Agenda packet — San Joaquin City Council, August 6, 2024

SAN JOAQUIN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
21991 COLORADO AVE (A)

SAN JOAQUIN, CA
TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2024
6:00 P.M.

MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL WILL BE IN ATTENDANCE AT THE MEETING.

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY ATTEND AND PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING

IN PERSON OR BY ZOOM OR SUBMIT WRITTEN COMMENTS AT CITY HALL OR BY EMAIL PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT [email protected].

ZOOM INFORMATION:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84329809206?pwd=Ez0hHt8tbDSNtLwBbcdOGrvzHLHJJf.1 MEETING ID: 843 2980 9206
PASSCODE: 208843
TELEPHONE NUMBER: 1-669-900-9128
The City Council welcomes you. All attendees are advised that pagers, cell phones, and any other communication devices should be powered off upon entering the Council meeting.

The City Council may consider and act on an agenda item in any order it deems appropriate. Actual timed items may be heard later but not before the time set on agenda. Persons interested in an item listed on the agenda are advised to be present throughout the meeting to ensure their presence when the item is called.

For each agenda item considered by the Council there will first be a staff presentation followed by a presentation from the involved individuals. Public comments from those in attendance will then be taken. All public comments will be limited to three minutes per person.

1. CALL TO ORDER – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
Julia Hernandez Mayor
Adam Flores-Cornejo Mayor Pro Tem
Cristina Covarrubia Councilmember
Abel Lua Councilmember
Martha Mejia Councilmember

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA –
______________________________________________________________ 21900 Colorado Avenue, P.O. Box 758, San Joaquin, CA 93660 (559) 693-4311, (559) 693-2193 (fax), www.cityofsanjoaquin.org

3. PRESENTATION –

4. PROCLAMATION –

5. CONSENT CALENDAR –
All items listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. For discussion of any Consent Item, it will be considered separately at the request of any member of the City Council or any person in the audience - A. SUBJECT: Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of July 2, 2024.

RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of July 2, 2024. (Enclosure P.1, Action Item)
B. SUBJECT: Warrants #’s 055367-055466.

RECOMMENDATION: Council approve Warrant #’s 055367-055466 as presented. (Enclosure P.4, Action Item) C. SUBJECT: Submitting Annual Measure C Funds Claim for Fiscal Year 2024-2025.

RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-28, concerning Local Transportation Purpose Funds Extension (Measure “C” Extension). (Enclosure P.17, Action Item)
D. SUBJECT: Revision of Resolution No. 2024-19, Confirming Diagram and Assessments for the Annual Levy for 2024-205 Assessment District No. 92-3.

RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the revision of Resolution No. 2024-19, the diagram and assessments for the annual levy of the City of San Joaquin’s Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 92-3 for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and direct the Deputy City Clerk to file the annual Engineer’s Report with the County of Fresno, California, allowing it to be recorded with the attached Engineer’s Report with exhibits. (Enclosure P.27, Action Item)

6. SHERIFF REPORT – (Enclosure P.30, Informational Only)

7. CITY MANAGER REPORT – Informational Only

8. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT – Informational Only

9. COUNCILMEMBER COMMUNICATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/AGENDA
ITEMS –
This portion of the meeting is reserved for the Mayor and Councilmembers (i) to make brief reports on boards, committees, and other public agencies, and at public events, (ii) to initiate new matters and to request updates, (iii) and to initiate new agenda items.

Under this section the Council may take action only on items specifically agendized and which meet other requirements for actions.

10. PUBLIC FORUM –
This part of the meeting is for members of the public to address the City Council regarding items that are not listed on the agenda and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council of the City of San Joaquin. If you wish to comment on an item which is not on the agenda, you may do so at this time and each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.

Speakers are asked, but not required, to state their name and address and to use the microphone. The Council is prohibited by law from taking action on items not on the agenda. Discussion shall be limited to referring the item to staff and possible scheduling on a future council agenda.

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS –
A. SUBJECT: Adoption of the Fresno Council of Governments (COG) Active Transportation Plan (ATP).

RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-29, approving the adoption of the 2024 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan for the City of San Joaquin. (Enclosure P.31, Action Item)
B. SUBJECT: Discussion on the State Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Application and possible activities and projects.

RECOMMENDATION: Council 1) review the program and available funding options and staff recommendations; 2) open the public hearing; 3) receive public comment regarding the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and possible activities and projects to be considered for funding under the upcoming NOFA process; 4) close the public hearing; 5) discuss potential applications/recommendations; and 6) direct staff to prepare a CDBG application for Council consideration. (Enclosure P.161, Action Item)

12. SAN JOAQUIN PLANNING COMMISSION –

13. OLD BUSINESS –

14. NEW BUSINESS –
A. SUBJECT: Authorizing Delegates for the Upcoming League of California Cities Conference.

RECOMMENDATION: Council authorize a Voting Delegate and up to two alternates for the upcoming issues to be voted upon at the 2024 LOCC Annual Conference. (Enclosure P.164, Action Item)

15. CLOSED SESSION –

16. ADJOURN MEETING –
NOTICE OF ADA COMPLIANCE: If you or anyone in your party needs assistance in order to attend the City Council meeting, or if you require auxiliary aids or services, e.g. hearing aids or signing services to make a presentation to the City Council, the City is happy to assist you. Please contact City Office at (559) 693-4311 so such aids or services can be arranged. Request may also be made by email to the City Clerk at [email protected] or mailed to San Joaquin City Hall, P.O. Box 758, San Joaquin, CA 93660. Accommodations should be requested as early as possible as additional time may be required in order to provide the request accommodation is suggested.

NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF AGENDA MATERIALS: Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding within 72 hours of the meeting regarding any items on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall, 21900 Colorado Avenue during normal business hours and on the City’s website at www.cityofsanjoaquin.org
LEVINE ACT DISCLOSURE. Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt Code Section 84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the City Council is required to disclose on the record any campaign contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $250 made by the party or the party’s agents within the preceding 12 months to any City official.

Participants and agents are requested to make this disclosure as well.

The disclosure should be made when the agenda item is called and must include the name of the party, participant, or agent, and any other person making the contribution, the name of the recipient, the amount of the contribution, and the date the contribution was made. Council Members are also required to make such disclosures and recuse themselves.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST. City Council Members with a conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act are required to make disclosure when the item is called and recuse themselves.

CERTIFICATION OF POSTING
I, Matt Flood, City Clerk of the City of San Joaquin, do hereby declare that the foregoing agenda for the regular San Joaquin City Council Meeting of Tuesday, August 6, 2024 was posted at the following locations: City Hall, 21900 Colorado Avenue, San Joaquin Senior Center, 21991 Colorado Ave (B) and US Post Office 8667 Ninth Street on Friday August 2, 2024 by 5:00 P.M. *NEXT REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2024*

SAN JOAQUIN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

MINUTES
TUESDAY, JULY 2, 2024

1. CALL TO ORDER – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – ROLL CALL
Mayor Julia Hernandez Present
Mayor Pro Tem Adam Flores Present
Councilmember Cristina Covarrubia Present
Councilmember Abel Lua Present
Councilmember Martha Mejia Present (6:02pm)
The Meeting was called to order and the pledge of allegiance led by Mayor Hernandez at 6:00pm.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion was made by Mayor Hernandez to approve the agenda, seconded by Councilmember Lua. Motion passed 4-0 (Absent: Mejia).

3. PRESENTATION

4. PROCLAMATION

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. SUBJECT: Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of June 4, 2024.

RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of June 4, 2024.

B. SUBJECT: Warrants #’s 055280-055366.

RECOMMENDATION: Council approve Warrant #’s 055280-055366 as presented.

C. SUBJECT: Ratification of the Agreement with the Fresno County Sheriff’s Department for Overtime Services.
______________________________________________________________ 21900 Colorado Avenue, P.O. Box 758, San Joaquin, CA 93660 (559) 693-4311, (559) 693-2193 (fax), www.cityofsanjoaquin.org 1 RECOMMENDATION: Council ratify the agreement with the Fresno County Sheriff’s Department for Overtime Services.

A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Flores to adopt the Consent Calendar, seconded by Councilmember Lua. Motion passed 5-0.

6. SHERIFF REPORT
Deputy Swain summarized the monthly report.

7. CITY MANAGER REPORT
The City Manager summarized her monthly report.

8. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
The City Attorney provided her report.

9. COUNCILMEMBER COMMUNICATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/AGENDA ITEMS Members of the Council shared their reports.

10. PUBLIC FORUM
Members of the public spoke.

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS

12. SAN JOAQUIN PLANNING COMMISSION

13. OLD BUSINESS

14. NEW BUSINESS
A. SUBJECT: Consider approving a Sixth Amendment to Employment Agreement with City Manager.

RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-26, approving a sixth amendment to the Employment Agreement with the City Manager.

A motion was made by Mayor Hernandez to approve the item, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Flores. Motion passed 5-0.

B. SUBJECT: Request to observe July 5, 2024 as a Holiday. 2 RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-27, observing July 5, 2024 as a Holiday in the City of San Joaquin.

A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Flores to approve the item, seconded by Councilmember Lua. Motion passed 5-0.

15. CLOSED SESSION

16. ADJOURN MEETING
At 6:48pm with no other business remaining before the City Council, a motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Flores to adjourn, seconded by Councilmember Mejia. Motion passed 5-0.
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-28

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JOAQUIN

CONCERNING LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PURPOSE FUNDS EXTENSION (MEASURE “C” EXTENSION)
WHEREAS, the City of San Joaquin is an eligible claimant of funds for Measure C Extension Local Transportation Pass-Through Projects and Program Funds pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 142257; and
WHEREAS, the Fresno County Transportation Authority has adopted a Resolution of Apportionment for FY 2024-2025, Measure C Extension Local Transportation Pass-Through Projects and Program Funds setting the City of San Joaquin’s percentages at the following:
• 0.60% of $16,792,597 ($100,252) for the Local Transportation Program, Local Allocation – Street Maintenance Category sub program;
• 0.67% of $16,778,495 ($112,265) for the Local Transportation Program, Local Allocation – Flexible Funding Category sub program;
Which shall be the proportionate share of Measure C Extension Local Transportation PassThrough Projects and Program Funds that the City shall be entitled to within the fiscal year.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of San Joaquin resolves as follows:
1) The City of San Joaquin hereby submits its Local Transportation Purposes Certification and Claims for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Measure C Extension Local Transportation Pass-Through Projects and Program Funds. 2) The City of San Joaquin hereby requests the release of funds to the City on a monthly payment basis consistent with the adopted percentages listed above, based on actual receipts.
3) The City Council of the City of San Joaquin further certifies:
a) That Local Transportation Purpose Funds will not be used to substitute for property tax funds which the City of San Joaquin had previously used for local transportation purposes; and
b) That the City of San Joaquin has and will segregate property tax revenues used to support local transportation purposes so that verification of nonsubstitution can be proved through audit; and c) That the City of San Joaquin shall separately account for Local Transportation Purposes Funds received pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 142257. The City shall maintain records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall separately record expenditures for each type of eligible purpose. The City shall make such records available to the Authority for inspection or audit at any time. 17 4) The City of San Joaquin understands that should a financial or compliance audit reveal that the City of San Joaquin violated any of the requirements set forth in paragraph 3 (a) (b) or (c), that the Fresno County Transportation Authority may seek to take immediate steps to resolve the violation in accordance with its adopted procedures.
5) The City of San Joaquin understands it must follow the Reporting Requirements as indicated in the Measure C Extension Local Agency Handbook and the Measure C Extension Local Agency Handbook, Other Revenue Funding and submit the appropriate Reporting Form for each Program/Project of expenditures for the 2024-2025 fiscal year no later than November 15, 2025 The City of San Joaquin understands that if these Reporting Requirements are not met by the date listed above the Fresno County Transportation Authority will stop any and all Local Transportation Purposes Pass-Through funds until such Reporting Requirements have been met.

The foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Joaquin the 6th day of August, 2024 and passed at said meeting by the following vote:
______________________________
Julia Hernandez, Mayor
ATTEST:

I, Matthew Flood, City Clerk of the City of San Joaquin, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted and passed by the City Council at a regular meeting of said City Council, held at the San Joaquin Council Chambers on August 6, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
__________________________________________
Matthew Flood, City Clerk
18 Measure C Extension Strategic Implementation Plan - Appendix D

MEASURE C EXTENSION

LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PASS THROUGH REVENUES
CERTIFICATION AND CLAIM FOR FY2024-25
TO: Fresno County Transportation Authority
FROM: City of San Joaquin
Local Agency Name
Address: P.O. Box 758, San Joaquin, CA 93660 Contact: Nancy Banda, Finance Director_ Telephone: FAX: Email Address: [email protected]_

1. Applicable Funding Program: (Check One)
Regional Public Transit Program
Fresno Area Express
Clovis Transit
FCRTA
PTIS/Transit Consolidation
ADA/Seniors/Paratransit
Farmworker Van Pools
Car/Van Pools
New Technology Reserve
Local Transportation Program
Street Maintenance
ADA Compliance
Flexible Funding
Pedestrian/Trails Urban
Pedestrian/Trails Rural
Bicycle Facilities
Regional Transportation Program
Fresno Airports
Alternative Transportation Program
Rail Consolidation Subprogram
Environmental Enhancement Program
School Bus Replacement
Transit Oriented Infrastructure for
In-Fill
Administrative/Planning Program
Fresno COG

2. The City of San Joaquin ("claimant") is an eligible claimant of funds for local transportation purposes pursuant to Local Agency Name
California Public Utilities Code Section 142257.

