recommended
for sections of Hanford Armona Road, E Lacey
Boulevard, 11th Avenue, and N Douty Street. The
Plan calls for these improvements to be phased
over time, with Phase 1 improvements including
a backbone network of 16 miles of enhanced
bikeways and 33 locations where pedestrian
improvements are urgently needed.

In addition to infrastructure improvements, the
Plan Update 2024 recommends policies and
programs to support active transportation.

Among these recommendations, an expanded
partnership with the city’s school districts would
enhance Safe Routes to School programs for
K-12 children, while temporary car-free street
events, a bike lending library, and bicycling
skills courses could encourage more Hanford
residents to walk or bike to their destinations.

The Plan Update 2024 establishes a vision for
the future of active transportation in Hanford
that ties into the city’s General Plan and Parks
and Recreation Plan. As recommendations are
implemented, the City will improve health and
safety, encourage mode shift, and enhance
the quality of life for residents and visitors of
Hanford.

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 12
Bike Network Recommendations Map

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 13
Bikeway Network Mileage By Classification
Class Existing (mi.) Recommended (mi.)
Class I: Shared-Use Path 0 12.6
Class II: Bike Lanes 6 9.4
Class IIB: Buffered Bike Lanes 0 50.8
Class III: Bike Routes 25 1.3
Class IIIB: Bike Boulevards 0 14.2
Class IV: Separated Bikeways 0 6.9
TOTAL 31 95.2

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 14
Pedestrian Network Recommendations Map

IntroductI on
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 15
Pedestrian Recommendations by Tier
Tier Number of Locations
Tier 1 – Urgent Action 33
Tier 2 – Safe Streets Network 6
Tier 3 – Future Study 20
TOTAL 59

VISIon S, Go ALS , And oB jEct IVES
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 16
Visions, Goals,
and Objectives

CHAPTER TWO

VISI on S, Go AL S, A nd oB jEc tI VES
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 17

OVERVIEW
The Plan’s vision, goals, and policies build
off the 2016 Hanford Pedestrian and Bicycle
Plan and other City documents. The goals
and policies reflect the priorities expressed by
the community throughout the public outreach
phase of this Plan Update 2024. Discussions
with City departments, best practices across the
nation, and input from community stakeholders
have shaped the proposed strategies and
policies intended to help the City achieve these
goals.

VISION
The City of Hanford will strive to enhance
mobility and safety by creating a well-
connected network of bicycle and pedestrian
facilities, including safe roadway crossings, on-
street bicycle accommodations, and off-street
facilities designed for a wide variety of users
and trip purposes. These enhancements will
be achieved collaboratively with the community
and other local agencies. The City will also
strive to improve health and safety, encourage
mode shift, and enhance the quality of life for
residents and visitors of the City of Hanford.

The Plan Update 2024 is organized around a
vision statement, four overarching goals tied
to relevant objectives, and a series of specific
policies and actions.

VISIon S, Go ALS , And oB jEct IVES
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 18

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Objectives Actions
Support access to jobs,
shopping centers, parks,
recreation centers, transit,
and other local destinations,
including the future Kings
Tulare High-Speed Rail
station.
⊲ Build low-stress bicycle facilities that provide access to local destinations and existing/future transit stations.
⊲ Increase the supply of secure bicycle parking at local destinations.
⊲ Install sidewalks where they are missing.
⊲ Collaborate across City departments to routinely identify and integrate active transportation improvements into all standard maintenance.
⊲ Support the development of a policy to include shared-use paths, sidewalks, and bikeways as part of development agreements. ⊲ Develop a program for a land development fee and utilize funds to implement and maintain the active transportation network.

Plan for Safe Routes to
Schools that allow for
increased mode choice and
safety for students traveling
to and from school.
⊲ Work with the school districts, KART and other regional transit agencies, and the school community (teachers, administrators, students, parents/ caregivers, and neighbors) to identify infrastructure improvements that make walking and bicycling to school a safer option for students.
⊲ Identify infrastructure improvements in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety to adjacent schools.
⊲ Create a walking/bicycling bridge (overcrossing) across Highway 198 to help students living in South Hanford reach their closest high school.
⊲ Assist the school districts, as needed, with providing bicycle racks to public schools or adding additional racks at schools in need of more bicycle parking.
⊲ Install traffic calming and other speed reduction measures to incentivize drivers to reduce travel speeds in school zones. 01 ACCESS, CONNECTIVITY, AND MULTI-MODAL CONSISTENCY:

Provide a well-connected multi-modal transportation network that offers safe, comfortable, and convenient mobility options for all residents and visitors of the City of Hanford.

Objectives
GOAL

VISIon S, Go ALS , And oB jEct IVES
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 19
Objectives Actions
Support multi-modal trips
through first- and last-mile
connections and amenities.
⊲ Design bikeways and pedestrian facilities that safely facilitate first- and last-mile connections to transit.
⊲ Install secure long-term bicycle parking at transit stations. ⊲ Ensure and install appropriate sidewalks and ramps with width to accommodate and improve access for pedestrians with mobility challenges.
⊲ Work with KART to increase the percentage of its fleet with racks that accommodate three bicycles.

Conduct before and after
studies of new bicycle and
pedestrian facilities to
measure effectiveness.
⊲ Track rates of people biking/walking, motorist speed, and number of bicycle- and pedestrian-involved collisions.

VISIon S, Go ALS , And oB jEct IVES
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 20
Objectives Actions
Support the health of residents
in the community by reducing
air pollution, asthma rates, and
greenhouse gas emissions.
⊲ Coordinate the development of bicycle and pedestrian networks that allow residents and visitors of the City of Hanford to choose active modes of transportation by providing low-stress, well- connected facilities and integrating bicycling and walking with transit.
⊲ Coordinate implementing programs, policies, and physical improvements to support targeted reductions in automobile vehicle miles traveled annually as residents, workers, and visitors meet daily needs by walking, biking, and using transit. ⊲ Work with the County’s Department of Public Health to address chronic disease or health sensitivities by providing travel options that support an active lifestyle.

Promote an active lifestyle that
includes biking and walking.
⊲ Enhance access to parks, open spaces, recreational facilities, local businesses, and other key destinations throughout the City. ⊲ Support active, walkable streets and safe travel conditions for all users.
⊲ Support programs that incorporate bicycling into the school districts’ physical education programs.

Apply best practices in
environmental stewardship.
⊲ Follow best practices in environmental stewardship during planning, design, and construction of active transportation facilities in or near environmentally sensitive areas and habitats. ⊲ Pursue policies and incentives that reduce vehicle miles traveled and vehicle travel speeds.
⊲ Consider innovation and demonstrative technologies that contribute to sustainable maintenance practices.
02 HEALTH, WELLBEING, AND SUSTAINABILITY:

Advance public health, environmental quality, and economic prosperity by providing inviting sidewalks, bikeways, and trails that encourage frequent usage and improve access to other non-vehicle modes of travel.

GOAL

VISIon S, Go ALS , And oB jEct IVES
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 21
Objectives Actions
Reduce conflicts between
transportation modes by
utilizing a layered approach to
road safety.
⊲ Install more streetlights and prioritize new lighting installations at locations with higher pedestrian and bicycle activity or where known safety concerns exist.
⊲ Design for appropriate and context-sensitive safe crossings and visibility of pedestrians and bicyclists at high-volume intersections.
⊲ Use innovative designs to create safety enhancements using guidance from organizations such as the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), as well as applicable state and federal design guidelines, including the Safe Systems Approach.

Facilitate multi-modal
transportation through first-
and last-mile mobility options
and smooth transitions
between modes.
⊲ Ensure regular maintenance of sidewalks, bikeways, and trails through maintenance agreements to enhance user experience, safety, and comfort.
⊲ Coordinate with KART and Amtrak to improve pedestrian amenities such as benches and covered waiting areas at transit stops.
⊲ Plan for low-stress bike connections to the High-Speed Rail Station.
⊲ Ensure transit stations meet ADA compliance.

Apply Best Practices for the
development of bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.
⊲ Designate and classify a network for bicycle and pedestrian facilities and amend existing design standards accordingly to allow for multi-modal use of the local road network.
⊲ Apply Complete Streets and trail design standards that meet best practices and community needs, monitor effectiveness, and update the recommendations as needed.

Reduce the frequency and
severity of bicycle and
pedestrian collisions
⊲ Monitor crash factors and provide targeted multi-modal education on transportation safety best practices.
⊲ Fund safety education programs for people driving, walking, and biking that encourage safe behaviors.
⊲ Adopt a City Council resolution authorizing school zone speed limits as low as 15 MPH.
03 PUBLIC SAFETY AND COMFORT:

Provide a safer and more comfortable environment for people walking, bicycling, and using other active modes.

GOAL

VISIon S, Go ALS , And oB jEct IVES
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 22
Objectives Actions
Increase the participation
of community members and
vulnerable groups through the
planning process.
⊲ Collaborate internally across City departments and with community-based and non-government organizations as part of future planning processes.
⊲ Ensure project-based outreach for any Plan recommendations follows inclusive public engagement practices.
⊲ Target outreach efforts to reach community members who may not be able to participate in traditional, in-person public meetings.

Coordinate the implementation
of bicycle and pedestrian
projects and facilities with
other local agencies.
⊲ Coordinate the implementation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities with the City’s road maintenance operations to deliver enhancements cost-effectively and improve roadway conditions. ⊲ Actively pursue alternative maintenance and capital funding opportunities with collaboration and support from KART, Amtrak, and the CA High-Speed Rail Authority.
⊲ Continue joint planning efforts with other agencies to deliver enhancements cost-effectively and improve roadway conditions for a multi-modal environment.
04 coLLAB orAtIon And coMM unItY PArtnErSHIPS:

Develop a network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities through a collaborative process that builds and maintains community trust.

GOAL

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 23
Hanford Today

CHAPTER THREE

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 24
LOCAL

CONTEXT

TRANSIT
ACCESS
The City of Hanford is the most populous city
in Kings County, with about 59,000 residents
located between Selma and Corcoran. Highway
198 cuts through the City of Hanford from east
to west and connects to Interstate 5 and the
City of Lemoore to the west. Moreover, Highway
198 isolates the south side, which has no high
schools, from the rest of the city. With the
development of the High-Speed Rail station
on the city’s east side, Hanford’s population
is expected to grow by 30,000 people. A
robust bicycle and pedestrian network will help
address Hanford’s existing barriers to active
travel while accommodating the transportation
needs of new residents and visitors from the
high-speed rail station. Currently, Hanford has
an Amtrak station downtown that connects to
Fresno and Bakersfield.

Hanford’s central downtown area has a well-
connected street grid with cul-de-sac residential
neighborhoods extending to the city limits.

However, large transportation corridors bisect
the City and isolate neighborhoods. In addition
to Highway 198, Highway 43 is at-grade and
runs north-south along the city’s eastern edge.

Highway 43 will be a barrier to the future High-
Speed Rail Station if bicycle and pedestrian
connections are not established. Furthermore,
two railroad tracks also bisect the City north-
south and east-west, intersecting the downtown
area where the existing Amtrak station is
located.

Hanford is served by two transit providers,
Amtrak and Kings Area Rural Transit (KART), that
offer route connections to local and regional
destinations. KART offers nine local bus routes
that extend out from the downtown, connecting
to medical centers, schools, and shopping
areas. Regionally, the Hanford Amtrak station
is located downtown and provides connections
to Bakersfield, Fresno, Stockton, and the Bay
Area. Low-income residents, residents without
vehicle access, and youth depend on transit for
daily transportation needs. Additionally, many
bicyclists may use transit for a portion of their
trip, making bicycling access to transit stops
and train stations an important part of the active
transportation network.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 25
EQUITY
As shown in Figure 1, the entire area south
of Highway 198 and the downtown are is
disproportionately impacted by environmental
pollutants. Some factors that contribute to
the disproportionate impacts are rates of
poverty and unemployment, exposure to
particulate matter, and groundwater threats.

The community of south Hanford is cut off from
the rest of the City by Highway 198, the east-
west railroad track, and large arterials like Lacey
Boulevard. The only routes for residents to
travel northward are along major arterials with
multiple travel lanes and no bicycle facilities
(11th Avenue, Douty Street, and 10th Avenue).

Similarly, the environmentally burdened area
below Grangeville Boulevard and east of the
north-south railroad track is bounded by large
arterials and collectors, including 11th Avenue,
Grangeville Boulevard, and 10th Avenue.

The areas of the City northwest of Lacey
Boulevard and 12th Avenue and east of
10th Avenue between Fargo Avenue and
Grangeville Boulevard rank in the 50 – 75%
of the CalEnviroScreen score. This means
these areas experience more pollution and
socioeconomic burdens than half of similar
census tracts. Finally, the newest part of the city
on the northern edge, bounded by Grangeville
Boulevard on the south and 11th Avenue and
10th Avenue on the east and west, is more
affluent and experiences much less pollution
burden than the rest of the City.

Equity issues are important to all planning
processes, including developing this Plan
Update 2024. Historically, communities with
large populations of people of non-white races
or ethnicities and low-income households
have received less investment from their local
governments, including an uneven spatial
distribution of facilities and safety improvements
for people walking and bicycling. A review
of citywide factors related to social and
physical conditions identified neighborhoods
disproportionately burdened by environmental
pollutants. These and other considerations
informed the projects and prioritization
recommended in this Plan Update 2024.

CalEnviroScreen 4.0 is a tool created by the
California Office of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment to identify communities
with higher pollution burdens. The tool
uses population characteristics to identify
sensitive populations such as those with
high asthma or cardiovascular disease rates,
housing-burdened low-income households,
and linguistically isolated households. These
population characteristics are combined with
pollution burdens like the amount of smog,
diesel particulate matter, and drinking water
contaminants in a community. Each California
census tract is given a score based on these
indicators, with higher scores experiencing
higher pollution burdens. Communities scoring
over 75% are considered disadvantaged by
the state. This is also a tool used in California’s
Active Transportation Program grant application
scoring. Communities that score in the most
burdened 25% of the state are considered
disadvantaged and receive a slight advantage
in the competitive funding process. Areas in
Hanford that meet this threshold are mapped in
Figure 1.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 26
Figure 1: Equity Map

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 27

LAND USE
The primary land use of the area within the
Hanford city limits is urban, with few agricultural
areas on the west and south sides (Figure 2).

It is important to note that some of the areas
identified as urban are used as industrial sites,
particularly the areas around the Highways.

Currently, the areas outside the city limits
are unincorporated areas primarily used as
agricultural land. However, with the construction
of the Kings Tulare High-Speed Rail Station and
the Cross Valley Corridor, the city boundary will
grow by annexing much of the unincorporated
area, as seen in Figure 2. Many of the roadways
in the unincorporated areas currently do not
have sidewalks or are unpaved. Therefore,
the City will have the opportunity to build
low-stress bikeways and new sidewalks along
annexed roads to enhance connections to
the future High-Speed Rail Station. Hanford's
existing and planned land uses will inform the
recommendations in this Plan Update 2024 to
maximize the number of people with access to
walking and bicycling networks.

Major destinations in Hanford include
schools, parks, healthcare facilities, shopping
centers, city hall, county administration, and
transit stations, mapped in Figure 2. These
destinations are concentrated on the north side
of Highway 198 between 11th Avenue and 10th
Avenue. They will require a comprehensive
network of active transportation facilities to
allow people to walk or bicycle instead of
driving.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 28
Figure 2: Land Use Map
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Ä198
Ä43HANFORD ARMONA RD

LOCUST ST
14TH AVE
11TH AVE

BROWN ST

DOUTY ST
RO
DGER
S
RD

FOURTH STSIXTH ST

LELAND WAY
10TH AVE

SEVENTH ST

WHITE ST

GRANGEVILLE BLVD

FLORINDA ST
IVY ST

FITZGERA
LD
LN
9 1/8 AVE

DAVIS ST

LACEY BLVD
12TH AVE

HUME AVE

REDINGTON ST

MULBERRYDR

GREENFIELD AVE

GLACIER
W
AY

CORTNER ST
FAIRM
ONT
DR

IRWIN ST
M A
NOR
AVE

ENCOREDR
9 1/4 AVE
HA
RRIS
ST

FARGO AVE
CENT
ENN
IAL
DR

MAGNOLIA AVE

FIFTH ST

MYRTLE ST

IONA AVE

FRONT ST
ASPEN
ST
CAM
PUS
DR
13TH AVE

SECOND ST
9TH AVE

HOUSTON AVE
ELM ST

HOOD AVE

FLINT AVE
10 1/2 AVE
6TH ST

THIRDST
14 1/2 AVE
8 1/2 AVE

IDAHO AVE

GENEVA AVE

GLENDALE AVE
7 1/2 AVE

JACKSON AVE
9 1/2 AVE

DEMAND ANAL YSIS -

LAND USE

CITY OF HANFORD

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Future High Speed Rail
! Future High Speed Rail Station
!
Rail Station
!
School
!
Library
Hanford 2035 City Limit
Hanford City Limit

LAND USE
Agriculture
Nature
Urban
Future Growth Area
Data provided by the City of Hanford. Date saved: 3/1/2024. 0 0.5 1 MILES

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 29

EXISTING BICYCLE NETWORK
the california
department of
transportation (caltrans)
designates four classes of
bicycle facilities:
⊲ Class I: Shared-Use Paths
⊲ Class II: Bicycle Lanes
⊲ Class III: Bicycle Routes
⊲ Class IV: Separated Bikeways
Descriptions of each bikeway class are
included in the following section.

The city’s existing bicycle network has
approximately 6 miles of Class II Bicycle Lanes
and 25 miles of Class III Bicycle Routes (Figure
3). Unfortunately, the Class II Bicycle Lanes
are discontinuous and often end before the
intersection, creating many gaps in the bike
network. Moreover, the Class III Bicycle Routes
run along large arterials with no separate lane
markings for bikes. Hanford has no Class I
Shared-Use Paths that would provide off-road
recreation and travel routes for residents. The
lack of quality facilities is discouraging and
unsafe for most cyclists, as it forces people to
ride on high-stress roads or provide no safe
crossing through large arterials.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 30
class I
Shared use Paths
Class I shared-use paths are paved trails
completely separated from the street. They
allow two-way travel by people bicycling
and walking and are often considered the
most comfortable facilities for children and
inexperienced riders as there are few potential
conflicts between people bicycling and
people driving.

No existing Class I Shared Use Paths in Hanford.
class II
Bicycle Lanes
Class II bicycle lanes are striped preferential
lanes on the roadway for one-way bicycle travel.

Some bicycle lanes include a striped buffer
on one or both sides to increase separation
from the traffic lane or from parked cars, where
people may open doors into the bicycle lane.

There are currently 6 miles of existing Class II Bicycle Lanes in Hanford.

Virginia Corridor Trail in Modesto CA
Bike Lane on Hanford Armona Rd in Hanford

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 31
class III
Bicycle routes
Class III bicycle routes are signed routes
where people bicycling share a travel lane
with people driving. Because they are shared
facilities, bicycle routes are only appropriate
on quiet, low-speed streets with relatively low
traffic volumes. Some Class III bicycle routes
include shared lane markings or “sharrows” that
recommend proper bicycle positioning in the
center of the travel lane and alert drivers that
bicyclists may be present. Per the California
Streets and Vehicle Code Section 891.9, local
jurisdictions shall not install a new sharrow on
a highway that has a posted speed limit greater
than 30 miles per hour, except at or near an
intersection for the purpose of connecting a
Class I, Class II, or Class IV bikeway through
the intersection. Other Class III bicycle routes
include more robust traffic-calming features
to promote bicyclist comfort and are known
as “bicycle boulevards.” The Hanford Fire
Department should be included in discussions
about new or altered bicycle boulevard features
to maintain access for emergency responders.

There are currently 25 miles of existing Class III
Bicycle Routes in Hanford.

Bike Route on Douty St in Hanford
Separated Bikeway in Modesto CA
class IV
Separated Bikeways
Class IV separated bikeways are on-street
bicycle facilities that are physically separated
from motor vehicle traffic by a vertical element
or barrier, such as a curb, bollards, or vehicle
parking aisle. They can allow for one- or two-
way travel on one or both sides of the roadway.

No existing Class IV Separated Bikeways in Hanford.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 32
Figure 3: Existing Bike Network Map

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 33

EXISTING PEDESTRIAN NETWORK
There are many features that contribute to a convenient and comfortable walking environment.

Significant investments and commitments to future improvements have been made that continue enhancing Hanford’s pedestrian experience.

Sidewalks
Sidewalks form the backbone of the pedestrian
transportation network. Most streets in the
city have sidewalks or pathways on at least
one side. Within the city limits, sidewalk
maintenance is the responsibility of the property
owner. While the city’s sidewalk network is
mostly complete, some streets are missing
sidewalks. These include Houston Avenue,
McCreary Avenue, W 6th Street, and portions of
11th Avenue.

Sidewalk in Downtown Hanford
High-Visibility Crosswalk In Downtown Hanford
High-Visibility c rosswalks
Crosswalks are a legal extension of the sidewalk
and guide pedestrians who are crossing
roadways by defining and delineating their
path of travel. Crosswalks are not required to
be marked; however, marked crosswalks alert
drivers of a pedestrian crossing point and
increase yielding to pedestrians. Markings can
be standard parallel lines or the “continental”
high visibility pattern shown in the image above,
which enhances the visibility of the crossing and
is becoming the best practice. Crosswalks in
school zones are yellow.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 34
Pedestrian Hybrid
Beacons
Pedestrian hybrid beacons are used to enforce
motorist yielding to pedestrians at uncontrolled
crosswalk locations. The beacon, when
activated by a person wishing to cross, flashes
yellow before displaying a solid red signal to
motorists, requiring them to stop. Pedestrians
are then shown a WALK signal and may cross
the road. When the WALK phase is complete,
the beacon flashes yellow before returning to a
dark inactive state. The operation of the beacon
is illustrated in the graphic below.

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon in Modesto CA
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon in Modesto CA
rectangular rapid
Flashing Beacon
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons, or
RRFBs, increase the visibility of uncontrolled
or midblock crosswalks with bright LED lights
activated by a pedestrian push button.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 35

BARRIERS

TO ACTIVE

TRANSPORTATION
ACTIVE

TRIP DENSITY
The city is divided by Highway 198, which runs
east-west on the south side of the downtown.

Additionally, a railroad track runs adjacent to
Highway 198, and a second one runs northwest-
southeast along the western side of downtown.

These extensive infrastructure facilities cut off
residents on the west and south sides from the
city’s main destinations. No high schools are on
the south side; therefore, students must cross
Highway 198 to get to school. The only north-
south corridors that cross Highway 198 are
large, multi-lane arterials with no bicycle lanes
and heavy traffic (i.e., 11th Avenue, Douty Street,
and 10th Avenue). For residents on the west
side, 11th Avenue is a major barrier to downtown.

The only east-west corridors with access
across the railroad tracks are Lacey Boulevard,
Grangeville Boulevard, and Elm Street, all with
multi-lane crossings at 11th Avenue. Moreover,
Highway 43 runs along the eastern city edge
and is a barrier to the future High-Speed Rail
Station. These transportation features create
challenges for walking and biking in some
places, as crossings are limited.

The colocation of residences and destinations
is crucial for supporting active transportation.

Active modes are more often used when
residents live close to their destinations.

Understanding the spatial distribution of
Hanford’s residential and employment centers
can help the City guide development to support
sustainable transportation by identifying where
people are already choosing to walk and bike.

From this analysis, the downtown area, bounded
by Grangeville Boulevard, 11th Avenue, Campus
Dr, and Highway 198, has the highest gross
activity density ( Figure 4). The public library and
the Amtrak station are within walking distance
of each other, and the KART bus routes all
meet in this area. Unfortunately, the streets that
bound this area serve as barriers for walking
and biking. Additionally, the northern area of
the city surrounding Pioneer Middle School
had a high gross activity density relative to the
surrounding areas. Improving roadway safety
in these areas will support the high density of
active trips happening today.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 36
Figure 4: Active Trip Density Map

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 37

ACTIVE TRIP POTENTIAL
Sustainable and active transportation is a key
part of a climate strategy that involves reducing
carbon emissions from transportation. Active
modes often fill first- and last-mile gaps for
transit trips and, on their own, may provide more
flexibility for short trips that are not well-served
by transit. Understanding the demand for active
transportation can help the City of Hanford
guide growth and development in supporting
sustainable transportation by identifying areas
where latent demand for active transportation
may exist.

Active-trip potential measures the proportion
of all trips that may reasonably be made
by active modes—like walking, biking, or
e-micromobility—in a particular area. As trip
distance is an important factor in mode choice,
assumptions about reasonable distances for
vehicle trips that could be replaced by walking,
biking, and e-micromobility, are based on trip
distances from the 2017 National Household
Travel Survey:

To this end, a neighborhood with high active-trip
potential reflected a relatively larger percentage
of trips beginning in that area that were under
five miles. A neighborhood with lower active-
trip potential reflected a more significant
percentage of longer trips starting in that area.

Areas of the city with a higher proportion of
short trips are areas with the highest potential to
convert vehicle trips to active trips.

As shown in Figure 5, the western side of the
city bounded by Grangeville Boulevard, Lacey
Boulevard, and Campus Drive, has the highest
active trip potential. This area of the City is
mainly residential and home to the Tara Estate
Senior Mobile Home Park. Also in this area are
the Youth Athletic Facility and other municipal
buildings. The downtown also has a high active
trip potential; however, it is lower than the area
mentioned above. The northern regions of the
city have the lowest active trip potential.
<1 mile: WALKI nG
1 – 3 miles: BIKIn G
3 – 5 miles: E-BIKES or S cootErS

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 38
Figure 5: Active Trip Potential Map

HAnFor d tod A Y
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 39
SAFETY
col lision Analysis
During the study period, 48 collisions in Hanford
involved a person riding a bicycle or walking.

Five of these victims were killed, and 46 were
injured. Bicycle and pedestrian-involved
collisions were concentrated in the area
bounded by Grangeville Boulevard, 11th Avenue,
10th Avenue, and Highway 198 (Figure 6). This
area encompasses the downtown area, which is
the city’s most walkable area and may explain
the concentration of collisions. A significant
number of collisions occurred on 11th Avenue,
a four-lane arterial connecting to Highway 198
(Table 1).

Additionally, there is a significant concentration
of collisions between the Amtrak station
and the public library in the downtown area.

Furthermore, the 11th Avenue and Lacey
Boulevard intersection was identified as the
highest collision intersection in Hanford, with a
total of 3 collisions involving people walking or
biking (Table 2). This intersection serves as a
western gateway into the downtown area.

Data on bicycle- and pedestrian-related
collisions can provide insight into locations
or roadway features that tend to have higher
collision rates, as well as behaviors and other
factors that contribute to collisions. These
insights will inform the recommendations in this
Plan Update 2024 to address challenges facing
people bicycling and walking.