3. The Fresno County Transportation Authority has adopted a Resolution of Apportionment for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 setting 0.60% of $16,792,597 (or $100,252) for the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and available to the claimant. On behalf of claimant, I hereby request release of the funds to claimant in accordance with:
(a) Monthly payments consistent with adopted percentage, based on actual receipts (b) Compliance with Steps A and B of the Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) – Local Agency Pass-Through Funding programs and Other Revenue Program Funding

4. On behalf of claimant, I hereby certify as follows:
(a) That the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above are not being used to substitute for property tax funds which claimant had previously used for local transportation purposes. Such substitution of property tax funds is prohibited by California Public Utilities Code Section 142257. (b) That claimant has segregated property tax revenues from claimant's other general fund revenues used to support the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above so that verification of non-substitution can be proved through audit or that the non-substitution of funds shall apply to claimant's entire general fund. (c) That claimant shall account for Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and received pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 142257. Claimant shall maintain current records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall separately record expenditures for each type of eligible purpose.

Claimant shall make such records available to the Authority for inspection or audit at any time.

5. Claimant understands that should financial or compliance audit exceptions be found, the Fresno County Transportation Authority will take immediate steps to resolve the exceptions in accordance with its adopted procedures.
_______________________________________________________ Finance Director ________________
ATTACHMENT: Evidence of Formal Action for Approval and Submittal Approved by: Fresno County Transportation Authority Board on: __________________________ Authorized Signature:

Title:

Date:
19 Measure C Extension Strategic Implementation Plan - Appendix D

MEASURE C EXTENSION

2. The City of San Joaquin ("claimant") is an eligible claimant of funds for local transportation purposes pursuant to Local Agency Name
California Public Utilities Code Section 142257.

3. The Fresno County Transportation Authority has adopted a Resolution of Apportionment for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 setting 0.67% of $16,778,495 (or $112,265) for the Subprogram or Category of funds checked above and available to the claimant. On behalf of claimant, I hereby request release of the funds to claimant in accordance with:
(a) Monthly payments consistent with adopted percentage, based on actual receipts (b) Compliance with Steps A and B of the Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) – Local Agency Pass-Through Funding programs and Other Revenue Program Funding

Claimant shall make such records available to the Authority for inspection or audit at any time.

Title:

Date:
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 STAFF REPORT
Date: August 6, 2024
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Matt Flood, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT:

Revision of Resolution 2024-19 of the City Council of the City of San Joaquin, California, confirming Diagram and Assessments for the Annual Levy for 2024-2025 of Assessment District No. 92-3.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Council approve the revision of Resolution 2024-19 confirming the diagram and assessments for the annual levy of the City of San Joaquin’s Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 92-3 for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and direct the Deputy City Clerk to file the annual Engineer’s Report with the County of Fresno, California, allowing it to be recorded with the attached Engineer’s Report with exhibits.

BACKGROUND:

At its June regular meeting, the City Council took the final step needed to record the LLMD assessments by approving Resolution No. 2024-19. As part of this resolution, the Council directed the City Clerk to record the resolution, the Engineer’s report, together with the diagrams and assessment information.

Upon taking it to the Recorder’s Office, the City Clerk was notified by County staff that their internal rules had changed relating to these and there now had to be specific language explicitly stating the Engineer’s Report was attached; something the City’s resolutions had not had in the past and was not required. They refused to record it without that language.

Therefore staff is bringing this back to Council to modify the original resolution to add the required language. Staff will then record the resolution so the appropriate properties can be assessed.

ATTACHMENTS:

Proposed Modified Resolution No. 2024-19
Engineer’s Report May 2024
27 1 | Page
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-19

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JOAQUIN,

CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENTS FOR THE ANNUAL LEVY FOR 2023-2024 OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 92-3
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2024, pursuant to Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, the Council of the City of San Joaquin did adopt a Resolution of Intention to Levy and Collect the Annual Assessments for Assessment District No. 92-3 of the City of San Joaquin (herein “District); and WHEREAS, the Council did declare in said Resolution of Intention its intention to levy and collect the annual assessments for the maintenance and operation of streets, public landscaping, parks, and street light facilities in the District; and WHEREAS, said Resolution of Intention was duly published and notice given of the public hearing as provided by law.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED, as follows:

1. The Council hereby determines that the territory within the District, whose boundaries are set forth in the Engineer’s Report for the City of San Joaquin Assessment District No. 92-3 for fiscal year 2024-2025, and on file with the City Clerk of the City of San Joaquin will be the territory benefited by the maintenance and servicing of the improvements described in said Engineer’s Report.

2. The public hearing on said annual levy of assessment was held in accordance with law on June 4, 2024. All persons filing protests or requesting to speak and who appeared were heard.

3. The Engineer’s Report, the diagram for the assessment district, and the assessment of the estimated costs of the improvements contained therein, and hereto attached to be recorded, and each and every part of said Report, is adopted and approved; and the assessment upon the land in the District being found to be in proportion to the benefits to be received from the improvements, are finally approved and confirmed as the assessment to pay the costs of said improvements and the expenses incidental thereto.

4. The Council hereby orders the levy of the assessments described in said Resolution of Intention and the Engineer’s Report.

5. The assessment diagram showing the assessment district referred to in said Resolution of Intention and also the subdivisions of land within the District, as contained in said Engineer’s Report, is the diagram of the properties that are to be assessed to pay the District costs. 28 2 | Page

6. The City Clerk is directed to record this resolution, with the attached Engineer’s Report, confirming the diagram and assessment for the annual levy for 2024-2025 of Assessment District No. 92-3 with the County of Fresno.

7. The Engineer of Work is directed to prepare and submit the levy of assessments and all assessment information required by the Fresno County Auditor-Controller / Treasurer-Tax Collector for placement on the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 secured property tax roll on or before August 10, 2024.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, THEREFORE, that the City Council of the City of San Joaquin finds as follows:

A. That the assessment imposed hereby is an assessment imposed exclusively to finance the capital costs of maintenance and operation expenses for sidewalks, streets and integral portions of each of the above-described facilities;
B. That the assessment imposed is hereby imposed at the assessment rate according to the methodology adopted pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment was initially imposed, or that the assessment imposed hereby is imposed at the assessment rate and according to the methodology adopted pursuant to majority voter approval from the voters voting in an election on the issue of such assessment.
* * * * *

CERTIFICATION
The foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Joaquin held on the 4th day of June, 2024 and passed at said meeting by the following vote:

AYES:

NOTES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Julia Hernandez, Mayor
City of San Joaquin
ATTEST:

Matthew Flood, City Clerk
City of San Joaquin
29 Area 1 - San Joaquin CAD (Monthly View)
Calls for Service - Per Hour (Not Self-Initiated)
6 4
1 3
2 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4
5 2
5 4
13 7
8 9
13 4
0 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Time of Day
0 5
10 # of CAD Events
Calls for Service - Type
Call for Service Type # of CAD Events
PATROL CHECKS 41
AMBULANCE REQUEST 34
VEHICLE STOP 33
DIRECTED PATROL CHECK 25
9-1-1 EMERGENCY UNKNOWN 18
FOLLOW-UP 13
SHERIFF'S ACTIVITY LEAGUE 10
CIVIL PROCESS 7
COMMUNITY CONTACT 7
CITIZEN ASSIST 4
AUDIBLE BURGLAR ALARM 4
MISC. INVESTIGATION 4
FIRE 4
PROBATION CONTACT 4
REPORTS 4
DETAIL-SPECIAL DETAIL 3
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 3
MISSING PERSON 21 & UNDER 3
CASE 3
ANIMAL COMPLAINT 3
DISTURBANCE 3
CITIZEN COMPLAINT 2
CHECK WELFARE 2
Evictions 2
FIREWORKS 2
INFORMATION 2
SUBJECT CHECK 2
SURVEILLANCE 2
SUSPICIOUS PERSON 2
THREATENING CALL 2
PUBLIC HAZARD 2
VEHICLE CHECK 2
VEHICLE NUISANCE 1
VANDALISM 1
VEHICLE BURGLARY 1
SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY 1
SHOOTING FROM A VEHICLE 1
INJURED PERSON 1
MENTALLY UNSTABLE PERSON 1
PRIOR PROBLEM 1
REPOSSESSION 1
SEX OFFENSE 1
PROBATION/PAROLE SEARCH 1
PROWLER 1
Drone Request 1
DRUNK DRIVER 1
EQUIPMENT REPAIR 1
MOTOR ASSIST 1
NOISE NUISANCE 1
NON-SPECIFIED MISDEMEANOR 1
GRAND THEFT AUTO 1
GUNSHOTS 1
HIT AND RUN VEHICLE 1
HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT 1
CHILD NEGLECT 1
ATTEMPT PICK UP 1
ABANDONED VEHICLE 1
Totals 281
Calls for Service - By Day (Not Self-Initiated)
Day of Week # of CAD Events
Friday 19
Tuesday 18
Saturday 17
Monday 16
Thursday 15
Sunday 15
Wednesday 14
Totals 114
Total Calls for Service (Not Self-Initiated)
114
San Joaquin
0 25
50 75
100
# of CAD Events
Shots Fired Calls
Call Type # of CAD Events
GUNSHOTS 1
SHOOTING FROM A VEHICLE 1
Totals 2
Total Calls for Service
281
San Joaquin
0 100
200
# of CAD Events
Traffic Accidents
Call Type # of CAD Events
HIT AND RUN VEHICLE 1
Totals 1 28
Total Reports
Generated on August 1, 2024 at 9:11 AM UTC
30 STAFF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
August 6, 2024
TO: City Council
FROM: Elizabeth Cabrera, City Manager
SUBJECT: 2024 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council first review and consider the analysis provided in the ND (Exhibit A) as a CEQA Responsible Agency, then recommend to approve the ATP as submitted, with Chapter 14 pertaining to San Joaquin attached as Exhibit B to the resolution.

Executive Summary
This is a request for the City Council to adopt the 2024 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan (ATP). The Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) prepared the ATP as a comprehensive countywide vision for walking, biking, and other forms of human-powered transportation. The 2024 ATP is an update of the 2019 plan. The ATP plan meets all the current requirements of the California Transportation Commission 2023 Active Transportation Program Guidelines. Chapter 14 of the ATP describes the current conditions and future plans for walking and biking in the City of San Joaquin. FCOG adopted the ATP on May 30, 2024. The ATP is attached as Exhibit B.

CEQA Determination
Per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been prepared by FCOG to assess the adoption of the ATP to evaluate potentially significant environmental impacts and on the basis of that study it was determined that no significant environmental impacts would result from the project. FCOG adopted the Negative Declaration (ND) on May 30, 2024. The City, as a CEQA Responsible Agency, shall consider the ND as prepared prior to making a decision on the ATP. (See Exhibit A).

Background
The ATP was developed to create a comprehensive countywide vision for active transportation and to support applications for new funding to create sidewalks, shared use paths, bike lanes, better street crossings, and other improvements for walking and bicycling. The ATP is a regional document covering Fresno County and the following incorporated cities: Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cove, Parlier, San Joaquin, and Sanger.

Chapter 14 of the ATP describes the current conditions and future plans for walking and biking in the City of San Joaquin.
31 2
The 2024 ATP was prepared to update the 2019 plan to reflect new, modified, or completed transportation projects, include updated information on disadvantaged communities and safety, and comply with current land use and plans within each city and the county. The ATP was prepared in response to the requirements and guidelines of the California Transportation Commission 2023 Active Transportation Program.

Vision and Goals
The ATP was developed with the vision of a complete, safe, and comfortable network of paths, sidewalks, and bikeways that serves all residents of Fresno County. The ATP has been developed to;
• create a network of safe and attractive, sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit;
• create a network of regional bikeways that allows bicyclists to safely ride between cities and other regional destinations;
• create better connections to transit, especially for communities with limited access to other transportation options;
• increase walking and bicycling trips and thus reduce vehicle miles traveled and improve air quality in the region by creating user-friendly facilities; and • increase safety by improving crosswalks and sidewalks and expanding the bikeway network.

Planned Networks and Programs
The ATP includes the following planned walking networks, biking networks, and supporting facilities for the Fresno County Region:
• Walking and Biking Networks
• Crossing and Intersection Improvements
• High Volume Regional Connecting Roads
• Bicycle Parking
Several improvements and other supporting programs are recommended by the ATP. Supporting programs include the following:
• Education and Encouragement
• Personal Safety and Lighting
• Pedestrian and Bicyclist Counts
• Wayfinding
• Maintenance
• Expenditure Tracking
Chapter 14 of the ATP describes planned networks for the City of San Joaquin, which include shared-use paths, bike lanes and routes, sidewalks, bicycle parking, and crosswalk improvements.

The planned walking and biking networks for San Joaquin are summarized as follows:
• 1.9 Miles of Sidewalk
32 3
• 2.9 Miles of Shared Use Path (Class I)
• 1.2 Miles of Bike Lane (Class II)
• 0.8 Miles of Bike Route (Class III)
• 1.0 Miles of Separated Bikeway (Class IV)
The proposed networks are intended to connect the existing multi-use paths, provide access to key destinations and recreation facilities, add sidewalk and crossing improvements near schools and across busy roads. The ATP describes that the facilities all support equitable transportation for disadvantaged communities, based on serval indicators of California’s Active Transportation Program. Potential funding sources for future improvements are included as Appendix F of the ATP.

Public Outreach and Engagement
Community engagement for the ATP was conducted in order to ensure that projects related to walking and biking would serve the needs of the community. Details on existing conditions throughout the county were collected at a variety of public avenues. The City of San Joaquin residents were able to provide their input on their transportation needs at the San Joaquin Food Distribution on July 13, 2023. Interviews with local stakeholder groups meetings were held to understand the community’s concerns and needs. Additionally, two virtual countywide meetings were held on December 4 and 6, 2023.

Engagement efforts also included a regional project website, an interactive map and a public survey. Additionally, the ATP was also advertised via social media posts in order to receive further input through the public survey and the interactive map. Comments were requested and received in English and Spanish.

City Plans and Policies Related to Active Transportation The following city plans and policies are relevant to biking and walking in San Joaquin:
• City of San Joaquin General Plan (2014)
• City of San Joaquin 2040 Community Plan (2011)
• City of San Joaquin Mobility and Revitalization Plan (2013) • Municipal Code of San Joaquin
33 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-29

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF SAN JOAQUIN, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE
ADOPTION OF THE 2024 FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR THE CITY OF

SAN JOAQUIN
WHEREAS, the Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) prepared the 2024 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan (ATP); and
WHEREAS, Chapter 14 of the ATP describes the current conditions and future plans for walking and biking in the city of San Joaquin; and
WHEREAS, the ATP fulfills each requirement in the California Transportation Commission 2023 Active Transportation Program Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the ATP was adopted by the FCOG Policy Board on May 30, 2024; and WHEREAS, on August 6, 2024, the City Council of the City of San Joaquin conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the ATP and at the hearing, all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received and considered the staff report and all the information, evidence, and testimony presented in connection with the ATP; and WHEREAS, per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been prepared by the Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) to assess the adoption of the ATP to evaluate potentially significant environmental impacts and on the basis of that study it was determined that no significant environmental impacts would result from the project; and WHEREAS, on May 30, 2024 FCOG adopted the Negative Declaration (ND); and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the analysis provided in the Initial Study and ND and considered the environmental effects of the project as shown in the ND prior to making a decision on the ATP; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of San Joaquin finds, determines, and resolves as follows:

1. The City Council finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals in this Resolution are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

2. The City Council has considered the Negative Declaration for the Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan prior to making a decision on project (attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference and also on file in the City Clerk’s Office.)
34 3. The City Council approves the ATP in its entirety, incorporated herein by reference, with Chapter 14 related to San Joaquin attached hereto as Exhibit B.

4. This Resolution is effective upon adoption.

The forgoing resolution was adopted at a regular council meeting of the City Council of the City of San Joaquin the 6th day of August 2024, and passed at said meeting with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________
Julia Hernandez, Mayor
City of San Joaquin
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Matt Flood, City Clerk
City of San Joaquin
Exhibit A: Final Negative Declaration Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan Exhibit B: Fresno Council of Governments 2024 Active Transportation Plan Chapter 35 36
Firebaugh, Fowler, Fresno City, Huron, Kingsburg, Orange Cove, Parlier, Reedley, Sanger, San Joaquin, Selma.

None.

Clovis, Coalinga, Kerman, Mendota, Fresno County.
37 FINAL NEGATIVE

DECLARATION
Fresno County Regional
Active Transportation Plan
May 2024
PREPARED BY:

Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc.
113 N. Church Street, Suite 310
Visalia, CA 93291
PREPARED FOR:

Fresno Council of Governments
2035 Tulare Street #201
Fresno, CA 93721
38 EXHIBIT A
Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc.

Final Initial Study/ Negative Declaration
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan
Prepared for:

Fresno Council of Governments
2035 Tulare Street #201
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 724-9218
Contact: Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Prepared by:

Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc.
113 N. Church Street, Suite 302
Visalia, CA 93291
(559) 840-4414
Contact: Travis Crawford, AICP
May 2024
39 TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION 1-1

1.1 Project Summary 1-1

1.2 Document Format 1-1
CHAPTER TWO – PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2-1

2.1 Project Background 2-1

2.2 Goals, Policies & Vision 2-2

2.3 Project Location 2-3

2.4 Setting and Existing Facilities 2-5

2.5 Project Description 2-6

2.6 Program vs Project Level CEQA Analysis 2-13

2.7 Other Required Approvals 2-15
CHAPTER THREE – INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 3-1

3.1 Environmental Checklist Form 3-1

3.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 3-3

3.3 Determination 3-4
I. Aesthetics 3-5
II. Agricultural and Forest Resources 3-8
III. Air Quality 3-11
IV. Biological Resources 3-16
V. Cultural Resources 3-20
VI. Energy 3-22
VII. Geology and Soils 3-25
VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3-29
IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 3-32
X. Hydrology and Water Quality 3-36
XI. Land Use and Planning 3-41
XII. Mineral Resources 3-43
XIII. Noise 3-45
XIV. Population and Housing 3-47
XV. Public Services 3-49
XV. Recreation 3-51
XVII. Transportation / Traffic 3-53
XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources 3-56
XIX. Utilities and Service Systems 3-58
XX. Wildfire 3-61
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance 3-64
CHAPTER FOUR – PREPARERS AND CONSULTATIONS 4-1

LIST OF FIGURES
1 – ATP Regional Location 2-4

APPENDICES
A- Active Transportation Plan
B- Comment Letters Received
40 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION
41 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 1 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 1-1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Summary
This document is the Final Initial Study / Negative Declaration (IS/ND) on the potential environmental effects of the adoption of the Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan (ATP or Project). The proposed 2024 ATP is an update of the 2019 plan. It reflects projects that have been newly identified, modified, or completed since the release of the first plan; updated information on disadvantaged communities and safety data; current land use and plans in each city and the county; and updates to reflect best active transportation planning practices. The proposed Project is more fully described in Chapter Two – Project Description.

Note: This Final Initial Study / Negative Declaration (IS/ND) consists of the publicly circulated Draft IS/ND (published 4/11/2024 to 5/13/2024) with the addition of minor clarifying revisions, and the addition of Appendix B. Appendix B provides copies of the three comment letters received on the Draft IS/ND. Based on these comment letters, minor revisions to the document were made in Chapter 3.3 – Air Quality and Chapter 3.4 – Biological Resources. The minor changes did not result in any significant impacts nor did they increase the severity of a previous impact determination. All changes made to the Draft IS/ND are shown in underline for added text. There was no deleted text.

Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG or Fresno COG) will act as the Lead Agency for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines.

1.2 Document Format
This IS/ND contains four chapters, and Appendices. Section 1, Introduction, provides an overview of the project and the CEQA environmental documentation process. Chapter 2, Project Description, provides a detailed description of project objectives and components. Chapter 3, Initial Study Checklist, presents the CEQA checklist and environmental analysis for all impact areas, mandatory findings of significance, and feasible mitigation measures. If the proposed Project does not have the potential to significantly impact a given issue area, the relevant section provides a brief discussion of the reasons why no impacts are expected. If the Project could have a potentially significant impact on a resource, the issue area discussion provides a description of potential impacts, and appropriate mitigation measures and/or permit requirements that would 42 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 1 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 1-2
reduce those impacts to a less than significant level. Chapter 4, List of Preparers, provides a list of key personnel involved in the preparation of the IS/ND.

Environmental impacts are separated into the following categories:

Potentially Significant Impact. This category is applicable if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant, and no feasible mitigation measures can be identified to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

Less Than Significant After Mitigation Incorporated. This category applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures would reduce an effect from a “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact”. The lead agency must describe the mitigation measure(s), and briefly explain how they would reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses may be cross-referenced).

Less Than Significant Impact. This category is identified when the project would result in impacts below the threshold of significance, and no mitigation measures are required.

No Impact. This category applies when a project would not create an impact in the specific environmental issue area. “No Impact” answers do not require a detailed explanation if they are adequately supported by the information sources cited by the lead agency, which show that the impact does not apply to the specific project (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone).

A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis.)
Regardless of the type of CEQA document that must be prepared, the basic purpose of the CEQA process as set forth in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15002(a) is to:
(1) Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities.
(2) Identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced. (3) Prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible.
43 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 1 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 1-3
(4) Disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved.

According to Section 15070(b), a Negative Declaration is appropriate if it is determined that:
(1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and
(2) There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment.

The Initial Study contained in Section Three of this document contains the analysis to support the determination that the environmental impacts of the proposed Project are less than significant and therefore a Negative Declaration will be adopted.
44 Chapter 2

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
45 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-1
Project Description

2.1 Project Background
The Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG or Fresno COG) has developed an Active Transportation Plan (ATP or Plan) with the intent of providing a comprehensive document outlining the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. The purpose of the ATP is to equip Fresno COG’s member agencies (County of Fresno and the fifteen incorporated cities of Clovis, Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Fresno, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cove, Parlier, Reedley, San Joaquin, Sanger, and Selma) with the tools to better compete for funding sources that support ATPs and related projects. The ATP is a planning tool and thus, no development will occur with its adoption. Future development under the ATP will be subject to site-specific CEQA and environmental review. The proposed Project area is Fresno County, and no land designation changes are proposed at this time. The ATP is included in this document as Appendix A.

Four cities in Fresno County (Clovis, Fresno, Reedley, and Selma) have recently updated or are currently updating their own active transportation plans. This plan supports connectivity to those cities as part of regional walking and biking networks.

Fresno COG created the ATP in coordination with its member agencies, the general public, and stakeholder groups such as local community group leaders, social media posts, and online surveys. Fresno COG encouraged public participation through open-house format workshops, as well as an online crowdsourced interactive map. The public was also invited to comment on the draft ATP projects during a public review and comment period.

As discussed in greater detail in Section 2.6 (Program vs Project Level CEQA Analysis), specific development is not being proposed under this ATP, and adoption of this CEQA document would not authorize any development. Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. 46 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-2

2.2 Goals, Policies & Vision
The ATP is guided by the following vision: A complete, safe, and comfortable network of paths, sidewalks, and bikeways that serves all residents of Fresno County. Specifically, this plan has been developed to:
• create a network of safe and attractive, sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit;
• create a network of regional bikeways that allows bicyclists to safely ride between cities and other regional destinations;
• create better connections to transit, especially for communities with limited access to other transportation options;
Through implementation of the ATP, Fresno COG seeks to achieve the following goals:
• increase walking and bicycling trips and thus reduce vehicle miles traveled and improve air quality in the region by creating user-friendly facilities; and • increase safety by improving crosswalks and sidewalks and expanding the bikeway network.

Many local, regional, state, and federal plans and other documents were reviewed in development of the ATP. These plans and documents contain goals and policies as well as specific requirements related to active transportation in Fresno County.

Local Jurisdictions
Each jurisdiction has its own policies and requirements related to bicycling and walking. The documents containing these policies and requirements generally include:
• Existing bicycle and pedestrian plans
• General plans
• Standard drawings
• Municipal codes
• Specific plans and other plans
Specific local plans and documents are discussed in the Appendix C of the ATP.