Collision data involving people walking and
bicycling was acquired from the Berkeley
Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS),
a public tool for accessing and mapping crash
data from the California Integrated Traffic
Records System (SWITRS). Four years of data
were evaluated from January 1, 2018, through
December 31, 2022.

COLLISIONS
46 Inj ur Ed
5 KILLE d

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 40
*2018 to 2022 collision data was gathered from the Berkeley Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) to identify the top collision street segments. To do this, collisions that occurred along street segments were defined using the TIMS data where “INTERSECTION” equals “N”. The top 5 street segments with the highest number of collisions were selected. For street segments with the same number of collisions, the collisions with the highest severity were selected.

Table 2: Top 10 Collision Intersections
Intersection
Total
Collisions
Bicycle
Fatality
Bicycle
Severe
Injury
Bicycle
Visible
Injury
Pedestrian
Fatality
Pedestrian
Severe
Injury
Fatality
Pedestrian
Visible
Injury
Lacey Blvd/11th Ave 3 0 0 0 0 1 2
Grangeville Blvd/
Douty St 2 0 1 0 0 0 1
Hanford Armona Rd/
12th Ave 2 0 0 1 0 0 1
Florinda St/White St 2 0 0 1 0 0 1
Hanford Armona Rd/
Philips St 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
Grangeville Blvd/11th Ave 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
5th St/11th Ave 2 0 0 0 1 1 0
Lacey Blvd/10th Ave 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Eighth St/Douty St 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
12th Ave/Glendale Ave 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
*2018 to 2022 collision data was gathered from the UC Berkeley’s Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) to identify the top collision intersections. To do so, collisions within 200 feet of an intersection were associated with said intersection. For intersections with the same number of collisions, collisions with the highest severity were selected.

Table 1: Top 5 Collision Segments
Street To/From
Total
Collisions
Bicycle
Fatality
Bicycle
Severe
Injury
Bicycle
Visible
Injury
Pedestrian
Fatality
Pedestrian
Severe
Injury
Fatality
Pedestrian
Visible
Injury
11th Ave Ivy St –
Lacey Blvd 3 0 0 0 0 2 1
11th Ave Fifth St –
Fourth St 2 0 0 0 1 1 0
Hanford
Armona Rd
Philips St –
Doris St 2 0 0 2 0 0 0
Seventh St
Phillips St –
Redington
St
2 0 0 0 0 1 1
Grangeville
Blvd
Douty St –
Harris St 2 0 1 0 0 0 1

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 41
Figure 6: Collision Map
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
Ä198
Ä43HANFORD ARMONA RD

LOCUST ST
14TH AVE 11TH AVE
BROW
N
ST

DOUTY ST
RO
DGER
S
RD

FOURTH STSIXTH ST

LELAND WAY
10TH AVE

SEVENTH ST

WHITE ST

GRANGEVILLE BLVD

FLORINDA ST

FITZGERALD LN
9 1/8 AVE

DAVIS ST

LACEY BLVD
12TH AVE

HUME AVE

REDINGTON ST

MULBERRYDR
GREENF

IELD AVE
GLACI
ER
WA
Y

CORTNER ST
FAIRM
ONT
DR

IRWIN ST

MUSCAT PL
M A
NOR
AVE

ENCOREDR
9 1/
4 AVE
HA
RRIS
ST

FARGO AVE

CENTENNI
AL
D R

MAGNOLIA AVE

IONA AVE

FRONT ST
CAMPUS
DR
13TH AVE

SECOND ST
9TH AVE

NEVILLE ST

HOUSTON AVE

NORTH STAR DR
ELM ST

BERKSHIRE LN

HOOD AVE

FLINT AVE
10 1/2 AVE

THIRDST
14 1/2 AVE
8 1/2 AVE

IDAHO AVE

GENEVA AVE

GLENDALE AVE
7 1/2 AVE

JACKSON AVE
9 1/2 AVE

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN

COLLISIONS

CITY OF HANFORD

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Future High Speed Rail
!
Rail Station
! Future High Speed Rail Station
!
School
!
Library
Hanford 2035 City Limit
Hanford Existing City Limit
Park

COLLISIONS
Pedestrian Collision
Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Killed
Bicycle Collision
Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Killed
Data provided by the City of Hanford, & UC Berkely Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS). Date saved: 3/1/2024.

Collision data from 2018 to 2022 was
sourced from the UC Berkeley Transportation
Injury Mapping System (TIMS).
0 0.5 1 MILES

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 42

USER EXPERIENCE &

PERCEIVED COMFORT
Traffic stress is the perceived sense of danger
associated with riding in or adjacent to vehicle
traffic. Studies have shown that traffic stress
is one of the most significant deterrents to
bicycling. The less stressful a bicycle facility is
and, therefore, more comfortable, the wider its
appeal to a broader segment of the population.

A bicycle network will attract a large portion of
the population if it is designed to reduce the
stress associated with potential motor vehicle
conflicts and if it connects people bicycling with
where they want to go.

Bikeways are considered low-stress if they
involve very little traffic interaction by nature
of the roadway’s vehicle speeds and volumes
(e.g., a shared, low-traffic neighborhood street)
or if greater degrees of physical separation are
placed between the bikeway and traffic lane
on roadways with higher traffic volumes and
speeds (e.g., a separated bikeway on a
major street).
types of Bicyclists
Research indicates that the majority of people
in the United States (56-73%) would bicycle
if dedicated bicycle facilities were provided.

However, only a small percentage of Americans
(1-3%) are willing to ride if no facilities are
provided.1 This research into how people
perceive bicycling as a transportation choice
has indicated that most people fall into one of
four categories, illustrated below.

Stron G & FEAr LESS:

Very comfortable and willing to
ride on streets without designated
facilities
EntHuSIAS tIc
& con FIdEnt:

Very comfortable, but prefer streets
with designated bike lanes
IntErEStEd,
But conc ErnEd:

Comfortable on trails and streets
with buffered or separated bike
lanes and interested in biking more
not curr EntLY
IntErEStEd:

Physically unable or very
uncomfortable even on streets with
separated bike lanes

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 43

BICYCLE LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS
Level 1
All Ages and Abilities
To better meet the needs of the “Interested,
But Concerned” cyclist, planners developed
the Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (Bicycle LTS)
analysis as an objective, data-driven evaluation
model to help identify streets with high levels
of traffic stress. The analysis uses roadway
network data (i.e., posted speed limit, street
width, number of travel lanes, intersection
conditions, presence and character of bikeway
facilities, and land use context) to determine
bicyclist comfort level. Combining these
criteria creates four levels of traffic stress for
the existing roadway network. The lower the
number, the lower the stress and the higher the
comfort level for people on bicycles. LTS 1 & 2
roads are typically the roadways that appeal to
the “Interested, but Concerned” cyclists.

A Bicycle LTS analysis was conducted to
provide insight into network gaps or focus areas
for improving the bicycle network. In addition,
the results also identify existing low-stress
routes which may be good for bicycling. The
analysis also identified barriers to bicycling,
such as routes along and across high-stress
roadways.

Figure 7 illustrates level of stress scores and
how they relate to both the type of bicycle rider
and the characteristics of a roadway. There are
four levels of traffic stress:

Figure 7: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress Scores
Level 1 includes off-street
shared-use paths and
some very low-stress
roadways suitable for all
ages and abilities.

Level 2 Average Adult
Level 3
Level 4 Fearless Adult
Level 2 includes
comfortable roadways
that the mainstream adult
population would ride a
bicycle on them.

Level 3 includes arterial
roadways with bicycle
facilities that are probably
only comfortable for an
experienced, confident
bicyclist.

Level 4 includes arterial
roadways with no bicycle
facilities ridden only
by strong or fearless
bicyclists.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 44
The bicycle level of traffic stress scores shown
in Figure 8 illustrate the low-stress connections
and gaps throughout Hanford. The BLTS map
approximates the user experience for the
majority of Hanford residents. However, people
may have differing opinions of traffic stress
depending on their own experiences. The City
is characterized by low-stress BLTS 1 cul-de-sac
streets bounded by higher-stress collector and
arterial roadways that score as BLTS 3 and 4.

Key findings include:
⊲ The most direct cross-city streets are those
with the highest BLTS scores. These include
11th Avenue, 10th Avenue, 12th Avenue,
Grangeville Boulevard, and Fargo Avenue,
many of which are considered bike routes.
⊲ All three streets to provide access across
Highway 198 have a BLTS of 3 or 4.
⊲ The secondary streets connecting
neighborhoods have a BLTS of 3.
⊲ Local residential streets have the lowest
BLTS at a score of 1 and offer indirect travel
paths that often end in dead-ends.
⊲ Many schools are near or adjacent to
roadways with BLTS scores of 3 or 4.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 45
Figure 8: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress Map
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
Ä198
Ä43

HANFORD ARMONA RD

LOCUST ST
14TH AVE
11TH AVE

BROWN ST

DOUTY ST
RO
DGER
S
RD

FOURTH STSIXTH ST

LELAND WAY
10TH AVE

SEVENTH ST

WHITE ST

GRANGEVILLE BLVD

FLORINDA ST
IVY ST
9 1/8 AVE

DAVIS ST

LACEY BLVD
12TH AVE

HUME AVE

REDINGTON ST

MULBERRYDR

GREENFIELD AVE
GLACI
ER
WA
Y

CORTNER ST
FAIRM
ONT
DR

IRWIN ST

MUSCAT PL
M A
NOR
AVE

ENCOREDR
9 1/
4 AVE
HA
RRIS
ST

FARGO AVE

CENTENNI
AL
D R

MAGNOLIA AVE

FIFTH ST

MYRTLE ST

FRONT ST
ASPE
N
ST
CAMPUS
DR
13TH AVE

SECOND ST
9TH AVE

HOUSTON AVE

NORTH STAR DR

BERKSHIRE LN

HOOD AVE

FLINT AVE
10 1/2 AVE
6TH ST
ELM ST

THIRDST
14 1/2 AVE
8 1/2 AVE

IONA AVE

IDAHO AVE

GENEVA AVE

GLENDALE AVE
7 1/2 AVE

JACKSON AVE
9 1/2 AVE

BICYCLE LEVEL OF

TRAFFIC STRESS (BLTS)

CITY OF HANFORD

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Future High Speed Rail
!
Rail Station
! Future High Speed Rail Station
!
School
!
Library
Hanford 2035 City Limit
Hanford Existing City Limit
Park

BLTS SCORE
BL TS 1 (Low Stress)
BL TS 2
BL TS 3
BL TS 4 (High Stress)
Data provided by the City of Hanford & OpenStreetMap(OSM). Date saved: 3/1/2024. 0 0.5 1 MILES
BL TS represents the level of stress people may
experience when biking on specific roadways.

BL TS scores vary depending on available bicycle
facilities, number of travel lanes, and vehicle
speeds and volumes. For this analysis,
Highways were excluded as bikes are not legally
allowed on them.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 46

PEDESTRIAN BARRIERS
Barriers to walking were identified as existing
or missing infrastructure that has the potential
to inhibit pedestrian trips. This includes missing
sidewalks, wide roads with few safe crossings,
railroad tracks, and highways. As shown in
Figure 9, the pedestrian barriers fall in line with
the high BLTS streets. Residents also identified
some local streets with missing sidewalks as
barriers. Like the BLTS, the multi-lane arterials
and cross-city corridors are barriers due to their
unsafe crossing conditions. The major barriers
are Highway 198 and the two railroad tracks
that cut through the City, which offer few to no
safe pedestrian crossings and no pedestrian
walkways along the corridors. The next major
barriers are multilane arterials connecting
to regional corridors with few traffic control
devices and safe crossings. These arterials
include 11th Ave, 12th Ave, and Grangeville Blvd.

Some of the minor barriers residents called out
were along residential streets with no sidewalks
or fast travel speeds.

HAn Ford t od AY
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 47
Figure 9: Pedestrian Barriers to Walking Map
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
Ä198
Ä43HANFORD ARMONA RD

LOCUST ST
14TH AVE 11TH AVE
BROW
N
ST

DOUTY ST
RO
DGER
S
RD

FOURTH STSIXTH ST

LELAND WAY
10TH AVE

SEVENTH ST

WHITE ST

GRANGEVILLE BLVD

FLORINDA ST

FITZGERALD LN
9 1/8 AVE

DAVIS ST

LACEY BLVD
12TH AVE

HUME AVE

REDINGTON ST

MULBERRYDR
GREENF

IELD AVE
GLACI
ER
WA
Y

CORTNER ST
FAIRM
ONT
DR

IRWIN ST

MUSCAT PL
M A
NOR
AVE

ENCOREDR
9 1/
4 AVE
HA
RRIS
ST

FARGO AVE

CENTENNI
AL
D R

MAGNOLIA AVE

IONA AVE

FRONT ST
CAMPUS
DR
13TH AVE

SECOND ST
9TH AVE

NEVILLE ST

HOUSTON AVE

NORTH STAR DR
ELM ST

BERKSHIRE LN

HOOD AVE

FLINT AVE
10 1/2 AVE

THIRDST
14 1/2 AVE
8 1/2 AVE

IDAHO AVE

GENEVA AVE

GLENDALE AVE
7 1/2 AVE

JACKSON AVE
9 1/2 AVE

PEDESTRIAN BARRIERS

TO WALKING

CITY OF HANFORD

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
DESTINATIONS + BOUNDARIES
Railroad
Future High Speed Rail
!
Rail Station
! Future High Speed Rail Station
!
School
!
Library
Hanford 2035 City Limit
Hanford Existing City Limit
Park

BARRIERS TO WALKING
Barriers
Data provided by the City of Hanford, & OpenStreetMap (OSM). Date saved: 3/1/2024.