Regional Plans
The following regional plans were also important in the development of the ATP:
47 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-3
• Fresno Council of Governments Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy
• Fresno County Transportation Authority Measure C
• Fresno Council of Governments Transportation Needs Assessment » Fresno Council of Governments Regional Safety Plan
• Golden State Corridor Design Plans
• Caltrans Bicycle Guide for District 6
• Caltrans District 6 Active Transportation Plan
State and Federal Plans and Policies
Several state and federal plans and other documents contain goals, policies, and requirements relevant to the ATP.
• California State Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
• California Green Building Code
• California Assembly Bill 32
• California Senate Bill 375
• California Assembly Bill 1358
• California Assembly Bill 743
• US DOT Policy Statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodation Regulations and Recommendations
• US Americans with Disabilities Act

2.3 Project Location
The various components/improvements recommended by the ATP are located throughout Fresno County. These recommendations cover incorporated cities, unincorporated communities, and County islands. Four cities in Fresno County (Clovis, Fresno, Reedley, and Selma) have recently updated or are currently updating their own active transportation plans. This plan supports connectivity to those cities as part of regional walking and biking networks. Figure 1 is a map showing the location of Fresno County and incorporated cities and unincorporated communities covered by this ATP, including cities that have their own ATPs. 48 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-4
Figure 1
ATP Regional Location
49 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-5

2.4 Setting and Existing Facilities
Environmental Setting
Fresno County is located near the center of the San Joaquin Valley, stretching approximately 100 miles (east to west) from the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the Coast Range Foothills. The County is bordered by the counties of San Benito, Merced, Madera, Mono, Inyo, Tulare, Kings, and Monterey.

There are 15 incorporated cities in Fresno County and several unincorporated communities within an area of approximately 6,000 square miles. Fresno County’s population as of January 1, 2023 was estimated to be 1,011,499. There are approximately 346,456 housing units in the County.1 Approximately 66% of the County’s population resides in the cities of Fresno and Clovis. Outside of the cities, communities, and mountainous areas, most of the land in the County is flat and is used for agricultural production.

Existing Bicycle / Pedestrian Conditions
The existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities provide access to destinations throughout the County and serve as recreational assets themselves. These existing networks include shared-use paths, bike lanes and routes, sidewalks and crosswalk improvements. Table 1 shows current bicycle and pedestrian facilities by type (excluding the jurisdictions that have individual ATPs).

The ATP provides a summary of existing bicycle and pedestrian trips within the County.

According to the ATP, the mode share of pedestrians for the journey to work in the County is approximately 1.5%, up from 0.9% at the time of the 2019 ATP, and for bicycles is approximately

0.4%, down from 1.9% at the time of the 2019 ATP.
2 1 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2023, California Department of Finance. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020- 2023/. Accessed March 2024.
2 Table 3-1: Trips to Work by Walking and Bicycling, Fresno COG 2024 Draft ATP, February 2024. 50 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-6
Table 1
Summary of Existing Walking and Bicycling Facilities (in miles) Jurisdiction Shared Use
Path (Class I)
Bike Lane
(Class II)
Bike Route
(Class III)
Separated
Bikeway
(Class IV)
Sidewalks
Coalinga 2.0 4.7 0.0 0.2 83.5
Firebaugh 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.6
Fowler 0.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 49.2
Huron 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 19.6
Kerman 0.9 6.5 2.4 0.0 85.0
Kingsburg 2.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 79.1
Mendota 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 47.1
Orange Cove 1.2 1.1 0.0 0.0 33.7
Parlier 1.1 6.0 0.0 0.0 57.7
San Joaquin 0.9 1.1 0.0 0.0 14.7
Sanger 2.1 11.6 0.0 0.0 135.2
Unincorporated
Fresno County 3.7 88.3 0.0 0.0 133.1
Total: 16.9 129.5 2.4 0.2 771.5
Source: Fresno COG Draft ATP, February 2024

2.5 Project Description
The proposed project under CEQA is the adoption of the Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan. The 2024 plan is an update of the 2019 plan. It reflects projects that have been newly identified, modified, or completed since the release of the first plan; updated information on disadvantaged communities and safety data; current land use and plans in each city and the county; and updates to reflect best active transportation planning practices.

The ATP itself contains various programs, policies, and recommendations pertaining to the development of pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The ATP provides a full description of 51 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-7
conceptual and proposed improvements throughout the County (See Appendix A), which are summarized herein.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Networks
The proposed pedestrian and bicycle networks are designed to fulfill the vision for walking, bicycling, and supporting facilities and programs for the Fresno County region. The build-out of pedestrian and bicycle networks are the long-term vision of the active transportation facilities for the region. The networks include shared-use paths, bike lanes and routes, sidewalks, and crosswalk improvements. The proposed networks are designed to connect to neighborhoods in each community, to provide access to key destinations, and to serve as recreational assets. Details of each jurisdiction’s networks are presented in Chapters 5 to 17 of the ATP and are summarized in Table 2.

The networks were developed with the following primary considerations:
• Connectivity to key destinations, especially schools, parks, and civic buildings • Collision history
• Previous plans
• Connections to adjacent jurisdictions’ networks
• Discussions with jurisdiction staff, school district staff, and law enforcement • Public comment
Table 2 summarizes the proposed network recommendations of the ATP. 52 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-8
Table 2
Summary of Planned Walking and Bicycling Facilities (In Miles) Jurisdiction Shared Use
Path (Class I)
Bike Lane
(Class II)
Bike Route
(Class III)
Separated
Bikeway
(Class IV)
Sidewalks
Coalinga 7.6 4.5 5.7 0.0 3.0
Firebaugh 5.7 8.1 2.7 4.8 2.3
Fowler 8.1 5.0 2.5 1.2 2.6
Huron 3.1 3.6 0.3 0.8 2.6
Kerman 1.6 16.2 6.9 0.0 1.0
Kingsburg 2.0 11.8 0.5 0.0 5.1
Mendota 5.5 9.7 0.7 0.0 1.7
Orange Cove 3.4 14.1 0.0 0.0 3.6
Parlier 1.8 3.9 1.4 4.3 1.8
San Joaquin 2.9 1.2 0.8 1.0 1.9
Sanger 14.7 25.6 1.0 0.0 7.5
Unincorporated
Fresno County 218.5 346.6 266.9 19.0 44.8
Total: 274.9 450.3 289.4 31.1 77.9
Source: Fresno COG Draft ATP, February 2024
Crossing and Intersection Improvements
Several crossing improvement projects are also proposed in Chapters 5 to 17 of the ATP to improve pedestrian comfort and safety. The decision to install a marked crosswalk or other crosswalk enhancement should take into account good engineering judgement, engineering study, and/or other necessary considerations as appropriate for each individual location.

Some of these considerations include:
• Pedestrian travel demand. Demand should include both existing demand and latent demand, the increase in pedestrians that would result from the improvement. 53 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-9
• Service of a facility or use that generates higher pedestrian travel or serves a vulnerable population (for example, children, elderly, persons with disabilities). This may include schools, hospitals, senior centers, recreation/community centers, libraries, parks, or trails.

Service of such facilities can justify pedestrian improvements to areas of demand less than 20 pedestrians/ hour.
• Sight distance requirements, using appropriate stopping sight distance guidance from AASHTO’s A Policy on Geometric Design for Highways and Streets or the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.
• Delay to pedestrian movements.
• Distance to nearest crossing.
• Guidance of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and FHWA’s Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations High Volume Regional Connecting Roads
The region is connected by many roads that serve large volumes of traffic, often at high speeds.

Where these roads pass through cities, speeds are generally slower, but traffic volumes are frequently still high, and the roads must roads serve pedestrians, bicyclists, and local vehicle traffic as well as traffic moving between communities. Careful design is required to ensure that these roads serve all users, are safe for all users, and do not serve as a barrier to bicyclists and pedestrians.

To serve the needs of all of these different users, Caltrans developed Main Street, California: A Guide for Improving Community and Transportation Vitality, most recently updated in 2013.

This document provides guidance to create streets that are multimodal, livable, and sustainable.

It provided good guidance for use when regional roads pass through cities. The ATP contains policies and strategies to allow for components of the ATP to occur on high volume roads. In rural areas outside of cities and unincorporated communities, bike lanes, separated bikeways, or shared-used paths should be used to support walking and biking.

Bicycle Parking
Current bicycle parking and recommended additions to bicycle parking are presented for each jurisdiction in Chapters 5 to 17 of the ATP.

Supporting Programs: Wayfinding
Wayfinding signage can be used on both bicycle and pedestrian facilities to direct users to connecting facilities and key destinations. Good wayfinding signs can also encourage pedestrians 54 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-10
and bicyclists to visit local business. These signs provide the most value at path junctions and at intersections of key bicycling and walking routes. Chapter 9B of the California MUTCD provides guidance on sign design and installation. These standard signs may also be augmented by signs depicting distances in miles to encourage walking and bicycling. Cities such as Kingsburg and neighborhoods or regions with distinctive branding can also include this branding in these signs.

Most jurisdictions do not have wayfinding signage. Good wayfinding signs can direct users to connecting facilities and key destinations also encourage pedestrians and bicyclists to visit local business. These signs are recommended at trail junctions and at intersections of key bicycling and walking routes.

Supporting Programs
Chapter 3 of the ATP recommends several other programs intended to maximize the success of the ATP, including educational programs, personal safety and lighting resources, and maintenance programs, pedestrian and bicyclist counts, and expenditure tracking.

Implementation
Implementation of the planned bikeway and pedestrian network is anticipated to occur in multiple ways:
• Active transportation projects pursued to implement the plan • In conjunction with adjacent land development projects as each jurisdiction requires those projects to construct roadway and sidewalk frontage improvements in accordance with jurisdiction standards and the planned facilities identified in this plan • In conjunction with maintenance and capacity enhancement projects, such as slurry seals, pavement reconstruction, roadway widening, or sidewalk rehabilitation projects Implementation will require many years to complete; implementation of priority projects will be targeted for completion in the next five to ten years. Implementation of each project is dependent upon availability and acquisition of funding. Projects requiring land acquisition or utility relocation will require extra time to implement. Improvements associated with work on adjacent roadways or development of adjacent land uses will provide opportunities for implementation relatively easily or at lower cost than if implemented separately. In these cases, lower priority improvements may be implemented before higher-priority improvements, depending on the location of these land development and roadway projects. Implementation of each project is also dependent on detailed feasibility and design studies based on local conditions. 55 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-11
Completion of projects in this plan should be reported by jurisdiction staff to the city councils and board of supervisors and on each city’s website. Fresno COG will update this plan periodically to reflect changing conditions and needs and progress toward completion.

Prioritization
The elements of these networks were prioritized as “High Priority” or “Other” (not high priority) for all jurisdictions based on several criteria:
• Proximity to key destinations, including schools, parks, bus stops, and activity centers • Collision locations
• Disadvantaged community indicators
• Senior and youth populations
• Public comment
• Judgement of local jurisdiction staff
Lists of projects with priorities are provided in Appendix D (Project Priorities and Cost Estimates) of the ATP.

Costs
The estimated costs to implement each type of facility are provided in Appendix D of the ATP and summarized in Table 3 below. Summarized costs for each jurisdiction are provided in Chapters 5 to 17. On-street bike routes and bike lanes are the least expensive to construct per mile, while separated bikeways, sidewalks, and shared-use paths are most expensive to construct. If roads must be widened, utilities relocated, or land acquired to implement any of these facilities, costs will increase. However, many of these facilities may be implemented during development of adjacent land uses or in conjunction with other projects. Therefore, some of these costs will not be directly borne by the jurisdiction.

Project cost estimates are based on local unit cost estimates. These estimates were developed based on relevant project experience in the area. Assumptions for each bikeway type and details of these estimates are described in Appendix D. Note that these are high-level cost estimates, therefore more detailed study and design of individual project will be required to refine them. 56 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-12
Table 3
Project Cost Estimates
Facility Type Cost Per Mile High Priority Total
Sidewalk $369,600 $10,733,800 $28,709,100
Shared-Use Path
(Class I)
$955,700 $74,745,297 $262,569,018
Bike Lane (Class II)* $401,400 $58,500,036 $180,674,154 Bike Route (Class III)* $16,000 $947,040 $4,628,000
Separated Bikeway
(Class IV)*
$633,600 $13,185,216 $19,698,624
Intersection
improvements $5,566,900 $10,761,500
Overcrossing $630,000 $630,000
Total $164,308,289 $507,103,396
* Distance measured by centerline
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023, Mark Thomas & Company, 2023 Unit costs for other equipment, including installation, are presented in Table 4 below.

Table 4
Unit Costs for Other Equipment
Equipment Type Cost
Bike Rack (each) $2,900
Wayfinding Signage (each) $790
Lighting (single street light) $15,000
Funding
Regional, state, and federal funding is available for walking and biking projects and programs.

Appendix E of the ATP, Funding Sources, summarizes these funding sources including their applicability to projects, planning efforts, and programs proposed in this plan. 57 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-13
The following funding sources are recommended as the most applicable for the projects in this plan:

Regional
• Fresno County Transportation Authority Measure C » SJVAPCD Bikeway Incentive Program
State
• Active Transportation Program » Highway Safety Improvement Program • California Department of Parks & Recreation Recreational Trails Program Federal
• Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) Grant Program » Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program • Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Program » Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program » Reconnecting Communities: Highways to Boulevards • Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation (SMART) Grant Programs » Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Grant Program
• Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-Saving Transportation (PROTECT) Grant Program
In addition to these funding programs, two other funding sources may be considered:
• Local Developer Fees: Local fees from land development projects can provide match funding or full implementation of projects where there is a nexus to the project. • Federal and State Earmarks: Opportunities to secure funding through federal and state legislation via earmarks has occurred at both the federal and state levels. There may be an opportunity to highlight the need for a project with Congressional Representatives and State Assembly members and Senators. Given the often short time frames for consideration, consider proactively developing a fact sheet with funding needs and benefits for potential projects in advance of a request.

2.6 Program vs Project Level CEQA Analysis
As discussed previously, the Project (under CEQA), is the adoption of the proposed ATP. The ATP is a program/policy-level document, which means it does not provide project-specific 58 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-14
construction details that would allow for project-level CEQA analysis. Furthermore, specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and adoption of this CEQA document would not authorize any development. Information such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings will be required in order for future “project-level” CEQA analysis to occur. Therefore, this CEQA document has been prepared at a “program-level”. Under CEQA, a programmatic document is prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and/or for a project that will be implemented over a long period of time. This CEQA document, prepared at a program level, is therefore adequate for adoption of the ATP by Fresno COG.

As Lead Agency, Fresno COG is responsible for adoption of this CEQA document. In addition, if a Responsible Agency (see list of responsible agencies on page 3-2) decides to approve the ATP, it should file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15096).

Implementation of the physical components of the ATP will occur over years to decades as funding and/or approval occur. Many of the individual projects contained in the ATP will be subject to various CEQA Exemptions, while others may likely be analyzed using a Mitigated Negative Declaration, or additional National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation depending on funding source. The level of documentation will be decided by the implementing agency. Table 5 below provides typical examples of the type of CEQA documentation that may be required for certain types of projects.

Table 5
Typical Environmental Requirements
Project Type CEQA
Exemption
Initial Study / Mitigated
Negative Declaration
NEPA / other
technical studies
Signage, bicycle parking,
minor striping, sidewalk
improvements, some lighting
X
Class III Bike Routes X
Class II Bike Lanes X X X
Class I Bikeways (trails,
paseos, paths);
bicycle/pedestrian bridges
X X
59 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 2 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 2-15
CEQA Exemptions
A typical exemption for bicycle/pedestrian projects is:
• Section 15301 (c) – Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities.

Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declarations
An Initial Study and Negative – or Mitigated Negative Declaration may be required when a project may have a significant impact on the environment. Examples include projects that involve construction in a potentially biological / culturally sensitive area, have potential impacts to existing traffic, have negative aesthetic impacts, or other reasons. Although it is not anticipated that future projects would require full-scale environmental impact reports (EIR), if significant and unavoidable impacts were to occur as a result of a project, an EIR may be required.

NEPA and other technical studies
When a project will be constructed using federal aid transportation funds, it may trigger NEPA requirements. Federal aid transportation funding in particular requires coordination through Caltrans, which can result in the preparation of a Preliminary Environmental Screening (PES) Form, and Environmental Assessment (EA), and/or the preparation of other technical studies (biological, cultural, traffic, etc.).

2.7 Other Required Approvals
This ATP meets all the current requirements of the statewide Active Transportation Program guidelines (as described in Appendix A of the ATP)
The proposed project would include, but not be limited to, the following regulatory requirements:
• The adoption of this Negative Declaration by Fresno COG. • Adoption by the Responsible Agencies (CEQA Guidelines Section 15096). • Compliance with other federal, state and local requirements. • The ATP is also intended to be used by the Fresno Council of Governments to identify projects for the Fresno County Regional Transportation Plan and support the use of funds provided through the Fresno County Measure C program
60 Chapter 3

IMPACT ANALYSIS
61 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-1
Initial Study Checklist

3.1 Environmental Checklist Form
Project title:

Adoption of the 2024 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan Lead agency name and address:

Fresno Council of Governments
2035 Tulare Street, #201
Fresno, CA 93721
Contact person and phone number:

Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
[email protected]
Fresno Council of Governments
(559) 233-4148 (ext. 241)
Project location:

The various component/improvements recommended by the ATP are located throughout Fresno County. Figure 1 shows the approximate boundaries of the ATP.

The ATP (Appendix A) provides location maps of potential project components.

Project sponsor’s name/address:

Fresno Council of Governments
2035 Tulare Street, #201
Fresno, CA 93721
General plan designation:

Various – located throughout the County
Zoning:

Various – located throughout the County
62 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-2
Description of project:

The proposed project is the adoption of the Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan. The ATP itself contains various programs, policies, and recommendations pertaining to the development of pedestrian, bicycle, and rolling (by wheelchair or scooter) facilities.

The 2024 plan is an update of the 2019 ATP plan. It reflects projects that have been newly identified, modified, or completed since the release of the first plan; updated information on disadvantaged communities and safety data; current land use and plans in each city and the county; and updates to reflect best active transportation planning practices.

The proposed networks are designed to build upon existing shared-use paths; to connect regional routes and paths; to provide access to key destinations; and to serve as recreational assets. See Section Two – Project Description.

Surrounding land uses/setting:

Various – located throughout the County
Other public agencies whose approval or consultation is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, participation agreements):
• Fresno Council of Governments (Lead Agency - CEQA adoption) • California State Clearinghouse
• Responsible Agencies:
o County of Fresno
o City of Coalinga
o City of Firebaugh
o City of Fowler
o City of Huron
o City of Kerman
o City of Kingsburg
o City of Mendota
o City of Orange Cove
o City of Parlier
o City of San Joaquin
o City of Sanger
63 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-3

3.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics
Agriculture Resources
and Forest Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology / Water
Quality
Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation
Tribal Cultural
Resources
Utilities / Service
Systems
Wildfire
Mandatory Findings of
Significance

3.3 Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 64 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-4
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
Date
65 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-5
I. AESTHETICS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County has a diverse visual landscape that gradually changes from east to west. Starting from the east are the Sierra Nevada Mountains which are rich in coniferous forests and provide scenic views of the varied topography. There are several large reservoirs scattered throughout the Sierra which provide recreational as well as scenic opportunities. The San Joaquin and Kings Rivers, which originate high in the Sierra Mountains, are the County’s two major rivers. Two scenic highways, Highway 168 and Highway 180, extend down from the Sierras and terminate in the Eastside Valley area. In addition, there are several scenic drives that wind their way through the Sierra and Sierra Foothill areas. The County’s built environment is located throughout the valley and much of it located along the Highway 99 corridor. Agricultural lands consisting of orchards, vineyards, ranches, and various row crops start on the fringe of these communities and extend to cover much of the valley floor. These large farms provide a sense of open space, emphasize the county’s rural and farming heritage, and allow motorists opportunities for unrestricted panoramic views. The Coastal Foothills, containing gentle rolling hills with scattered 66 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-6
oak trees, extend westward past Interstate 5. Due to the continuous unrestrictive views of adjacent coastal foothills, Interstate 5 (I-5) is an officially designated scenic highway. 1 RESPONSES
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. Construction and operation of project components contained in the ATP could potentially impact scenic resources and vistas; degrade the existing visual character of the area; and/or create a new source of light or glare. Although most of the project components are at ground level and would not impose a significant visual impact, there are components such as signage, trail lighting, bicycle racks, pedestrian bridges etc. that could potentially impact visual resources. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential impacts to aesthetic resources.

Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents. 1 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Page 4.16-1.
67 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-7
Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any aesthetic impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development. Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
68 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-8
II. AGRICULTURE AND

FOREST RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
b. Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code section
51104(g))?
d. Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
e. Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
69 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-9

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County is differentiated into five geographical regions including: the Coast Range; Westside Valley; Eastside Valley; Sierra foothills; and Sierra Mountains. Most of the high-quality farmland areas are located in the Eastside Valley. Land west of I-5 (the Coast Range foothills area) is generally used for cattle grazing and mineral extraction, although there is also a small amount of irrigated fruit and nut tree crops, row crops, and dry crop farming in that area. The Westside Valley is typically used for row and field crop production, with some fruit and nut tree crops.

The Sierra Foothill area supports cattle grazing and citrus production at the lower elevations.

Land in the Sierra Nevada area is not typically farmed; however, it is used for cattle grazing.

Along the west side of the City of Fresno, Clovis, Sanger, and Reedley, and elsewhere in the Eastside Valley, farms generally grow tree fruits, almonds, and raisin grapes. On the west side of SR 99, farms mostly grow grapes, almonds, apples, and alfalfa. Near the Fresno Slough area of the Eastside Valley, row crops are predominant. Near I-5, as well as on the North and South Valley area, almonds, row crops, field crops, apples, and some grapes are grown.

Farming and agricultural related businesses comprise a significant component of the local economy. Several factors contribute to the success of agricultural operations in Fresno County, not the least of which are excellent soil and climatic growing conditions. Workforce and transportation availability are also key factors.2

RESPONSES
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? 2 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Page 4.3-2.
70 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-10
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. Construction and operation of project components contained in the ATP could potentially impact agricultural resources; conflict with Williamson Act parcels; and/or impact forest land resources. Although most of the project components would occur within existing right of way and outside of agricultural or forest land, it is conceivable that a new trail or path could be placed on or near such lands. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential impacts to agricultural and forest resources.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any agricultural impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
71 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-11
III. AIR QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan?
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d. Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors or adversely affecting a
substantial number of people)?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County lies within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, which is managed by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD or Air District). National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) have been established for the following criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter (PM10 andPM2.5), and lead (Pb). The CAAQS also set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and visibility.

Air quality plans or attainment plans are used to bring the applicable air basin into attainment with all state and federal ambient air quality standards designed to protect the health and safety of residents within that air basin. Areas are classified under the Federal Clean Air Act as either “attainment”, “non-attainment”, or “extreme nonattainment” areas for each criteria pollutant based on whether the NAAQS have been achieved or not. Attainment relative to the State standards is determined by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The San Joaquin Valley is designated as a State anon-attainment area and Federal extreme non-attainment area for O3, a State and Federal non-attainment area for 72 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-12
PM2.5, a State non-attainment area for PM10, and Federal and State attainment area for CO, SO2, NO2, and Pb.

Standards and attainment status for listed pollutants in the Air District can be found in Table 1. 3 Note that both state and federal standards are presented.

Table 1
Standards and Attainment Status for Listed Pollutants in the Air District Federal Standard California Standard
Ozone 0.07 ppm (8-hr avg, 2015) 0.07 ppm (8-hr avg)

0.09 ppm (1-hr avg)
Carbon Monoxide 9.0 ppm (8-hr avg)

35.0 ppm (1-hr avg)

9.0 ppm (8-hr avg)

20.0 ppm (1-hr avg)
Nitrogen Dioxide 0.053 ppm (annual avg)
100 ppb (1-hr avg)

0.30 ppm (annual avg)

0.18 ppm (1-hr avg)
Sulfur Dioxide 0.5 ppm (3-hr avg)

0.075 ppm (1-hr avg)

0.04 ppm (24-hr avg)

0.25 ppm (1hr avg)
Lead 0.15 µg/m3 (rolling 3-month avg) 1.5 µg/m3 (30-day avg) Particulate Matter (PM10) 150 µg/m3 (24-hr avg)
Revoked (annual)
20 µg/m3 (annual avg)
50 µg/m3 (24-hr avg)
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) (2012 standard)
12 µg/m3 (annual avg)
35 µg/m3 (24-hr avg)
12 µg/m3 (annual avg)
μg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
Additional State regulations include:

CARB Portable Equipment Registration Program – This program was designed to allow owners and operators of portable engines and other common construction or farming equipment to register their equipment under a statewide program so they may operate it statewide without the need to obtain a permit from the local air district.

U.S. EPA/CARB Off-Road Mobile Sources Emission Reduction Program – The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires CARB to achieve a maximum degree of emissions reductions from off3 Ambient Air Quality Standards & Attainment Status, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. https://ww2.valleyair.org/air-quality-information/ambient-air-quality-standards-valley-attainmnet-status/. Accessed March 2024. 73 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-13
road mobile sources to attain State Ambient Air Quality Standards (SAAQS); off- road mobile sources include most construction equipment. Tier 1 standards for large compression-ignition engines used in off-road mobile sources went into effect in California in 1996. These standards, along with ongoing rulemaking, address emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and toxic particulate matter from diesel engines. CARB is currently developing a control measure to reduce diesel PM and NOX emissions from existing off-road diesel equipment throughout the state.