Barriers to walking were identified as
infrastructure that has the potential to inhibit
pedestrian trips. This includes wide roads with
few safe crossings and railroad tracks and
highways.
0 0.5 1 MILES

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 48
Outreach

CHAPTER FOUR

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 49
Engaging the Hanford community has been
a priority throughout the Plan Update 2024
process. A variety of outreach opportunities
were used to seek input from diverse Hanford
residents and community members. The plan
development process also included extensive
coordination with partner agencies and other
City departments to ensure that Plan Update
2024 meets community needs, advances
initiatives of local and regional partners,
and includes projects and programs that
can be implemented feasibly. Ongoing
outreach ensured a continuous feedback
loop that informed the final project list and
Plan Update 2018. Specific events and
opportunities included:

Online Engagement Tools
⊲ Survey
⊲ Interactive Mapping Tool
⊲ City Website and Social Media
Community Meetings
⊲ Community Workshops/Open Houses
⊲ Pop Up Events
City Board, Commission,
and Council Meetings
⊲ Parks and Recreation Commission
⊲ City Council
This chapter presents an overview of the format
and approach for each outreach opportunity,
along with a summary of feedback received.

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 50

ONLINE SURVEY
A community survey was developed to gather
input on walking and bicycling challenges,
preferences, and opportunities throughout
Hanford. The survey was available online in
Spanish and English from January through
September 2024. It was advertised at all
outreach events and through the City’s
newsletter and email notifications, as well as
on posters displayed at Winter Wonderland
events and KART bus stops throughout the city.

Participation in the survey was also encouraged
by awarding a gift card to a randomly selected
respondent. More than 112 people responded to
the survey.

A summary of responses is provided below.
⊲ One-fifth of respondents said they use
active modes to reach their destinations
daily.
⊲ Popular destinations include Civic Center,
Downtown District, Hidden Valley Park,
Target/Walmart, and Freedom Park.
⊲ Respondents avoid walking and biking on
major roads due to the lack of bike lanes
and perceived speeding drivers.

When asked about their primary mode of
transportation, 85% of respondents said
automobile or motorcycle. This is symbolic of
Hanford’s auto-centric design and high-stress
bike network. However, about 20% said they
use active modes to reach their destination
daily. Moreover, respondents listed the following
places as the top destinations they would like
to walk, bike, or roll to: Civic Center, Downtown
District, Hidden Valley Park, Target/Walmart,
and Freedom Park.

Of note, 66% of respondents said Highway 198
is not a barrier for walking, biking, or rolling
between North and South Hanford. However,
some respondents said they avoid walking,
biking, or rolling on main streets because
there are no bike lanes and drivers are often
speeding. Many of the written comments
described driver behavior and major roads as
the main deterrents for bicycling. Additionally,
respondents cited the sidewalk network as
discontinuous or in poor condition, which makes
it difficult to get between neighborhoods. Trip
needs, followed by distance and travel time,
ranked the highest among the factors that limit
one’s ability to take active modes.

When asked about walking, biking, or rolling
to communities outside of Hanford, 41% of
respondents were interested. Lemoore was
the most popular destination outside Hanford,
located west along Highway 198. Additionally,
written comments suggested increasing the
bus/train service frequency between Lemoore
and Hanford.

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 51

ONLINE INTERACTIVE MAPPING TOOL
In Phase 2, the draft recommended walking and
bicycling networks were displayed on the map,
and community members were invited to “like”
or “dislike” projects to show their preferences,
in addition to adding comments on specific
projects and seeing the feedback left by others.

The map was available for four weeks, from
September 23 through October 19, 2024. This
input helped prioritize projects and refine the
networks.

An interactive mapping tool was posted on
the City’s website and used throughout the
development of this Plan Update 2024 to gather
input and feedback from the community directly
on a city map.

In Phase 1, community members were
encouraged to draw routes or place pins on
the map and add comments to identify desired
walking or bicycling improvements, challenging
locations, and other information about the
walking and bicycling environment. Nearly 800
comments were received during the three-
month comment period, between September 18
and December 31, 2023. This input informed the
recommended bicycling and walking network
improvements.

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 52

CITY WEBSITE AND SOCIAL MEDIA
Flyers & Posters
Flyers and posters were also created in both
English and Spanish with the project website
and Community Open Houses listed. The cards
were placed at various businesses, community
centers, and libraries throughout the City.

For all community outreach opportunities, including the online survey and interactive mapping tool, the City leveraged its existing website and social media accounts to share information about the Plan Update 2024 process and encourage Hanford residents to engage with the project team.

Website
The City created a section on their website for
this Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update
2024. All online communications and project
flyers pointed to this website, where community
members were able to learn about the planning
process, see upcoming outreach events, and
download draft maps and other deliverables at
key milestones.

Social Media
The City has nearly 18,000 followers on
Facebook, more than 5,300 followers on
Instagram and more than 13,000 members on
Nextdoor. Throughout the Plan Update 2018
process, posts on these platforms notified
residents of upcoming events, draft documents
available for review, online engagement tools,
and other project milestones.

Bus Shelter Posters
Posters were displayed at Kings Area Regional
Transit (KART) bus stops throughout the
City. The posters encouraged transit riders
and passersby to visit the Plan Update 2024
website and provide feedback using the online
interactive mapping tool.

Hanford.city/ActiveTransportationPlan
CHECK IT OUT!
¡ÉCHALE UN VISTAZO!

POP-UP EVENT

EVENTO EMERGENTE
Fulton Cycle Works
209 N Irwin St
Hanford, CA 93230
Wednesday,
September 25, 2024
3:00–4:00 pm
Miércoles,
25 de septiembre de 2024
3:00–4:00 pm

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 53
PHASE 1 EVENTS: COMMUNITY

WORKSHOPS AND POP-UP EVENTS
The two community workshops and the pop-
up event in September 2023 introduced the
project to Hanford residents. Community
members were encouraged to ask questions
and give feedback about the Plan during this
workshop. Participants identified areas where
improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure
is needed and shared local knowledge on
walking and biking trends in Hanford. Many
residents identified Highway 198 as a major
barrier for residents living on the south side
and cross-city travel. Furthermore, they also
identified Grangeville Boulevard, Fargo Avenue,
11th Avenue, 10th Avenue, and Lacey Boulevard
as major barriers. Community members also
shared that many students walk to the cluster
of neighborhood schools located between
10th Avenue, Fargo Avenue, and Grangeville
Boulevard. Residents also suggested regional
bike connections to neighboring cities and bike
safety campaigns to increase awareness of
using lights when biking at night.

Community workshops and pop-up events
created opportunities for community members
to learn about the Plan, ask questions, and
provide feedback at multiple stages of Plan
development.

These events were held during the earlier
stages of the Plan and sought to collect
feedback from the community regarding the
vision and goals for the Plan and to ask for
locations with opportunities and challenges to
walking and rolling in the city. The project team
prepared three large engagement boards. Two
of the boards included information on potential
bicycling and walking facilities. The third
board was a large map of the City of Hanford,
where attendees were able to write comments
regarding active travel in the City.

Community workshops and pop-up events were
held at the following locations and dates:
⊲ Community Workshop #1 at the Hanford
Civic Auditorium, September 20, 2023
⊲ Community Workshop #2 at the Hanford
Civic Auditorium, September 21, 2023
⊲ Pop-Up: Thursday Night Marketplace at the
Civic Center Park, September 21, 2023
Thursday Night Marketplace Pop-up Event.

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 54
Figure 10: Engagement Map With Resident Feedback

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 55

WALK AUDIT
During the walk audit, participants documented
curb ramps to be non-compliant with ADA
standards, a lack of shade along streets and at
bus stops, perceived speeding, and unsafe mid-
block crossings as primary active transportation
issues. More specifically, perceived speeding
vehicles were a major concern along Florinda
Street and 11th Avenue, which made biking
along these streets feel unsafe. Moreover,
community members shared that drivers often
fail to yield for pedestrians crossing at mid-block
crosswalks along 7th Street and Douty Street.

Project Team and Residents Discussing Crossing Issues Along Douty St During the Walk Audit Project staff conducted a walk audit with
Hanford residents in September 2023, which
allowed community members to give in-person
feedback about areas of Hanford. The audit
also allowed the project team to see barriers
to active transportation travel in real-time
and to experience what it is like to walk using
existing infrastructure. The audits also allowed
participants to observe the behaviors of people
walking, biking, and driving in the study area.

The audits were hosted by the project team but
were designed to allow community members
to lead the audit by showing the project team
where there were opportunities and concerns
within the audit study area. The walk audit
began at the Hanford Civic Center Park and
continued along Douty Street, Florinda Street,
N 11th Avenue, and W 7th Street. Participants
were given checklists of specific items
to observe during the audits, such as
characteristics of the roadway and intersections
and how safe and comfortable the participants
felt during the audit.

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 56
Figure 11: Feedback Sheet from Walk Audit Participant.

outr E A cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 57
PHASE 2 EVENTS: COMMUNITY

OPEN HOUSES AND POP-UP EVENTS
The People’s Trail boards received the most
attention, with many residents sharing their
support for its development. Many attendees
expressed support for the recommended
improvements, particularly in Downtown
Hanford and along the Pedestrian Priority
Corridors. Some attendees encouraged the
project team to consider improvements along
the current city boundaries as well as areas
planned for future annexation.

Table 3 summarizes common feedback
provided during this final round of community
engagement. Figures 12 and 13 show the
Recommended Bike Network - Complete
Network and Pedestrian Recommendations with
community member feedback.

A series of draft recommendations engagement
events were held to gather community feedback
on the proposed bicycle and pedestrian
improvements in fall 2024. The project team
held two community workshops at the City Civic
Center and two pop-up events. The pop-up
events at the Thursday Night Marketplace and
the Longfield Center included the same content
but were held at different locations to reach
Hanford’s diverse re
sidents.

The project team prepared six large
engagement boards that were
displayed at the
events. Two boards featured the recommend
bikeway improvements, including the Backbone
and Complete Network (including the Future
Network). A Pedestrian Recommendations
board illustrated the locations identified by
project team’s technical analysis and Phase
1 feedback for pedestrian improvements,
accompanied by a chart of recommended
infrastructure at each location. Two boards
featured the People’s Trail, including a map of
the proposed route and concept designs for the
trail. Community members
were given time to
review maps of the recommendations; prioritize
im
provements and recommend additional
locations using stickers, and provide feedback
with sticky notes.

Table 3: Common
Community Feedback
Concerns Requests Specific Projects
Lack of separation between cars
and cyclists on most bike routes Need trails Support for the People’s Trail Removal of street trees Additional pedestrian crossings Improvements in Home Garden, an
unincorporated area planned for
future annexation into the city
Phase 2 Community Open House

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 58
Figure 12: Bikeway Recommendations with Community Prioritization

outr EA cH
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 59
Figure 13: Pedestrian Recommendations with Community Prioritization

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 60
Recommendations

CHAPTER FIVE

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 61
This chapter presents the projects, programs,
and policy changes for the City of Hanford.

The active transportation network described
in this Plan Update 2024 seeks to provide
the Hanford community with convenient,
comfortable, and healthy transportation choices.

Recommendations come from the needs and
opportunities identified through the evaluation
of existing conditions, evaluation of progress
made since the development of the 2016 Plan,
extensive community input, and data-driven
analyses. Improvements identified during
previous planning efforts or studies were also
reviewed for this Plan Update 2024, including
the four low-stress bikeways and numerous
crossing improvements.

RECOMMENDATIONS PROCESS
Recommendations are considered planning-
level, meaning they should be used as a guide
when implementing projects. In some cases,
traffic impact analysis and more detailed design
analysis will be required to evaluate specific
site conditions and develop designs that reflect
conditions and constraints.

Developing recommendations for bicycle
and pedestrian infrastructure and programs
is a multi-step process that synthesizes the
data collected throughout the development
of this Plan, including feedback from
community members, and identifies solutions
that will best create a connected and
safe active transportation network. These
recommendations aim to build robust local
pedestrian and bicycle transportation networks,
identify potential cross-city trails that can be
used instead of high-stress major roads, and
establish school walking and biking routes to
support the future growth of Hanford that will
come with the new High-Speed Rail Station.

These recommendations also consider a
changing transportation landscape, designing
for and incorporating new sustainable mobility
transportation options while ensuring equitable
accessibility.

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 62

PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS
Identifying pedestrian recommendations
requires consideration of Hanford’s varying
road types, nearby destinations, and the
people who would use the future facilities. The
following location typologies provide examples
of the types of pedestrian improvements the
City should consider implementing based
on a street’s characteristics. In some cases,
a street or intersection will fit the criteria for
several typologies; in other cases, a street
may not fit within these parameters. These
location typologies and their accompanying
recommended improvements should be used
to guide the City in creating further detailed
recommendations. Some tools will require
Council adoption and citywide guidelines and
policies to list the type of street and situations
that warrant installation. Implementing measures
will also be a companion to the engineering
assessment, following standard engineering
practices and guidelines. The complete list of
pedestrian recommendations can be found in
the Appendices Pedestrian Recommendations.
⊲ Major Intersections: Intersections of
high-speed multi-lane roadways may feel
uncomfortable to cross when walking.