California Global Warming Solutions Act – Established in 2006, Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) required that California’s GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. The State’s regulatory program implementing the 2008 Scoping Plan is now fully mature. All regulations envisioned in the Scoping Plan have been adopted by the responsible agencies and the effectiveness of those regulations have been estimated by the agencies during the adoption process and then are tracked to verify their effectiveness after implementation. The Governor Brown, in the introduction to Executive Order B-30-15, states “California is on track to meet or exceed the current target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as established in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32).” The progress was evident in emission inventories prepared by CARB, which showed that the State inventory dropped below 1990 levels for the first time in 2016.4 The State projects that it will meet the 2020 target and achieve continued progress towards meeting the 2017 Scoping Plan target for 2030.5 CARB adopted the 2022 Scoping Plan on December 16, 2022 that addresses long-term GHG goals set forth by AB 1279. The 2022 Scoping Plan outlines the State’s pathway to achieve carbon neutrality and an 85 percent reduction in 1990 emissions goal by 2045. In the 2022 Scoping Plan, CARB advocates for compliance with a local GHG reduction strategy consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15183.5. 4 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2018. Climate Pollutants Fall Below 1990 Levels for the First Time. Website:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/climate-pollutants-fall-below-1990-levels-first-time. Accessed March, 2024. 5 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update, the Proposed Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. January 17, 2017. Website:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2030sp_pp_final.pdf. Accessed March 2024. 74 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-14

RESPONSES
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact. The State Legislature and Senate Bill (SB) 99 specified that one of the main goals of the Active Transportation Program is to:
“Advance the active transportation efforts of regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals as established pursuant to Senate Bill 375 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008) and Senate Bill 391 (Chapter 585, Statutes of 2009).”
By definition, Fresno COG’s ATP would potentially reduce vehicle trips and therefore have a beneficial impact by helping to reduce emissions of greenhouse gas, particulate matter, and other pollutants. In addition, adoption of the ATP would not affect population or employment growth and as a result would not result in growth that exceeds growth estimates of the County’s General Plan or local Community Plans, nor would it generate emissions beyond what have been accounted for in regional air quality plans.

Construction of some components of the ATP, however, has the potential to produce short-term emissions and odors through the use of construction equipment, movement of dirt, etc.

Individual future projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential air quality impacts, including construction emission calculations. Individual future projects would be required to evaluate and implement applicable construction emission reduction measures pursuant to SJVAPCD rules, regulations and guidelines.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in the County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise 75 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-15
project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any air quality impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

In addition, one of the goals of the ATP is to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
76 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-16
IV. BIOLOGICAL

RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
77 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-17
IV. BIOLOGICAL

RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e. Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County supports a rich variety of habitat types as defined by the Wildlife Habitat Relationship (WHR) which include the following 28 habitats: annual/ruderal grassland, valley oak woodland, pasture, cropland, valley-foothill riparian, fresh emergent wetland, lacustrine, blue oak woodland, blue oakfoothill pine woodland, mixed chaparral, chamise-redshank chaparral, vernal pool, alkali scrub, orchard, vineyard, montaine chaparral, montaine hardwoodconifer, montaine riparian, sierran mixed conifer, ponderosa pine, Jeffery pine, white fir, lodgepole pine, subalpine, conifer, alpine dwarf scrub, wet meadow, bitterbush, and juniper.

Special-Status Species
Over 164 special-status plant and wildlife species are known to occur in Fresno County. Specialstatus plants and wildlife have been designated as “rare,” “threatened,” “endangered,” or “species of concern,” under federal or state endangered species legislation, by state resource agencies, or by groups such as the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). The special-status species with potential to occur in Fresno County were determined by review of the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) and CNPS electronic inventory of vascular plants. In general, special-status species are associated with a specific habitat such as vernal pools, 78 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-18
chaparral, oak woodland, or riparian corridors, however some species can utilize common habitat such as cropland.6

RESPONSES
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, but future development of project components contained in the ATP could potentially affect protected biological species and/or habitats. Construction and operation of trails, paths, signage, etc. may occur in biologically sensitive areas. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential presence of endangered or listed species and mitigation measures that would reduce any impacts 6 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Page 4.9-1.
79 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-19
to a less than significant level. Future projects under the ATP will be subject to the rules and regulations of the California Department of Fish & Wildlife as well as the Fish and Game Code, the California Endangered Species Act, and other regulatory authorities as applicable. Future projects may be subject to protocol-level surveys for special status species, regulatory permitting, and other biological evaluation as necessary. Future projects will be evaluated on a project by project basis.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. This includes future biological evaluation. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any biological impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development. Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
80 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-20
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
c. Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Cultural resources in Fresno County reflect the area’s history of settlement by Native Americans, Europeans, Mexicans and others, as well as periods of economic and social change such as those associated with the Gold Rush and development of agriculture and rail transportation. This region of the San Joaquin Valley, which extends from the forested Sierra Nevada to the Coastal Range, has supported an abundance of wildlife, riparian habitats and marshes. Records indicate that at least five Native American tribes resided in the area. The presence of archaeological and historic resources would generally be most likely along rivers and streams and in other areas with ground cover or other features which could have invited and sustained habitation. Fresno County’s rich history has produced a large stock of historically significant homes, public buildings, and landmarks including important ethnic historical sites. The physical environment of Fresno County has been greatly altered by human modification over the past 150 years, including archaeological resources which may have been buried or displaced. The California Department of Parks and Recreation records indicate that at least five Native American tribes resided in the area.7
7 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Pages 4.7-1 and 4.7-2. 81 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-21

RESPONSES
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, but future development of project components contained in the ATP could potentially affect protected cultural resources. Construction and operation of trails, paths, signage, etc. may occur in culturally sensitive areas. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential presence of cultural or historical resources.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any cultural or historical impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
82 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-22
VI. ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
California’s total energy consumption was the second-highest in the nation in 2020, but its per capita energy consumption was less than in all but three other states. In 2022, California was the fourth-largest electricity producer in the nation. The state was also the nation’s third-largest electricity consumer. In 2022, renewable resources including hydroelectric power and small-scale, customer-sited solar power, accounted for 49% of California's in-state electricity generation, while natural gas fueled another 42%, and nuclear power supplied almost all the rest.8 Energy usage is typically quantified using the British Thermal Unit (BTU). As a point of reference, the approximately amounts of energy contained in common energy sources are as follows9:

Energy Source/Fuel BTUs
Motor Gasoline 120,214 per gallon
Natural Gas 1,036 per cubic foot
Electricity 3,412 per kilowatt-hour
8 California Profile Overview, U.S. Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA. Accessed March 2024. 9 U.S. Energy Information Administration. Energy Units and Calculators Explained. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/unitsand-calculators/british-thermal-units.php. Accessed March 2024. 83 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-23
California energy consumption in 2021 was approximately 6,784.8 trillion BTU, as provided in Table 4.10 This represents an approximately 2.4% decrease from energy consumption in 2020.

Table 4
2021 California Energy Consumption
End User BTU of energy consumed
(in trillions)
Percentage of total
consumption
Residential 1,228.5 18.2
Commercial 1,156.8 17.1
Industrial 1,597.5 23.6
Transportation 2,802 41.2
Total 6,784.8 --
Total electrical consumption by Fresno County in 2022 was 8,384.41 GWh11, while total Gas consumption was 319.44 million Therms.12

RESPONSES
a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, but future development of project components contained in the ATP could potentially affect energy consumption. Construction and operation of trails, paths, signage, street lighting etc. may require additional energy. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at 10 California Profile Overview, U.S. Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2. Accessed March 2024.
11 California Energy Commission. Electricity Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx . Accessed March 2024.
12 California Energy Commission. Gas Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx . Accessed March 2024.
84 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-24
which time the implementing agency would identify the potential presence of cultural or historical resources.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not result in increased demand for energy because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
85 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-25
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-B of the most recently
adopted Uniform Building Code
86 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-26
creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
There are a number of active and potentially active faults within and adjacent to Fresno County.

Faults within Fresno County and major active and potentially active faults in the region are described below. Two of the active faults, which are located near Coalinga and Panoche in the West Valley, have been designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones (EFZ). Most of Fresno County, from approximately Interstate 5 (I-5) east, is located in Seismic Zone 3, as defined by the most recent California Uniform Building Code. Areas in the Coast Range and foothills and a small area along the Fresno County-Inyo County boundary are located in Seismic Zone 4. 13 Groundshaking is the primary seismic hazard in Fresno County, because of the County's seismic setting and record of historical activity. Most of the already urbanized locations in the East and West Valleys and Sierra Nevada Foothills areas are subject to less intense seismic effects than locations in the Coast Range Foothills and Sierra Nevada Mountain areas.14

RESPONSES
a-i. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
13 Fresno County General Plan EIR Background Report.
14 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Page 4.13-1.
87 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-27
a-ii. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? a-iii. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? a-iv. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the most recently adopted Uniform Building Code creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) would be subject to existing building codes, the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Act, and other state and federal regulations related to seismic and geological hazards.

Implementation of General Plan policies, Community Plan Policies, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) would further minimize such potential impacts. Examples of BMPs include hydroseeding, erosion control blankets, installing silt fences, etc.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as 88 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-28
necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any geological or seismic hazards because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
89 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-29
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS

EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Various gases in the earth’s atmosphere play an important role in moderating the earth’s surface temperature. Solar radiation enters earth’s atmosphere from space and a portion of the radiation is absorbed by the earth’s surface. The earth emits this radiation back toward space, but the properties of the radiation change from high-frequency solar radiation to lower-frequency infrared radiation. GHGs are transparent to solar radiation, but are effective in absorbing infrared radiation. Consequently, radiation that would otherwise escape back into space is retained, resulting in a warming of the earth’s atmosphere. This phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect. Scientific research to date indicates that some of the observed climate change is a result of increased GHG emissions associated with human activity. Among the GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone, Nitrous Oxide (NOx), and chlorofluorocarbons. Human-caused emissions of these GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are considered responsible for enhancing the greenhouse effect. GHG emissions contributing to global climate change are attributable, in large part, to human activities associated with the industrial/manufacturing, utility, transportation, residential, and agricultural sectors.

In California, the transportation sector is the largest emitter of GHGs, followed by electricity generation. Global climate change is, indeed, a global issue. GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria pollutants and TACs (which are pollutants of regional and/or local concern). Global climate change, if it occurs, could potentially affect water resources in California. Rising temperatures could be anticipated to result in sea-level rise (as polar ice caps melt) and possibly 90 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-30
change the timing and amount of precipitation, which could alter water quality. According to some, climate change could result in more extreme weather patterns; both heavier precipitation that could lead to flooding, as well as more extended drought periods. There is uncertainty regarding the timing, magnitude, and nature of the potential changes to water resources as a result of climate change; however, several trends are evident.

Snowpack and snowmelt may also be affected by climate change. Much of California’s precipitation falls as snow in the Sierra Nevada and southern Cascades, and snowpack represents approximately 35 percent of the state’s useable annual water supply. The snowmelt typically occurs from April through July; it provides natural water flow to streams and reservoirs after the annual rainy season has ended. As air temperatures increase due to climate change, the water stored in California’s snowpack could be affected by increasing temperatures resulting in: (1) decreased snowfall, and (2) earlier snowmelt.

RESPONSES
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact. The State Legislature and SB 99 specified that one of the main goals of the Active Transportation Program is to:
“Advance the active transportation efforts of regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals as established pursuant to Senate Bill 375 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008) and Senate Bill 391 (Chapter 585, Statutes of 2009).”
By definition, Fresno COG’s ATP would potentially reduce vehicle trips and therefore have a beneficial impact by helping to reduce emissions of greenhouse gas, particulate matter, and other pollutants. In addition, adoption of the ATP would not affect population or employment growth and as a result would not result in growth that exceeds growth estimates of the County’s General Plan or local Community Plans, nor would it generate emissions beyond what have been accounted for in regional air quality plans.

Construction of some components of the ATP, however, has the potential to produce short-term emissions and odors through the use of construction equipment, movement of dirt, etc. 91 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-31
Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential GHG impacts.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the County. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any greenhouse gas impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

In addition, one of the goals of the ATP is to reduce greenhouse gases. Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
92 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-32
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS

MATERIALS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project
area?
93 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-33
f. Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g. Expose people or structures either directly
or indirectly to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Hazardous materials refer generally to hazardous substances that exhibit corrosive, poisonous, flammable, and/or reactive properties and have the potential to harm human health and/or the environment. Accidental releases of hazardous materials can occur from a variety of causes including roadway accidents, fires, train derailments, shipping accidents and industrial accidents.

Various industrial and commercial facilities within the County use and store hazardous materials and generate hazardous waste. Underground storage tanks (USTs) are primarily used to contain gasoline and other petroleum products such as diesel and waste oil. A variety of other hazardous materials and wastes, such as solvents, are also stored in underground storage tanks. Facilities that use and store hazardous materials and wastes must comply with federal, State, and local laws governing hazardous materials/waste handling, storage, transportation, and disposal.15 The various project components contained in the ATP are proposed to be located throughout the County and are likely to be near places such as schools, residential neighborhoods and commercial areas.

RESPONSES
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
15 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Page 4.14-1.
94 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-34
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially involve the use and/or transport of hazardous materials that could be located near sensitive areas such as schools, residential or commercial areas. This could occur during the construction stage and may include items such as petroleum, natural gas, cleaners, solvents, paint, pesticides, etc. No on-going use or transport of hazardous materials is anticipated once construction is complete. Use and transport of such materials would be subject to existing state and federal regulations related to hazards and hazardous materials.

Implementation of General Plan policies, Community Plan policies and Best Management Practices (BMPs) would further minimize such potential impacts. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential hazard-related impacts.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise 95 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-35
project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any hazard-related impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
96 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-36
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER

QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
b. Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off- site;
ii. substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite;
iii. create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
97 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-37
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER

QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Water resources in Fresno County include a number of rivers and streams, artificial waterways, and groundwater.

Surface Water Resources
The San Joaquin River originates in the Sierra Nevada and flows westerly forming the border between Fresno and Madeira Counties downstream from Mammoth Pool Reservoir. The North and Middle Forks originate in Madeira County near Devils Postpile National Monument. The South Fork begins at Martha Lake in northern Kings Canyon National Park within Fresno County. Average annual precipitation in the upper reaches of the river falls mainly in the form of snow and is as high as 70 inches. By comparison, the arid San Joaquin Valley to the west, average annual rainfall is as low as six inches near Mendota. Friant Dam is the most significant of the several dams on the San Joaquin River. It was completed in 1942 by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) for the purposes of agricultural irrigation and is part of the Central Valley Project (CVP). There are several dams upstream of Friant owned and operated by Southern California Edison (SCE) and Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) for power generation. The combined storage capacity of the dams upstream of Friant is 609,530 acre-feet and the storage capacity of Millerton Lake (formed by Friant Dam) is 520,500 acre-feet.

The Kings River originates high in the Sierra Nevada Mountains near the Inyo County line. It has a large drainage basin including most of Kings Canyon National Park and most of the area between Shaver and Florence Lakes in the north to the Fresno/Tulare County border in the south. 98 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-38
The average annual precipitation for the mountain region has not been consistently recorded but, it is probably greater than the 43 inches that falls in Grant Grove on the southern reaches of the Kings River watershed. Downstream average precipitation is approximately 7 to 10 inches per year. The major portions of the upper reaches feed into Pine Flat Lake, a 1,000,000 acre-feet reservoir constructed by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) in 1944 for flood control purposes. There are additional reservoirs upstream of Pine Flat that are owned and operated by PG&E for the purpose of hydroelectric power generation. These facilities have a combined storage capacity of about 252,000 acre-feet.

There are many creeks and lakes in the high Sierra Nevada within Fresno County, all of which eventually feed into either the Kings River or the San Joaquin River. In addition, several creeks drain the foothill areas and flow into developed areas in central Fresno County. Most of these streams (i.e., Redbank, Fancher, Dry and Dog Creeks) have been controlled by efforts of the Corps and the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD).

Groundwater Resources
Groundwater conditions vary considerably from eastern to western Fresno County. Aquifers east of the valley trough are generally semi-confined to unconfined, while aquifers west of the valley trough are generally semi-confined to confined. Most pumping occurs below a naturally occurring subterranean clay, although considerable pumping also occurs above the layer, depending upon location and water quality issues. This layer is several hundred feet below the ground surface, and pumping costs are high.16

RESPONSES
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
16 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Page 4.8-1 thru 4.8-3. 99 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-39
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite; ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially increase the impervious surface areas and utilize water supply during construction and for potential landscaping. Individual future projects would be required (depending on size and location) to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and implementation of the construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that require the incorporation of BMPS. In addition, construction water usage will be minimal and temporary; and any proposed landscaping will be installed pursuant to Fresno COG’s guidance and regulations, the County General Plan, and/or local Community Plans, thereby minimizing water use. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential hydrological impacts.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual 100
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-40
projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any hydrology-related impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
101
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-41
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an established
community?
b. Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County encompasses roughly 6,000 square miles, making it California’s sixth largest county by land size. Agriculture, with 2,911 square miles, and resource conservation (includes national forests and parks and timber reserves), with 2,691 square miles, are overwhelmingly the predominate land use in the county -- occupying over 90 percent of county land. The 15 incorporated cities occupy the next largest amount of land with 154 square miles. Closely behind the cities is unincorporated residential land with 152 square miles. The last three categories include commercial (seven square miles), industrial (11 square miles), and unclassified lands such as highways, streets, and rivers (11 square miles).17

RESPONSES
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the General Plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
17 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Page 4.2-1.
102
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-42
No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could occur at various places throughout the County. None of the proposed projects would physically divide an established community, nor would they conflict with any applicable land use plans or habitat conservation plans.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any land use impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development. In addition, all of the proposed development is consistent with approved land use documents. Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
103
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-43
XII. MINERAL

RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County has been a leading producer of minerals because of the abundance and wide variety of mineral resources that are present in the County. Extracted resources include aggregate products (sand and gravel), fossil fuels (oil and coal), metals (chromite, copper, gold, mercury, and tungsten), and other minerals used in construction or industrial applications (asbestos, highgrade clay, diatomite, granite, gypsum, and limestone).

Oil production has long been a major industry in western Fresno County, particularly in the Coalinga area. Extensive oil recovery operations are located mostly to the north of the city of Coalinga. Oil companies such as Chevron USA, Union Oil Company, Shell Production, and Santa Fe Energy have substantial land holdings in the area. Natural gas and natural gas liquids occur in oil sands or with oil in an overlying gas cap or as dry gas in separate zones in oilfields and in separate gas fields.18

RESPONSES
18 Fresno County General Plan EIR, Page 4.11-1.
104
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-44
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could occur at various places throughout the County. However, it is unlikely that any of the projects listed in the ATP will impact mineral resources.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any mineral resource impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
105
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-45
XIII. NOISE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b. Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c. For a project located within the vicinity of
a private airstrip or an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Noise is most often described as unwanted sound. Although sound can be easily measured, the perception of noise and the physical response to sound complicate the analysis of its impact on people. The County is impacted by a multitude of noise sources. Mobile sources of noise, especially cars and trucks, are the most common and significant sources of noise in most communities, and they are predominant sources of noise in the County. In addition, commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses throughout the County (i.e., schools, fire stations, utilities) generate stationary-source noise.

RESPONSES
106
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-46
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially increase noise due to construction (temporary impact) and possibly operation (due to increased use or establishment of a new trail). Noise from these sources is not expected to be substantial, particularly with regard to on-going use, because there is little noise generated from walking and bicycling. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential noise-related impacts.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any noise-related impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
107
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-47
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Induce substantial population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County’s population as of January 1, 2023 was estimated to be 1,011,499. There are approximately 346,456 housing units in the County.19

RESPONSES
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. Adoption of the ATP would not affect population or employment growth and as a result would not result in growth that exceeds growth estimates of the County’s General Plan or 19 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2023, California Department of Finance. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020- 2023/. Accessed March 2024.
108
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-48
local Community Plans, nor would it result in the displacement or relocation of people or housing.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any population or housing impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
109
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-49
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County provides full service sheriff and fire protection services. There are numerous schools, parks, libraries and other public facilities located throughout the County.

RESPONSES
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to 110
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-50
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
Police Protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
No Impact. Adoption of the ATP would not affect population or employment growth and as a result would not result in growth that would require the assemblage of additional fire or police resources, or the expansion of any schools or other public facilities. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially increase the need for security for pedestrians and bicyclists utilizing these facilities. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential public service related impacts.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any public service impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
111
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-51
XVI. RECREATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County has a variety of regional parks and landscaped areas. Regional recreational facilities include 12 parks, two fishing access areas and a boat-launch/parking facility at Shaver Lake. These areas are used for picnicking, fishing, hiking, jogging, bird watching, nature study, non-organized sports, barbecues, softball, soccer, volleyball, overnight camping, passive recreation and more.20

RESPONSES
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
20 Resources and Parks Division, Public Works and Planning, County of Fresno. https://www.fresnocountyca.gov/Departments/Public-Works-and-Planning/divisions-of-public-works-and-planning/resources-andparks-division/parks. Accessed March 2024. 112
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-52
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. Adoption of the ATP would not affect population or employment growth and as a result would not result in growth that would require expansion of existing recreational facilities.

More so, the ATP is intended to increase the pedestrian and bicycle recreational opportunities for the residents of the County and thus will have a beneficial impact on recreational facilities and opportunities.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any recreational impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
113
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-53
XVII. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent
with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
The existing transportation system and services in Fresno County includes airports, highways, local roadways, transit systems, railroads, and bicycle paths. Two major functions of roadways are to provide mobility for through-traffic and provide direct access to adjacent properties.

Roadways also provide bicycle and pedestrian access and allow for the circulation of nonvehicular traffic.

In 2017, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed SB 1, also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act. SB 1 directs $100 million annually from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account to the ATP, significantly augmenting the available funding for this popular program.21
21 Active Transportation Program, California Transportation Commission. https://catc.ca.gov/programs/active-transportationprogram. Accessed March 2024. 114
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-54

RESPONSES
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially impact existing roadways and intersections. For instance, if new crosswalks or bicycle lanes are proposed, these projects could require additional analysis to determine their impacts to (and safety from) roadway and vehicular activity. Additionally, construction activities will require various vehicular trips to and from the various project sites.

However, these will be minimal and temporary. In the event that partial or full road closure is necessary during project construction, the contractor will be required to adhere to any and all regulations from the local jurisdiction, Caltrans and/or other regulatory agency. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential transportation-related impacts.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.
115
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-55
Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any transportation-related impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
116
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-56
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
ii. A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of the Public
Resources Code section 5024.1, the
lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

RESPONSES
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural 117
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-57
landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No Impact. In accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52, potentially affected Tribes were formally notified of this Project and were given the opportunity to request consultation on the Project. The City contacted the Native American Heritage Commission, requesting a contact list of applicable Native American Tribes, which was provided to the City. The City provided letters to the listed Tribes on February 13, 2024, notifying them of the Project and requesting consultation, if desired.

The City did not receive any responses from the tribes contacted.

The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially impact Tribal Cultural Resources. Individual projects would be subject to sitespecific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential Tribal Cultural Resource impacts and would need to comply with AB 52 and/or SB 18, as necessary.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. ‘It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.
118
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-58
Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any Tribal Cultural Resource impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development. Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
119
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-59
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
e. Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
120
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-60
Many unincorporated communities have elected to form special districts to provide services to rural clients. Cities and special districts own and operate numerous water, wastewater, and stormwater systems throughout Fresno County.

RESPONSES
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially utilize water supply during construction and for potential landscaping. Once the various project components are in operation, no wastewater generation is expected and solid waste generation will be limited mostly to construction activity. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential utility-related impacts.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the County. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects 121
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-61
are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any utility-related impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
122
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-62
XX. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power
lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate
fire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Fresno County is located approximately in the center of the San Joaquin Valley, stretching approximately 100 miles from the Coast Range foothills to the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada.

The State Fire Marshal is mandated to classify lands within State Responsibility Areas into Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ). Fire Hazard Severity Zones fall into one of the following classifications:
• Moderate
123
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-63
• High
• Very High
According to the latest State Responsibility Area-Fire Hazard Severity Zones map of the Fresno County, the central portion of the County falls under Local Responsibility Area, with the foothills to the east and region west of Interstate-5 consisting of a mix of Moderate to Very High severity zones. The region of Sierra-Nevada mountains falls under the Federal Responsibility Area. 22

RESPONSES
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No Impact. The proposed adoption of the ATP would not result in direct physical changes, however future development of project components contained in the ATP (trails, bridges, small structures, etc.) could potentially exacerbate wildfire risks or expose people or structures to increased risks during construction. Once the various project components are in operation, no wildfire risks or exposure to pollutants is expected, with improved active transportation network potentially improving emergency response and evacuation plans. Individual projects would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the implementing agency would identify the potential wildfire-related impacts.

As previously discussed, Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as 22 Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, CalFire. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-andmitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps-2022. Accessed March 2024. 124
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-64
a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a connected and complete network of trails, walkways and bikeways that provides safe convenient and enjoyable connections to key destinations around the County. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any wildfire-related impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development.

Therefore, there is no impact.

Mitigation Measures: None are required.
125
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-65
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF

SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
c. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?