Pedestrian improvements at these major
intersections should focus on providing
adequate crossing time (pedestrian
intervals) or creating staged crossing
opportunities to shorten individual crossing
distances, such as curb extensions and
pedestrian islands.
⊲ Mid-block Crossings: When signalized
intersections are far apart, mid-block
crossings provide a safe place for
pedestrians to cross the street without
having to go out of their way. Mid-block
crossings exist on some streets in Hanford,
such as the segment of 7th Street that runs
through Downtown. Mid-block crossing
locations should have infrastructure
that increases the visibility of crossing
pedestrians to drivers. Curb extensions that
position pedestrians closer to the roadway
and flashing pedestrian beacons are both
examples of strategies to warn drivers to
stop for crossing pedestrians.
⊲ Pedestrian Priority Zones: Streets within
the Pedestrian Priority Zones should
provide safe walking infrastructure for a
level of pedestrian activity. Opportunities
to cross the street should be frequent
to allow people walking to reach local
destinations without needing to walk long
distances and/or out of direction to reach
a crosswalk. Traffic calming infrastructure
should slow down vehicles through these
busy pedestrian areas, and transit should be
easily accessible and comfortable.
⊲ School Perimeter: The Pedestrian Priority
Zones incorporate most of the K-12 schools
in the city. Pedestrian infrastructure within
walking zones of schools, such as along
Florinda Street near Woodrow Wilson
Junior High, must consider the needs of
young people. High-visibility yellow school
crosswalks should be installed to alert
motorists that students may be in the area.

Longer crossing intervals may be needed
to allow enough time for students and
families to cross the street. Wider sidewalks
may be needed to accommodate a high
volume of pedestrian traffic before and after
school, and landscaped buffers separating
the sidewalk from the street can create
additional distance between people on the
sidewalk and drivers.
⊲ Pedestrian Priority Corridors:

The Pedestrian Priority Corridors are
pedestrian network projects that aim
to enhance connections between the
Pedestrian Priority Zones.

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 63

PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT TOOLBOX
The following pages show a toolbox of improvements that can be used based on each typology. Each colored circle within the improvement represents the typology where the improvement may best fit; however, the City will consider all possibilities when further evaluating specific design treatments.

ADVANCE YIELD LINES:

Advance yield lines discourage
drivers from stopping too close to
mid-block crosswalks.

ALL-WAY STOP/
WARRANT ANALYSIS:

All-way stops prevent motorists,
bicyclists, and pedestrians from
having to cross free-flowing lanes of
traffic and reduce the risk on crashes.

CURB EXTENSIONS:

Curb extensions shorten crossing
distances for pedestrians and slow
vehicle turning movements.

HIGH VISIBILITY
CROSSWALKS:

Crosswalks that make pedestrians
more visible from further distances.

Crosswalks should be yellow in
school zones.

LEADING PEDESTRIAN
INTERVALS (LPI s):

LPIs give pedestrians a 3-7 second
head start in the crosswalk before the
signal turns green for drivers.

PEDESTRIAN HYBRID
BEACONS (PHB s):

PHBs are actuated devices used at
busier unsignalized crossing locations
to stop drivers for a pedestrian to
cross.

PEDESTRIAN
REFUGE ISLANDS:

Pedestrian refuge islands provide
a safe place for pedestrians to wait
while crossing a multi-lane street.

PEDESTRIAN-SCALE
LIGHTING:

Pedestrian-scale lighting illuminates
pedestrian paths, creating a safer
and more comfortable walking
experience.

RAISED CROSSWALKS:

Raised crosswalks slow down
vehicles while also allowing
pedestrians to cross at-grade with the
sidewalk.

RECTANGULAR RAPID-

FLASHING BEACONS
(RRFB s):

RRFBs are activated by pedestrians
and alert drivers that a pedestrian is
trying to cross the street.

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 64
Pedestrian Priority Zones
Three Pedestrian Priority Zones were identified
using the bicycle- and pedestrian-involved
collision data and active travel demand data
(Figure 14). The zones encompass both the
areas with the highest active travel demand and
bicycle- and pedestrian-involved collisions. The
Downtown Pedestrian and Traffic Study report
was also used to help define the zones. The
three zones fall between 10th and 12th Avenues;
two are north of Highway 198, and one is south
of Highway 198. One of the northern zones
encompasses the downtown area, and the other
includes the residential neighborhoods between
Fargo Ave and Grangeville Blvd. These northern
zones contain the city’s main commercial area
in the downtown area, the Civic Center, multiple
schools and parks, and many of the collisions
along 11th Ave and 12th Ave. The southern zone
encompass residential neighborhoods centered
around 11th Ave, each containing a school, a
park, and transit stops.

Pedestrian Priority
corridors
Four Pedestrian Priority Corridors were
identified to enhance connectivity for people
walking in Hanford. These corridors provide
the most direct travel path between residential
neighborhoods, major destinations, and the
pedestrian priority zones. The Local Road Safety
Plan and the Downtown Revitalization Plan
informed the selection of the pedestrian priority
corridors. The corridors run along Hanford
Armona Road, E Lacey Boulevard, 11th Avenue,
N Douty Street. To improve people’s experience
walking along these corridors, the City should
consider conducting parking utilization studies
and implementing pedestrian improvements at
intersections and along street segments.

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 65
Figure 14: Pedestrian Recommendations Map

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 66
Figure 15: North Pedestrian Priority Zone Recommendations

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 67
Figure 16: South Hanford Pedestrian Priority Zone Recommendations

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 68
Figure 17: Downtown & South Pedestrian Priority Zone Recommendations

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 69
Table 4: Tier 1 Urgent Action Locations
Project
ID
Location Recommended Improvements
Crossing Improvements Signs and Signals
Curb Extensions
High Visibility Crosswalk Marking
Advance Yield/Stop Lines
Raised Crossing
Pedestrian Refuge Island
Pedestrian-Scale Lighting
All-Way Stop/ Warrant Analysis
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon/HAWK
Leading Pedestrian Signal
1 W Cortner St/N 11th Ave ● ● ●
2 Grangeville Blvd/N 11th Ave ● ● ● ●
3 Centennial Dr/Grangeville Blvd ● ●
4 E Grangeville Blvd/N Douty St ● ● ●
5 E Grangeville Blvd/N
Kensington Way ●
6 E Grangeville Blvd/10th Ave ● ●
7 Hill St/Harris St ●
8 Greenfield Ave/Cerritos Ave ● ● ●
9 Greenfield Ave/Campus Dr ● ●
10 Florida St/Whitmore St ● ●
11 Cameron St/N 10th Ave ● ● ●
12 Douty St/Elm St ● ● ●
13 Ivy St/Park Ave ● ● ●
14 N 11th Ave/Ivy St ● ● ● ● ●
15 E 10th St/N Harris St ● ● ●
16 N Douty St/Court St ● ●
17 N Douty St/E 8th St ● ●
18 N Lacey Blvd/N 10th St ● ● ●
19 N Douty St/China Alley ●
20 Lacey Blvd/11th Ave ● ● ● ● ● ●

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 70
Project
ID
Location Recommended Improvements
Crossing Improvements Signs and Signals
Curb Extensions
High Visibility Crosswalk Marking
Advance Yield/Stop Lines
Raised Crossing
Pedestrian Refuge Island
Pedestrian-Scale Lighting
All-Way Stop/ Warrant Analysis
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon/HAWK
Leading Pedestrian Signal
21 W Lacey Blvd/Greenfield Ave ● ● ●
22 W Lacey Blvd/Campus Dr
(People's Trail) ● ● ●
23 7th St/Douty St ● ●
24 W Lacey Blvd/Centennial Dr ● ● ●
25 Centennial Dr/Shopping Mall
Entrance ● ● ●
26 Mall Dr/Adventists Hospital
Entrance ●
27 7th Ave/Santa Fe Ave ● ● ●
28 7th St/11th Ave ● ● ●
29 6th St/11th Ave ● ●
30 6th St/Douty St ●
31 5th St/Irwin St ●
32 5th St/Redington St ●
33 5th St/11th Ave ● ● ●
34 4th St/11th Ave ● ● ●
35 4th St/11th Ave ● ● ●
36 3rd St/11th Ave ● ● ●
37 Harris St/Between Coe Park
and Ball Park ●
38 Douty St/Longfield Center ● ● ● ● ●
39 Davis St/ 11th Ave ● ● ● ● ●

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 71
Project
ID
Location Recommended Improvements
Crossing Improvements Signs and Signals
Curb Extensions
High Visibility Crosswalk Marking
Advance Yield/Stop Lines
Raised Crossing
Pedestrian Refuge Island
Pedestrian-Scale Lighting
All-Way Stop/ Warrant Analysis
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon/HAWK
Leading Pedestrian Signal
40 Davis St/Grant St ● ●
41 Scott St/S Phillips St ● ●
42 Harris St/Lincoln Elementary ● ● ● ●
43 Hanford Armona Rd/Hanford
Soccer Complex ● ● ● ●
44 Hanford Armona Rd/S Harris St ● ● ● ●
45 Hanford Armona Rd/11th Ave ● ● ● ● ● ●
46 Hanford Armona Rd/ Bengston
Ave ● ● ● ●
47 12th St/Hanford Armona Rd ● ● ● ● ●
48 12th St/Graham St ●
49 Hanford Armona Rd/Casa Del
Sol Apartments ● ● ●
50 Dawn Ln/Martin Luther King
Elementary ● ● ●
51 Dawn Ln/Hume Ave ● ●
52 Dawn Ln/11th Ave ● ● ● ●
53 1st Pl/Home Ave ●
54 2nd Pl/Home Ave ●
55 3rd Pl/Home Ave ●
56 1st Pl/Garden Dr ●
57 2nd Pl/Garden Dr ●
58 3rd Pl/Garden Dr ● ●
59 Temple Dr/Shawn Pl ●

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 72

BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS
Developing bicycle network projects requires consideration of the existing conditions of active transportation facilities in Hanford, as well as meeting the safety needs of community members. The recommendations process also requires using community member comments to understand where bicycle facilities are most needed and where existing facilities need to be improved. Bicycle network projects are categorized based on the four classifications recognized by Caltrans, along with two sub- classifications, described in detail in Chapter 3 and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Guidelines in the Appendices. These include:
class I
Shared use Paths
Dedicated paths for walking and bicycling are
completely separate from the roadway and
suitable for all ages and abilities.
class II
Bike Lanes
Dedicated lanes for bicycle travel adjacent to
the motor vehicle travel lane are separated with
a painted line.
class IIB
Buffered Bike Lanes
Bicycle lanes that include a striped “buffer” area
either between the bicycle lane and travel lane
or between the bicycle lane and parked cars.
class III
Bike routes
Signage and pavement markings on streets that
bicyclists share with motorists.
class IIIB
Bike Boulevards
Signed bicycle routes on low-speed,
low-volume streets with additional traffic-
calming infrastructure.
class IV
Separated Bikeways
On-street bikeways that are physically
separated from motor vehicles with vertical
elements such as bollards, planters, or curbs.

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 73
The primary network needed to establish a
baseline set of routes is referred to as the
“Backbone Network” ( Figure 19). These routes
should take priority for implementation.

The “Complete Network” illustrates the
completed build-out of Hanford’s bikeway
network, including the prioritized Backbone
Network (Figure 18). While the Backbone
Network includes the most important routes
for early implementation, the City should seize
opportunities to construct facilities shown in the
Full Network if the ability to do so arises before
the Backbone Network is complete.

The full list of bicycle recommendations
is provided in the Appendices Bicycle
Recommendations.

Nearly 93 miles of new bikeways are proposed
in this Plan Update 2024, which would be triple
the current 31 miles of bikeways in the City. The
proposed bike network projects significantly
enhance the existing bike network by adding
Shared-Use Path (Class I) and Separated
Bikeways (Class IV) facilities. A major facility of
the recommended bike network is the People’s
Trail, a Shared-Use Path running through the
City north-south along the western side of 11th
Avenue. Additionally, there will be another
Shared-Use Path along the northern side of
Highway 198 going through the City east-west
along the China Alley. Separated Bikeways
will build off the Class I facilities by providing
cross-city connections on the City’s large
arterials. Bike Lanes (Class II), Buffered Bike
Lanes (Class IIB) and Bike Boulevards (Class
IIIB) will bridge the remaining network gaps and
provide connections to local destinations. As
the City plans to build out the recommended
bike network, it can start by using restriping
projects to paint buffered bike lanes, which
will eventually become separated bikeways. In
this fashion, the City can implement immediate
improvements while laying the foundations for a
more robust network.

Implementing the recommended bicycle
network in Hanford will require coordination
between City staff, residents, business
owners, neighboring jurisdictions, and other
organizations and stakeholders. Implementing
the bicycle network also requires investment
from the City or grant funds from federal
or state opportunities. For this reason, the
recommended bike network in the Plan is
structured to address project phasing and
project scale.

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 74
StrEEt PHASI nG nEtWorK
⊲ Backbone Network: These streets create
the backbone of the bicycle network in
Hanford, upgrading the current bikeway
network. These streets can connect people
biking to destinations across Hanford and
to neighboring jurisdictions. Projects on this
network are generally easier to implement
and provide a foundation to build-on for
current bicyclists in Hanford.
⊲ Complete Network: The Complete
Network is the next phase of bicycle
infrastructure. This network provides a more
comprehensive network of bikeways around
the entire city of Hanford. This network is
more widespread, providing bicycle access
and multiple route choices to all parts of the
city. Development of the Complete Network
would encourage more city residents to bike
through the city, providing safe conditions
along Hanford’s major travel routes.

LEVEL oF P rotEctIon
⊲ Basic-Comfort Facilities: This bicycle
network shows a lower-tier option for
bicyclist protection. Class II, IIB, and
III bikeways are typically less costly
to construct. Bike lanes can also be
implemented with other street projects, like
resurfacing.
⊲ High-Comfort Facilities: This bicycle
network follows major roadways and
provides cross-city routes. Class IV
bikeways provide more physical protection
from motor vehicles and will be comfortable
for most adult bicyclists. Class I Shared-Use
Paths provide off-street connections that are
comfortable for all users. Class II, IIB, III, and
IIIB bikeways supplement the Class IV and
Class I bikeways, but these other bikeway
types are mostly along slower neighborhood
streets. Most of the Basic-Comfort bike
network projects can be implemented and
later improved to create the High-Comfort
facilities network.

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 75
Figure 18: Recommended Complete Bike Network

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 76
Figure 19: Recommended Backbone Bike Network

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 77
Table 5: Bicycle Recommendations
Street Name From Street To Street Class
10th Ave Hwy 43 Houston Ave IIB
11 1/2 Ave Davis St State St IIIB
11th Ave Flint Ave Houston Ave IIB
12th Ave Flint Ave Houston Ave IIB
13th Ave Fargo Ave Front St IIB
2nd St Phillips St 10th Ave II2b
6th St 11th Ave 10th Ave II2b
7th St Mall Dr Williams St II2
7th St Williams St Lacey Blvd IV
8 1/2 Ave Leland Florinda IV
8th St Santa Fe Ave Phillips St IIIB
9 1/4 Ave Leland Way Lacey Blvd IIIB
9th Ave Leland Lacey Blvd IIB
9th St Douty St 10th Ave IIIB
Alpine Ave Hume Ave Houston Ave IIB
Aspen St W Pepper Dr Fargo Ave II
Berkshire Way/ Kings Rd Fitzgerald Ln Grangeville Blvd IIIB Cameron St 11th St 10th Ave IIIB
Campus Dr Lacey Blvd Railroad Tracks IV
Centennial Dr Lacey Blvd 12th Ave I
Centennial Dr Lacey Blvd Fargo Ave IIB
China Alley Phillips St White St I
Court St Irwin St Douty St I
Courtner St Glacier Way Douty St IIIB
Davis St People's Trail 11th Ave IIIB
Devon St 13th Ave Centennial Dr IIB
Douty St Flint Hanford Armona IIB
E Lacey Blvd 10th Ave Light Rail Station IV
Elm St Greenfield Ave 11th Ave IV
Encore Dr Aspen St Fargo Ave IIIB
Fargo Ave 13th Hwy 43 IIB
Fitzgerald Ln Fargo Ave Grangeville Blvd II
Flint Ave 12th Ave Hwy 43 IIB

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 78
Street Name From Street To Street Class
Flood Channel from Flint
Ave to Rodgers Road
(People’s Trail)
Flint Rodgers I
Flood Channel from RR to
Hume Ave (People’s Trail) Railroad Hume I
Flood Control From
Greenfield to Lacey Blvd
(People’s Trail)
Greenfield Lacey I
Florinda St 8 1/2 Ave High Speed Rail Station I
Florinda St 11th Ave 10th Ave II
Florinda St 9 1/4 Ave 8 1/2 Ave III
Florinda St 10th Ave 9 1/4 Ave IIB
Garner Ave Seventh Lacey II
Glacier Way Flint Ave Courtner St II
Grangeville Blvd 9th Ave 7th Ave IV
Grangeville Blvd 13th Ave 9th Ave IIB
Green St China Alley China Alley IIIB
Greenfield Centennial Lacey Blvd IIB
Hanford Armona 13th 10th Ave IIB
Harris St 2nd St Hanford Armona IIIB
Houston Ave 12th Ave 10th Ave IIB
Hume Ave 12th Ave 11th Ave IIB
Irwin St W Lacey Blvd Civic Center Park IIIB
Ivy St 11th Ave 10th Ave IIIB
Kensington Way Fargo Ave Grangeville Blvd IIIB
Kings County Dr 12th Ave Lacey Blvd II
Leland Way 9 1/4 Ave 8 1/2 Ave IV
Leland Way Douty St 9 1/4 Ave IIIB
Leoni Dr Cortner St Grangeville Blvd IIIB
Liberty St Centennial Dr 12th Ave IIB
Mall Dr Lacey Blvd 12th Ave II
McCreary Ave 11th Ave Douty St IIIB
Muscat Pl 12th Ave Fitzgerald Ln IIIB
Neill Way Fargo Ave Leland Way IIIB
Pepper Dr Aspen St Glavier Way II
Phillips St Fourth St 2nd St II

rE coMME nd AtIon S
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 79
Street Name From Street To Street Class
Phillips St Lacey Blvd Fourth St IIB
Railroad Tracks Western City Limit Light Rail Station I Redington St 6th St Dewey II
Rodgers Rd Dead End north Cortner St I
Rodgers Rd Grangeville Blvd Dead End north III
Rodgers Rd 11th Ave Grangeville Blvd IIB
Sangiovese St Centennial Dr 12th Ave IIB
State St/Kimball St/
Echo Ln/Bonnyview Ln 11th 1/2 Ave 11th Ave IIIB
University Ave Grangeville Blvd Greenfield IIB
W Lacey Blvd Irwin St 13th Ave II
White St China Alley 7th St IIIB
Table 6: Bikeway Network Mileage By Classification
Class Existing (mi.) Recommended (mi.)
Class I: Shared-Use Path 0 12.6
Class II: Bike Lanes 6 9.4
Class IIB: Buffered Bike Lanes 0 50.8
Class III: Bike Routes 25 1.3
Class IIIB: Bike Boulevards 0 14.2
Class IV: Separated Bikeways 0 6.9
TOTAL 31 95.2

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 80
Non-Infrastructure
Policy and Program
Recommendations

CHAPTER SIX

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 81
Non-infrastructure programming supports
the recommended infrastructure in this Plan
by encouraging and educating community
members about the full potential of active
transportation infrastructure. The City and
surrounding jurisdictions already have many
programs in place for both children and adults
to learn how to safely walk, bike, and roll on
Hanford’s streets. This section reviews these
existing programs and recommends additional
programs to increase active transportation use
in the city.

Policy recommendations
coMMItMEnt to PLA n
IMPLEME ntAtIon
A-1 The City will incorporate the Active
Transportation Plan into the City’s
General Plan and seek resources to implement
the recommendations of the Plan.

A-2 As other roadway improvements are
constructed by the City and other
agencies, the City will evaluate opportunities to
integrate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure
to advance the implementation of the Active
Transportation Plan.

SAFE rout ES to S cHooL
A-3 The City will act as an engaged partner
with the Hanford Elementary School and
Joint Union High School districts, local schools,
and Kings County in support of Safe Routes to
School activities and programs.

PEoPLE’S tr AIL MAS tEr PLA n
A-4 The City will pursue funding to develop a
Master Plan for the People’s Trail.

LoWEr SPEEd LIMI tS
A-5 The City will evaluate how new legislation
could be applied within current legislative
restrictions on lowering speed limits on streets
with bicycle facilities, in pedestrian priority zones,
on streets with a disproportionate number of
crashes resulting in a fatality or serious bodily
injury, and in other locations with a concentration
of vulnerable road users (e.g., children and
seniors).

LEAdInG PE dEStrIAn IntErVALS
A-6 The City supports Leading Pedestrian
Intervals (LPI) and will evaluate
opportunities to implement LPI at signalized
intersections where feasible while taking into
consideration transit needs.

MAIntEnAncE
A-7 Bicycle facilities will be resurfaced at the
time that the street on which they reside is
resurfaced, to ensure equitable maintenance
between vehicle and bicycle facilities.

A-8 The City will ensure sufficient funding for
the maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure.

PLAn EVAL uAtIon
A-9 When the Active Transportation Plan is
updated, the City will assess citywide
bicycle and pedestrian data and conduct
additional counts as needed.

A-10 When and where feasible, bicycle and
pedestrian counts should be conducted
before and after new projects are constructed.

A-11 The City will establish a centralized
database to track the implementation
status of the bicycle and pedestrian network
proposed in the Active Transportation Plan. The
database and its mapping component will allow
for the rapid creation of reports and maps to be
deployed to officials and the public.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 82

PROGRAMMATIC RECOMMENDATIONS
⊲ Evaluation: Evaluation programs are an
important component of any engineering
or programmatic investment. They help the
City measure its success at meeting the
goals of this Plan and to identify adjustments
that may be necessary.

A note on enforcement: Enforcement
programs have historically been part of
Active Transportation Plan recommendations.

However, in many instances, police enforcement
makes people feel less safe walking, bicycling,
and rolling, particularly for people of color.

As a result, this Plan does not recommend
general enforcement programs. Instead, the
Plan seeks to use engineering to solve many of
the common challenges historically addressed
through enforcement, such as speeding and
bike lane encroachment. This Plan also supports
City collaboration with the Hanford Police
Department on active transportation safety
education and encouragement activities.

Pedestrian and bicycle programs, such as
education and encouragement programs, are
essential in increasing the desirability and safety
of walking, biking, and rolling. Programs help
build the “human infrastructure”1 of a walking
and bicycling culture and encourage more
people to walk, bike, or roll. Many programs can
be categorized according to the following “E’s”:
⊲ Equity: The equity recommendations below
encompass actions that could have been
listed under many of the other program
subheadings. However, by bringing them
together under the framework of equity,
the plan ensures that the ATP reaches all
populations by including communities of
various ethnicities, addressing the needs of
all people regardless of age or ability, and
reaching low-income communities.
⊲ Encouragement: Encouragement programs
provide incentives and support to help
people leave their car at home and try
walking or bicycling instead. Bicycle
encouragement programs, in particular,
target “interested but concerned” people
who would like to ride a bike but who may
not be confident in their skills or in their
interactions with people driving.
⊲ Education: Education programs are
designed to improve safety and awareness.

They can include in-classroom or after-
school programs that teach students how to
safely cross the street or bicycle in the road.

They may also include brochures, posters, or
other information aimed at people walking,
bicycling, or driving.
1The term “human infrastructure” was coined by urban anthropologist Adonia Lugo to refer to the social relationships and communities that support bicycling.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 83
Equity Program
recommendations
tArGEtEd outr EAcH And
ProGrAMS
Hanford is committed to supporting its diverse
residents, underserved communities, and
populations that typically do not walk, bike, or
roll. Traditional methods of encouraging active
transportation may not reach these groups
(e.g., English outreach to non-English speakers)
or address the unique needs of these groups
(e.g., women are more likely to need to travel
with a child). A focused effort to engage with
these populations will help the City encourage
walking, biking, and rolling for all residents.

B-1 Recommendation:

Advertise and promote all programs in
languages used by Hanford residents, such
as English and Spanish. Offer programs
specifically for women, families, non-English
speaking communities, and other specific
demographic groups.

BIcYcLE A ccESS orIES
GIVEAWAY P roGrAM
A barrier to safe bicycling is often the lack of
necessary equipment (e.g., helmet, bike lights,
locks, reflective attire, etc.) The City can pursue
a program to provide essential gear at no or
reduced costs to low-income residents.

B-2 Recommendation:

Subsidize or provide free bicycle equipment
to residents who qualify for CalFresh or SCE
CARE/FERA utility discount. The City could
consider working with local bike shops to
implement this program.

BIcYcLE/PE dEStrIA n
InFrAStructur E EQ uItY
ProGrAM
People biking, walking, and rolling may be
inequitably accommodated by infrastructure
such as lighting, bathrooms, water fountains,
bus stops, and sidewalk improvements.

B-3 Recommendation:

Revise the Capital Improvement Program per
recommendations from the Plan with a review
of equitable distribution of infrastructure that
supports people walking and biking, especially
in areas with a disproportionate number of
pedestrian or bicycle-related crashes.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 84
Encouragement Program
recommendations
cAr-Fr EE S trEEt EVE ntS
Car-free street events promote health and
community connection by creating a safe and
attractive space for physical activity and social
contact. Car-free street events temporarily
close streets to motor vehicles and open them
to the public for walking, bicycling, shopping,
dancing, and other activities. These events are
cost-effective compared to building new parks
for the same purpose. The events have many
names: Ciclovías (originating in South America),
Open Streets, Summer Streets, Sunday Streets,
and Sunday Parkways. Car-free events have
been very successful internationally and are
rapidly becoming popular throughout California
and the United States. Events can be regularly
scheduled or one-time occasions.

By working with businesses along corridors
where the events take place, they have time
to promote the event and support travel
alternatives to their business during the event.

These events increase foot traffic, often
resulting in increased profits for food and drink
establishments and local retailers; however, the
perception of losing access to car traffic and
parking for a day can cause initial opposition.

To mitigate these concerns, a small-scale pilot
event is recommended where a block or two is
restricted from car traffic. Following a successful
pilot, the event’s scope can expand as people
experience car-free streets and become more
receptive to larger events.

B-4 Recommendation:

Support a regular, recurring, car-free street
event. While specific locations and times
for these events should be developed
through community outreach and support,
one possibility for the City of Hanford would
be to combine a car-free street event with the
Thursday Night Market Place program and/or
work with Main Street Hanford and businesses
in the Downtown Business District for
a separate event. Possible locations
include Douty Street, 7th Street, and
Hanford Armona Road.

BIcYcLE F rIE ndLY coMM unItY
The League of American Bicyclists (LAB)
recognizes communities that improve bicycling
conditions through education, encouragement,
enforcement, and evaluation programs.

Communities can achieve diamond, platinum,
gold, silver, or bronze status or an honorary
mention. Bicycle-friendliness can indicate that
a community is healthy and vibrant. Like good
schools and attractive downtowns, bicycle-
friendliness can increase property values, spur
business growth, and increase tourism. Once
Bicycle Friendly Community status is attained,
the City should promote the milestone to the
community through a press release or marketing
campaign highlighting the amenities that
warrant the designation.

B-5 Recommendation:

Apply for Bicycle Friendly Community status
after implementation of the priority projects
and many of the recommended programs
identified in this Plan.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 85
EMPL oYEr -BASEd
Encour AGEMEnt ProGrAMS
/ BIc YcLE-Fr IEndLY BuSInESS
ProGrAMS
Hanford’s rapidly growing employment base
means that working with employers may be an
effective means of achieving the goals of this
Plan. Walking, biking, and rolling to work have
many benefits, including reducing the stress
associated with driving in traffic, reducing
health costs by improving worker health, and
helping businesses market their environmental
sustainability.

The City can work with or provide information
to employers about commuting by foot or by
bicycle. Employers can host bicycle classes
and participate in International Bike to Work
Day/Week in mid-May. Employers can also set
up a National Bike Challenge (lovetoride.net)
account so that employees can log their hours
and set up an internal contest for who logs the
most hours. These programs also present the
opportunity to promote other shared commute
modes to encourage multimodal trips and
connections to transit. For example, the City
could host a promotional campaign or trip
planning event that demonstrates linking bicycle
and walking trips with KART transit trips. This
campaign/event can increase participation
among employees who live too far from work to
travel by foot or by bicycle, such as commuters
who could use regional transit routes
connecting to Hanford via Amtrak station, KART
Transit Center, and/or – in coming years – the
California High-Speed Rail station.

Hanford could also start a Bicycle Friendly
Business Program, recognizing businesses
that make it easy and convenient for both
employees and customers to arrive by walking,
biking, or rolling. To begin, the City could
develop partnerships with businesses in
areas of high visitor traffic (such as 7th Street),
suggesting they display trip planning resources
for active modes that are visible to visitors as
part of the Bicycle Friendly Business Program.

Businesses might also offer a small discount,
periodic raffle prizes, or incentives to visitors who
ride their bikes to their business as a promotion
to increase foot traffic into their business. This
program partners well with car-free street events.

B-6 Recommendation:

Work with or provide information to employers
about walking and cycling with the intention
of reducing the number of Hanford workers
who drive alone to work. The City should also
establish a Bicycle Friendly Business Program.

The City should support Bike to Work Day/
Week as a car-free event and explore additional
policies and programs that can encourage
walking and biking to work. The City should
serve as a role model by actively promoting
alternative commute modes for City employees.

BIKE PA rKInG
rEtro FIt ProGrAM
Accessible bike parking is a key feature of a
robust and seamless active transportation
network. New developments in Hanford are
required to provide bike parking in accordance
with the California Building Code; however,
older developments do not have the same
requirements. With limited options for renters and
visitors of older developments, the City should
pursue a program to help implement bike parking
in these private locations.

B-7 Recommendation:

Consider opportunities to fund or subsidize a
bike parking retrofit program to help existing
private developments add bike parking to their
property. The City could create a bike parking
request program and fund public bike parking
or lockers in areas of high demand.

Funding sources may limit parking to publicly
accessible locations.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 86

SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PROGRAMS
Partnerships between schools and transit
providers are also growing across California and
the United States. KART provides significant
service within Hanford, with at least one KART
route serving stops within a comfortable
walking (1/2-mile) and biking (3-mile) distance of
all Hanford schools. KART offers a $10 discount
on 30-day passes for students; children under
11 ride free with a parent or guardian. The recent
launch of the KART Flex Route in Lemoore
also provides an opportunity to expand this
transit option to transport students safely and
affordably throughout Hanford. The City could
work with KART to expand the current Flex
service area or establish a second Flex zone
with partial funding from the City and/or school
districts. The City already partners with KART to
transport students from middle and high schools
to the Hanford Boys and Girls Club, laying the
foundation for expanding this partnership to
other destinations. By partnering with KART, the
school districts could create cost efficiencies
in their transportation budgets for morning and
afternoon busing, resulting in more funding
for classroom activities and other cost-saving
benefits to Hanford residents and taxpayers.

B-8 Recommendation:

Collaborate with Hanford Elementary and
Hanford Joint Union High school districts,
as well as charter and private schools, to
establish an SRTS program. This program
should start with a site assessment
at qualifying schools and incorporate
infrastructure recommendations from this
ATP. The City should work with KART and the
school districts to determine the feasibility
of establishing an expanded or second KART
Flex Route zone in Hanford and creating a
centralized or subsidized pass program as part
of an SRTS program.

Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a program
that helps children get to school by walking,
bicycling, carpooling, or transit. It envisions
active kids using safe streets, helped by
engaged adults, including teachers, parents,
and police officers, complemented by
responsible drivers.

Hanford offers conditions for effective and cost-
efficient SRTS programs. Several schools are in
proximity of each other, near other destinations
that attract pedestrian and bicycle trips, and
along or near major thoroughfares with a history
of crashes resulting in injuries and fatalities.

Monroe Elementary, Hanford High School, and
Earl F. Johnson High School are located a few
blocks apart along Douty Street. Crosswoods
Charter Academy and Kings Academy II are a
few blocks apart on 7th Street by the Hanford
Amtrak Station and KART Transit Center. All five
schools are within a 1-mile radius of Downtown
Hanford. Woodrow Wilson Junior High School
and Jefferson Academy are within two blocks
of each other near 11th Street. Hanford West
High School and Hanford Adult School share
the same campus. These schools are also
between the Hanford Mall and Adventist
Health facilities, which could offer safe routes
to medical appointments, job/internship sites,
and after-school social activities. Armona Union
Elementary and Parkview Middle School also
share a campus on Hanford Armona Road.

Sierra Pacific High School and Frontier, Simas,
and Jefferson Academy elementary schools are
located near Grangeville Boulevard between
12th and 14th Avenues, a corridor recommended
for a Class IV separated bikeway. Roosevelt and
MLK elementary schools are located along 11th
Avenue near the proposed People’s Trail.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 87
WAYFIndIn G
Wayfinding provides direction and creates a
sense of place for people biking and rolling.

Installing pedestrian-scale wayfinding signs
throughout the City’s active transportation
network will improve the quality and usability of
the existing and proposed network.

There are various design options for wayfinding
signs. Guide signs may follow California’s
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD) standards, which use additional
plaques that display destinations and
mileage. The City would mount these plaques
under existing bike routes and lane signs.

Alternatively, the City may decide to design
wayfinding signs that exhibit Hanford’s unique
style and commitment to public art. These signs
display the community’s identity and support of
bicyclists.

The development of a wayfinding signage plan
requires interdepartmental and stakeholder
collaboration to determine sign display
design, the frequency at which signs should
be installed, and the destinations to be
displayed on each sign. Staff, consultants, or
volunteers with significant bicycling and walking
experience and local network knowledge
should be involved to ensure local needs are
met.

B-9 Recommendation:

Develop and install comprehensive wayfinding
or directional signage to support easy
navigation for people walking and bicycling,
building upon the Downtown Renovation
Project’s signage element. A citywide
wayfinding system can raise awareness and
improve access for residents and visitors
to community assets such as the Civic
Center, parks, medical facilities, and transit
hubs. Signs may also include “distance
to” information, which displays mileage to
community destinations. This wayfinding could
leverage the proximity of KART bus stops,
the KART Transit Center, the Amtrak station,
and – eventually – California High-Speed Rail
Station. Signs could include a stop/station
vicinity map showing major destinations and
multimodal routes within a half-mile radius
for walking and a two or three-mile radius
accessible by bicycle.

ActIVE tr AnSPortAtIon
AdVISorY co MMIttEE
The project’s Active Transportation Program
Advisory Committee could be transitioned
into a permanent group to manage the non-
infrastructure elements of this plan and support
the City in developing and promoting potential
programs that maximize the City’s investments
in physical infrastructure. The committee would
be tasked with ensuring progress is made
toward programmatic goals and provide the
City officials with guidance and coordination to
maximize policy and programmatic successes.

The committee would be tasked with ongoing
stakeholder coordination, funding identification,
and advocacy. Special attention could be given
to the timing of when new infrastructure is
operational to build excitement about new travel
opportunities. The committee should operate
under a set of defined objectives and meet
regularly to discuss challenges, shared vision,
and solutions to improve mobility in Hanford.

The scope of a committee can vary and grow
depending on the level of partner coordination
and program management necessary. If the
demands of a committee become too high,
the City could consider the formation of a
transportation management association to
facilitate more travel options and commute
programs.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 88
B-10 Recommendation:

Establish a permanent Active Transportation
Advisory Committee to oversee the non-
infrastructure elements of this Plan. This group
would be tasked with building partnerships
and working towards plan recommendations,
particularly initiatives that require community
involvement, outreach, and coordination.

As these programs expand, the City should
consider working with Main Street Hanford
or other community-based organizations
to establish a transportation management
association.
cASH rEWA rdS For PE oPLE
WHo BIKE to W orK
A small cash incentive has been successful in
encouraging residents to commit to trading
a car trip for traveling by foot or by bike. This
incentive could apply on a daily or per-trip basis,
leaving flexibility to encourage those who may
need to drive or use other modes during other
days of the week. One example could be a
month-long campaign (such as during National
Bike Month in May) that supports people
who commit to giving up their car for bike or
walk trips in exchange for $3 a day. These
programs are typically more successful when
hosted by a community-based organization,
business improvement district, transportation
management association, or employer.

B-11 Recommendation:

Pay people to ride their bicycles or make trips
on foot instead of driving their car during a
specific period. Non-monetary incentives, such
as a drawing for a grand prize item, could also
be successful.

HoSt ProMot IonAL EVE ntS
Promotional events, fairs, or challenges can
be effective in encouraging people to change
their travel behavior from driving to walking or
biking. When all travel options are presented at
an event with high foot traffic, more people are
exposed to travel options they may not have
considered or even known about. The events
should be staffed by City staff, advocates, bike
shop owners, or other enthusiastic people who
are knowledgeable about the available travel
options. Event organizers should distribute
physical resources and collateral to help people
consider different trip scenarios that may work
for them. These events can be particularly
important to highlight new infrastructure,
focusing on how improvements can facilitate
active transportation trips.

These events could be integrated into the car-
free events discussed above or could be smaller
tabling and outreach events that highlight new
infrastructure or programs from this plan. All
promotional events, fairs, or challenges are
opportunities to promote other City programs
and all infrastructure projects supporting how
people access Hanford.

B-12 Recommendation:

Host promotional events, fairs, or challenges
that provide resources to passersby in areas of
high traffic. These events provide resources to
people interested in learning more about how
to travel by biking or walking.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 89
BIKE LE ndIn G LIB rArY
Bike libraries provide bicycles to people who
want to test bicycle travel before purchasing a
bike or do not have the resources to purchase
a quality bike. These libraries offer bike rentals
for longer durations than a single trip, typically
providing a personal bike for weeks or months.

These programs are significantly less expensive
to manage and maintain than a traditional
bike share system, which typically requires
docking stations within ½ mile of each other.

By centralizing pick up and drop off at a single
location hub, bike libraries also create a captive
audience for education and safety courses and
materials to support Vision Zero goals.

The bike library should offer a variety of bikes,
such as e-bikes, cargo bikes, and tricycles,
to provide options for people to use during
different trip purposes, abilities, and seasons.

To accommodate riders with the highest need,
rental fees should be subsidized or free based
on social services eligibility or for students and
seniors. Bike libraries can be City-operated or
managed in partnership with local bike shops
and advocacy groups that can provide and
maintain the bikes. The City can pursue grant
opportunities to fund the bike library through
the Active Transportation Program and Regional
Early Action Planning (REAP) programs and
leverage California Air Resources Board rebate
programs for e-bike purchases to facilitate a
bike-to-own model.

B-13 Recommendation:

Establish a bike library to rent out bikes to
individuals who may not have access to one
or are curious about getting around by bike.

Integrate safety and education courses to
support users, especially those who are new to
traveling by bicycle.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 90
Education Program
recommendations
AduLt BI cYcLInG SKILLS
cLASSES
Most adults biking have not received training
on safe bicycling practices, the rules of the
road, and bicycle handling skills. Bicycling skills
classes can address this education gap. With a
large increase in bicycle infrastructure planned
in the coming years, the City should sponsor
and partner with other organizations to provide
Adult Bicycle Skills classes to encourage people
who are inexperienced or less comfortable
biking to try out new facilities. The League of
American Bicyclists (LAB) offers classes taught
by certified instructors.

B-14 Recommendation:

Sponsor and host a range of adult bicycling
skills classes or partner with County or
regional activities on an ongoing basis.

FAMILY BI cYcLInG SKILLS
cLASSES
Like adult bicycling skills classes, family
bicycling skills classes support parents and
children. Classes may teach parents how
to ride safely with their children in an urban
environment (either on the bike with them
or riding on the sidewalk next to them) with
neighborhood rides or may teach children how
to bicycle safely and follow the rules of the road
through games and fun.

B-15 Recommendation:

Sponsor and host family bicycling skills classes
or partner with County or regional activities on
an ongoing basis.
drIVE r EducAtIon ProGrAM/
cAMPAIG n
The California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS)
regularly offers grant opportunities to fund
educational campaigns that support pedestrian,
bicycle, and roadway safety. A driver education
campaign can help educate drivers about safe
driving around people walking, biking, and
rolling. For example, people driving should look
for people bicycling when making a right turn
to avoid the “right hook” collision. They should
also look for people walking in the crosswalk
when making a left turn to avoid the “left hook”
collision.

B-16 Recommendation:

Implement a driver education program and/or
campaign.

non-In Fr AS tructur E PoLIc Y And Pro GrAM rE coMME nd AtIon S HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 91
ActIVE tr AnSPortAtIon
rEPort cArd
Cities around the world have begun monitoring
their active transportation programs to
track the number of non-motorized users,
gauge user perceptions of the bicycle and
pedestrian networks, and identify safety trends.

Results are often published in a periodic
active transportation report card, which can
be distributed to the public as a means of
publicizing the City’s commitment to improving
walking, bicycling, and rolling conditions.

B-18 Recommendation:

Establish an annual or semi-annual pedestrian
and bicycle report card to track progress
toward meeting the goals, policies, and action
items presented in this Plan. Data collection
may include a community and workforce
survey, pedestrian and bicycle counts, and
summary of collision and hospital records.

EVALUATION

PROGRAMS
Annu AL tr AFFIc count S
Pedestrian and bicycle counts and community
surveys act as methods to evaluate not only the
effectiveness of specific pedestrian and bicycle
improvement projects but can also function as
way to measure progress towards reaching City
goals.

B-16 Recommendation:

Require large new developments to conduct
pedestrian and bicycle counts, and should
expand traffic counts by:
⊲ Conducting before and after pedestrian,
bicycle, and vehicle counts on all roadway
projects.
⊲ Exploring the possibility of using automatic
counters to collect data on key pedestrian
and bicycle corridors. Automatic count
technologies can be useful for bicycle
count efforts. In-pavement loop detectors
accurately count bicycle activity on-street,
and infrared counters can count pedestrian
and bicycle activities on paths.

IMPLEME ntAt Ion
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 92
Implementation

CHAPTER SEVEN

IMPLEME ntAt Ion
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 93
This Plan Update 2024 includes projects,
programs, and policy changes intended to
create a more walkable, bikeable Hanford.

Implementation of this Plan Update 2024
will require community support and political
leadership in addition to significant funding.

Bicycle and pedestrian improvements shall
be implemented based on the industry’s
best practices and the most up-to-date
design guides described in the Appendices
Design Guides.

PRIORITIZATION
Methodology
Prioritizing the recommended bicycle and
pedestrian projects helps the City identify a
strategic process for creating a safe, connected,
and useful active transportation network.

Bicycle recommendations
The bicycle recommendations are divided
into three tiers of implementation: Backbone
Network, Complete Network, and Complete
Network - Future Study. Recommended bicycle
projects that provide the safest and most direct
connections to major destinations make up the
Backbone Network, or “Tier 1.” These projects
also require less planning since they mainly
upgrade existing facilities. A major component
of this Backbone Network is the People’s Trail,
which will run across the City from south to
north with a bicycle and pedestrian bridge
over Highway 198. This trail will connect the
communities of South Hanford to the rest of the
City. When completed, the Backbone Network
will provide safe bicycle connections across the
City and to major destinations.

The Complete Network (Tier 2) enhances
the Backbone Network by providing a grid of
bikeways that connect the city’s residential
neighborhoods with major destinations,
including schools, parks, major shopping
centers, Downtown Hanford, and other job
centers. All Tier 1 and 2 recommendations
include roadways with sufficient roadway space
to add separated bikeways.

IMPLEME ntAt Ion
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 94
Table 7: Bikeway Network Mileage By Classification (Prioritized) Table 8: Tier 1 Backbone Network
Classification Existing (mi.)
Recommended (mi.)
Backbone Complete
Class I Shared-Use Path 0 5.0 (Tier 1) 12.6 (Tiers 1-3) Class II Bike Lanes 6 1.0 9.4
Class IIB Buffered Bike Lanes 0 9.6 50.8
Class III Bike Routes 25 0 1.3
Class IIIB Bike Boulevards 0 0.1 14.2
Class IV Separated Bikeways 0 0.4 6.9
TOTAL 31 16.1 95.2
Street Name From Street To Street Class
8th St Santa Fe Ave Phillips St 3b
China Alley Phillips St White St 1
Douty St Flint Hanford Armona 2b
Florinda St 10th Ave 9 1/4 Ave 2b
Florinda St 11th Ave 10th Ave 2
Green St China Alley China Alley 3b
Greenfield Ave Centennial Lacey Blvd 2b
Hanford Armona Rd 13th 10th Ave 2b
People’s Trail - Flood Channel from Flint Ave to Rodgers Rd Flint Rodgers 1 People’s Trail - Campus Dr Lacey Blvd Railroad Tracks 4 People’s Trail - Flood Channel from Railroad to Hume Ave Railroad Hume 1 People’s Trail - Flood Control From Greenfield to Lacey Blvd Greenfield Lacey 1 White St China Alley 7th St 3b
Tier 3, the Complete Network - Future Study,
incorporates facilities on major roadways that
will require significant planning to implement
and should be added based on future growth
and travel patterns. These Future Study
corridors primarily include planned major roads
that would extend the recommended Tier 1 and
2 bikeway corridors. Many of the Tier 3 corridors
are under evaluation through other city projects,
particularly those focused on connections to the
future California High Speed Rail station.

Table 7 shows the full breakdown of mileage
between the Backbone and Complete Networks
(including Future Study). Table 8 lists the Tier 1
corridors. A complete list of all bicycle projects,
their tiers, and projected costs in FY2024
dollars, is included in the Appendices
Bicycle Recommendations.

IMPLEME ntAt Ion
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 95
Pedestrian
recommendations
The pedestrian recommendations are
prioritized into three tiers based on safety,
equity, proximity to destinations and transit
stops, and cost: Urgent Action, Safe Streets
Network, and Future Study. The Urgent Action
pedestrian recommendations in Tier 1 focus
on improving access and safety for Hanford’s
disadvantaged communities and addressing
hot spots where crashes have caused fatalities
or significant injuries to pedestrians. These
recommendations are concentrated in the
South Hanford and Downtown Pedestrian
Priority Areas. Tier 2, the Safe Streets Network,
aims to further enhance safety and access
to transit stops, schools, parks, shopping
centers, and other job centers, while balancing
fiscal constraints by including projects with
an estimated cost of less than $50,000. Tier
2 recommendations are concentrated in the
North Hanford and Downtown Pedestrian
Priority Areas. Finally, Tier 3 recommendations
encompass high-cost improvements (more
than $250,000) and recommendations outside
the identified Pedestrian Priority Areas. Table
9 shows the number of locations by tier. Table
10 shows the locations of Tier 1 Urgent Action
improvement recommendations. The full list
of recommendations, with projected costs in
FY2024 dollars, can be found in the Appendices
Pedestrian Recommendations.

Table 9: Pedestrian Recommendations by Tier
Table 10: Tier 1 Urgent Action Locations
Tier Number of Locations
Tier 1 – Urgent Action 33
Tier 2 – Safe Streets Network 6
Tier 3 – Future Study 20
TOTAL 59
Location Recommended Improvements
Curb Extensions
High Visibility
Crosswalk Marking
Advance Yield/Stop
Lines
Raised Crossing
Pedestrian Refuge
Island
Pedestrian-Scale
Lighting
All-Way Stop/ Warrant
Analysis
Rectangular Rapid
Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
Pedestrian Hybrid
Beacon/HAWK
Leading Pedestrian
Signal
E Grangeville Blvd/N Douty St ● ● ●
E Grangeville Blvd/N Kensington Way ●
E Grangeville Blvd/10th Ave ● ●
Hill St/Harris St ●
Florida St/Whitmore St ● ●
Cameron St/N 10th Ave ● ● ●
N 11th Ave/Ivy St ● ● ● ● ●

IMPLEME ntAt Ion
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 96
Location Recommended Improvements
Curb Extensions
High Visibility
Crosswalk Marking
Advance Yield/Stop
Lines
Raised Crossing
Pedestrian Refuge
Island
Pedestrian-Scale
Lighting
All-Way Stop/ Warrant
Analysis
Rectangular Rapid
Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
Pedestrian Hybrid
Beacon/HAWK
Leading Pedestrian
Signal
N Douty St/Court St ● ●
N Douty St/E 8th St ● ●
N Lacey Blvd/N 10th St ● ● ●
N Douty St/China Alley ●
Lacey Blvd/11th Ave ● ● ● ● ● ●
W Lacey Blvd/Campus Dr
(People’s Trail) ● ● ●
7th Ave/Santa Fe Ave ●
7th St/11th Ave ● ● ●
6th St/11th Ave ● ●
5th St/11th Ave ● ● ●
4th St/11th Ave ● ● ●
3rd St/11th Ave ● ● ●
Harris St/Between Coe Park and Ball
Park ●
Douty St/Longfield Center ● ● ● ● ●
Davis St/11th Ave ● ● ● ● ●
Davis St/Grant St ● ●
Scott St/S Phillips St ● ●
Harris St/Lincoln Elementary ● ● ● ●
Hanford Armona Rd/S Harris St ● ● ● ●
Hanford Armona Rd/11th Ave ● ● ● ● ● ●
Hanford Armona Rd/Bengston Ave ● ● ● ●
12th St/Hanford Armona Rd ● ● ● ● ●
12th St/Graham St ●
Dawn Ln/Martin Luther King
Elementary ● ● ●
Dawn Ln/Hume Ave ● ●
Dawn Ln/11th Ave ● ● ● ●

IMPLEME ntAt Ion
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 97
Priority Project:

People’s trail
The People’s Trail project includes the
construction of 3.7 miles of new trails and paths
(Figure 20). This proposed multi-use trail aligns
with the Peoples Ditch, which serves as a north-
south corridor and irrigation canal carrying
water from the Kings River to farms in Kings
County. Landscaping, irrigation, solar lighting,
road crossings, 4-foot chain link fencing, park
benches, and road stripping would be included.

Protected pedestrian crossings will be utilized in
the crossings where pedestrians will be crossing
roads with higher vehicle speeds and higher
traffic volumes. The protected road crossings
will include installing a raised median and
additional striping to create a buffer zone for
pedestrians in the center of the roadways. The
City will also utilize pedestrian hybrid beacons
for increased visibility at all road crossings (See
the Appendices for Design Concepts).

The proposed People’s Trail project will
connect residents living in disadvantaged
neighborhoods to Hanford’s largest employment
center. The employment center spans 1.25
square miles and bisects the City north of
Highway 198. The employment center includes
locally-owned stores and boutiques as well as
big-box stores like Target, Walmart, Lowe’s,
and Home Depot. There are also many local
and chain restaurants scattered throughout the
employment center. The multi-use trail will also
provide easier access to medical providers,
local schools, and parks. It will provide safe,
alternative, non-motorized transportation routes
for commuters going to work and children
traveling to and from school. It will link the
community, improve air quality, and reduce
road congestion by lessening dependence on
automobile travel for all trips. This project will
be a hugely beneficial addition to the City that
is critically park-deprived. A community-wide
survey conducted in conjunction with the 2020
Parks and Recreation Master Plan identified
walking/bicycle trails as the number one
recreation need. The City of Hanford currently
has no Class I trails.

Photo rendering of what the People’s Trail could look like.

AFTER BEFORE

IMPLEME ntAt Ion
HANFORD, CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 98
Figure 20: People’s Trail
City of Hanford Active Transportation Plan
PEOPLE’S TRAIL RECO MMEND A TIONS

TERRACE DR

EARL WAY
RO

DGERS RD
M AL
EVA
HT01

SEVENTH ST

H
W
I
ER
O
MT

TS

FLORIN DA ST

FITZGERALD
LN

MC CREARY AVE

DAVIS ST

HUME AVE
HT11
A
EV
HT11
A
EV
G

LACIER W
AY

CORTNER ST

PHILLIPS
ST
RD T
N
O
MRIAF

FARGO AVE
RD LAI
N
NET
NEC

M AGNOLIA AVE
RD ST
KIN
GS RD
H
O
LT AVE
MEADOW
VIEW
RD

ASPEN ST
I
N
OEL

RD
EVA
HT21
EVA
HT21
CAM
PUS DR

EIG HTH ST
SECOND

ST

EVA KRAP
EVA
HT9

ORC H ARD DR

FLINT AVE

KINGS COUNTY DR
13TH RD
Data provided by the City of Hanford & Kings County. Date saved: 8/21/2024. 0 0.25 0.5 MILES

W GRANGEVILLE BLVD

W LACEY BLVD

HANFORD ARMONA RD
PEOPLE’S DITCH
SR-198

DOWNTOWN HANFORD
PEOPLE’S DITCH
LEGEND
Class I: Shared-Use Path
Class IV: Separated Bikeway
Crossings
Railroad
Schools
Parks

ADVENTIST HEALTH HANFORD

HANFORD MALL
SR-198 CROSSING

RAIL CROSSING

HANFORD ADULT SCHOOL

QUAIL RUN PARK

YOUTH ATHLETIC COMPLEX

SIMAS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

CENTENNIAL PARK

ROOSEVELT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

MLK JR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

WOODROW WILSON JR HIGH SCHOOL

JEFFERSON ACADEMY

MONROE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

HIDDEN VALLEY PARK

PIONEER MIDDLE SCHOOL

HANFORD AMTRAK STATION

KINGS VALLEY ACADEMY II

W ELM ST RAIL CROSSING