RESPONSES
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the 126
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 3 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 3-66
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
No Impact. Fresno COG’s ATP is a programmatic document that proposes goals and policies pertaining to the future of walking and bicycling in Fresno County. It is intended as a guidance document with the ultimate vision of a network of safe, comfortable, and attractive sidewalks, shared-use paths, and bikeways that connect Fresno County residents to key destinations, especially local schools, parks, and transit. Individual project details such as precise project locations, project timing, funding mechanisms, material types, types of equipment and ultimately construction drawings are currently not available. At such time that specific individual projects are implemented, the implementing agency will conduct site-specific CEQA analysis as necessary. Furthermore, implementation of the ATP would be required to comply with the goals and policies under the County’s General Plan, County Community Plans, and other relevant regulatory documents.

Adoption of the ATP alone would not create any impacts because specific development is not being proposed under this ATP and it would not authorize any development. Therefore, there is no impact.
127
Chapter 4
List of Preparers
128
Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan | Chapter 4 FRESNO COG | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. 4-1

LIST OF PREPARERS AND CONSULTATIONS
List of Preparers
Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc.
• Travis Crawford, AICP, Principal Environmental Planner • Deepesh Tourani, Associate Environmental Planner
Persons and Agencies Consulted
Fresno Council of Governments
• Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fehr & Peers
• Rod Brown
129
Appendices
130
Appendix A
Active Transportation Plan
131
Appendix B
Comment Letters Received
132
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DISTRICT 6 OFFICE
1352 WEST OLIVE AVENUE |P.O. BOX 12616 |FRESNO, CA 93778-2616 (559) 908-7064 | FAX (559) 488-4195 | TTY 711
www.dot.ca.gov
May 13, 2024

FRE-GEN
Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt a Negative Declaration
FCOG Fresno County
Regional Active Transportation Plan
SCH# 2024040476
https://ld-igr-gts.dot.ca.gov/district/6/report/32817

SENT VIA EMAIL
Simran Jhutti, Senior Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
2035 Tulare Street, Suite 201
Fresno, CA 93721
Dear Mx. Simran Jhutti:

Thank you for the opportunity to review the Negative Declaration document for the Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan (ATP) which is a regional document that includes programs, policies, and recommendations regarding the development of pedestrian and bicycle facilities in Fresno County. The plan scope generally covers all of Fresno County and participating jurisdictions.

Caltrans provides the following comments consistent with the State’s smart mobility goals that support a vibrant economy and sustainable communities:

1. It is noted in the Negative Declaration that, “during project construction, the contractor will be required to adhere to any and all regulations from the local jurisdiction, Caltrans/or other regulatory agency.” The ATP document also mentions utilizing resources, such as the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, for designing and implementing walking and biking facilities.

Caltrans recognizes that some State Routes act as main streets and arterials for some communities and play a vital role in transportation and accessing services.

While Caltrans supports the implementation of active transportation infrastructure, we highly encourage agencies to coordinate early with Caltrans when implementing active transportation projects on State Routes.

2. As a point of information, any work completed in the State’s right-of-way will require a Caltrans encroachment permit. An encroachment permit must be obtained for 133
Mx. Simran Jhutti
May 13, 2024

Page 2 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” all proposed activities for placement of encroachments within, under or over the State highway rights-of-way. Activity and work planned in the State right-of-way shall be performed to State standards and specifications, at no cost to the State. Engineering plans, calculations, specifications, and reports (documents) shall be stamped and signed by a licensed Engineer or Architect. Engineering documents for encroachment permit activity and work in the State right-of-way may be submitted using English Units. The Permit Department and the Environmental Planning Branch will review and approve the activity and work in the State right-of-way before an encroachment permit is issued. The Streets and Highways Code Section 670 provides Caltrans discretionary approval authority for projects that encroach on the State Highway System. Encroachment permits will be issued in accordance with Streets and Highway Codes, Section 671.5, “Time Limitations.” Encroachment permits do not run with the land. A change of ownership requires a new permit application. Only the legal property owner or his/her authorized agent can pursue obtaining an encroachment permit.

3. Prior to an encroachment permit application submittal, the project proponent is required to schedule a “Pre-Submittal” meeting with District 6 Encroachment Permit Office. To schedule this meeting, please call the Caltrans Encroachment Permit Office - District 6: 1352 W. Olive, Fresno, CA 93778, at (559) 383-5047 or (559) 383- 5235.

Please review the permit application - required document checklist at:
https://forms.dot.ca.gov/v2Forms/servlet/FormRenderer?frmid=TR0402&distpath=M AOTO&brapath=PERM.

Please also review the permit application - processing checklist at:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/ep, and the Applicant's Check List to determine appropriate review process (TR-0416) (Rev 01/23) If you have any other questions, please call or email Christopher Xiong at (559) 908- 7064 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
DAVID PADILLA, Branch Chief
Transportation Planning – North
134
May 13, 2024
Simran Jhutti
Fresno Council of Governments
2035 Tulare Street #201
Fresno, CA 93721
Project: Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan, Negative Declaration
District CEQA Reference No: 20240458
Dear Ms. Jhutti,
The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) has reviewed the Regional Active Transportation Plan (ATP) and Negative Declaration (ND) from the Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG). Per the ATP, the project is an update to the 2019 ATC Plan and consists of a comprehensive document outlining the future of walking and bicycling in 11 cities (Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cove, Parlier, San Joaquin, and Sanger) within Fresno County (Project). The Project is located at various locations throughout Fresno County, CA.

The Project is a plan level project and, while project-specific data may not be available until specific approvals are being granted, the ATP should include a discussion of policies, which when implemented, will reduce or mitigate impacts on air quality at the individual project level.

The District offers the following comments at this time regarding the Project:

Project Siting
The ATP is the blueprint for future growth and provides guidance for the community’s sidewalk and bikeway development. Without appropriate mitigation and associated policy, site specific projects under the ATP may contribute to negative impacts on air quality due to increased construction emissions. 135
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 2 of 5 District Reference No: 20240458
May 13, 2024
Project Related Emissions
The District recommends that the ATP stipulate that site specific projects under the ATP identify and characterize project construction emissions. The District recommends the air emissions be compared to the District significance thresholds as identified in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts: https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/g4nl3p0g/gamaqi.pdf. The District recommends that future projects be mitigated to the extent feasible, and that future projects with air emissions above the aforementioned thresholds be mitigated to below these thresholds.

The District understands that the ATP is a plan-level project where future site specific project data may not be available at this time. As such, the ATP should include a discussion of policies, which when implemented, will require assessment and characterization of project-level emissions, and subsequently require mitigation of air quality impacts to the extent feasible at the individual project-specific level.

Construction Emissions
The District recommends, to further reduce impacts from construction-related diesel exhaust emissions, the Project should utilize the cleanest available offroad construction equipment.

District’s Bikeway Incentive Program
Incorporating design elements (e.g., installing bikeways) within the Project that enhance walkability and connectivity can result in an overall reduction of vehicles miles traveled (VMT) and improve air quality within the area. Site specific projects under the ATP are expected to result in an overall reduction in VMT by installing bikeways, and may be eligible for funding through the District’s Bikeway Incentive Program. The Bikeway Incentive Program provides funding for eligible Class 1 (Bicycle Path Construction), Class II (Bicycle Lane Striping), or Class III (Bicycle Route) projects. These incentives are designed to support the construction of new bikeway projects to promote clean air through the development of a widespread, interconnected network of bike paths, lanes, or routes and improving the general safety conditions for commuter bicyclists. Only municipalities, government agencies, or public educational institutions are eligible to apply. More information on the grant program can be found at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/grants/bike-paths/
Guidelines and Project Eligibility for the grant program can be found at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/drpijuw1/bikeway-program-guidelines-62515.pdf 136
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 3 of 5 District Reference No: 20240458
May 13, 2024
District Rules and Regulations
The District issues permits for many types of air pollution sources, and regulates some activities that do not require permits. A project subject to District rules and regulations would reduce its impacts on air quality through compliance with the District’s regulatory framework. In general, a regulation is a collection of individual rules, each of which deals with a specific topic. As an example, Regulation II (Permits) includes District Rule 2010 (Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review), Rule 2520 (Federally Mandated Operating Permits), and several other rules pertaining to District permitting requirements and processes.

The list of rules below is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Current District rules can be found online at: https://ww2.valleyair.org/rules-and-planning/current-district-rulesand-regulations. To identify other District rules or regulations that apply to future projects, or to obtain information about District permit requirements, the project proponents are strongly encouraged to contact the District’s Small Business Assistance (SBA) Office at (559) 230-5888.

District Rule 9510 - Indirect Source Review (ISR)
Site specific projects under the ATP may be subject to District Rule 9510 if upon full buildout, the project would equal or exceed any of the following applicability thresholds, depending on the type of development and public agency approval mechanism:

Table 1: ISR Applicability Thresholds
Development
Type
Discretionary
Approval Threshold
Ministerial Approval /
Allowed Use / By Right
Thresholds
Residential 50 dwelling units 250 dwelling units
Commercial 2,000 square feet 10,000 square feet
Light Industrial 25,000 square feet 125,000 square feet Heavy Industrial 100,000 square feet 500,000 square feet Medical Office 20,000 square feet 100,000 square feet
General Office 39,000 square feet 195,000 square feet
Educational Office 9,000 square feet 45,000 square feet Government 10,00 square feet 50,000 square feet
Recreational 20,000 square feet 100,000 square feet
Other 9,000 square feet 45,000 square feet
District Rule 9510 also applies to any transportation or transit development projects where construction exhaust emissions equal or exceed two tons of NOx or two tons of PM.
137
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 4 of 5 District Reference No: 20240458
May 13, 2024
The purpose of District Rule 9510 is to reduce the growth in both NOx and PM emissions associated with development and transportation projects from mobile and area sources; specifically, the emissions associated with the construction and subsequent operation of development projects. The Rule requires developers to mitigate their NOx and PM emissions by incorporating clean air design elements into their projects. Should the proposed development project clean air design elements be insufficient to meet the required emission reductions, developers must pay a fee that ultimately funds incentive projects to achieve off-site emissions reductions.

In the case the individual development project is subject to District Rule 9510, per Section 5.0 of the rule, an Air Impact Assessment (AIA) application is required to be submitted no later than applying for project-level approval from a public agency so that proper mitigation and clean air design under ISR can be incorporated into the public agency’s analysis.

Information about how to comply with District Rule 9510 can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/permitting/indirect-source-review-rule-overview The AIA application form can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/permitting/indirect-source-review-rule-overview/formsand-applications/ District staff is available to provide assistance and can be reached by phone at (559) 230-5900 or by email at [email protected].

District Rule 4002 (National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants)
In the event an existing building will be renovated, partially demolished or removed, site specific projects under the ATP may be subject to District Rule 4002. This rule requires a thorough inspection for asbestos to be conducted before any regulated facility is demolished or renovated. Information on how to comply with District Rule 4002 can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/compliance/demolition-renovation/ District Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings)
Site specific projects under the ATP may be subject to District Rule 4601 since it may utilize architectural coatings. Architectural coatings are paints, varnishes, sealers, or stains that are applied to structures, portable buildings, pavements or curbs. The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from architectural coatings. In addition, this rule specifies architectural coatings storage, cleanup and labeling requirements. Additional information on how to comply with District Rule 4601 requirements can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/tkgjeusd/rule-4601.pdf
138
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 5 of 5 District Reference No: 20240458
May 13, 2024
Other District Rules and Regulations
Site specific projects under the ATP may also be subject to the following District rules: Rule 4102 (Nuisance) and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations).

Future Projects / Land Use Agency Referral Documents
Per the ND, future development under the ATP will be subject to site-specific CEQA and environmental review, including air emissions mitigation. A project’s referral documents and environmental review documents provided to the District for review should include a project summary, the land use designation, project size, air emissions quantifications and impacts, and proximity to sensitive receptors and existing emission sources, and air emissions mitigation measures. For reference and guidance, more information can be found in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/g4nl3p0g/gamaqi.pdf
District Comment Letter
The District recommends that a copy of the District’s comments be provided to the Project proponent.

If you have any questions or require further information, please contact Ryan Grossman by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at (559) 230-6569.

Sincerely,
Tom Jordan
Director of Policy and Government Affairs
For: Mark Montelongo
Program Manager
139
State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Central Region
1234 East Shaw Avenue
Fresno, California 93710
(559) 243-4005
www.wildlife.ca.gov
Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870
May 16, 2024
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
2035 Tulare Street #201
Fresno, California 93721
[email protected]
(559) 233-4148
Subject: Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan (Plan) Initial Study (IS)/Negative Declaration (ND)
SCH No.: 2024040476
Dear Simran Jhutti:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received an Initial Study (IS)/Negative Declaration (ND) from the Fresno Council of Governments (COG) for the Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan (Plan) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Plan that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Plan that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code. While the comment period may have ended, CDFW respectfully requests that the COG still consider our comments.

CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statue for all the people of the State (Fish & Game Code, Section 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, Section 21070; CEQA Guidelines Section 15386, subd. (a)). CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id., Section 1802).

Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 140
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024
specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.

CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA (Pub.

Resources Code, Section 21069; CEQA Guidelines, Section 15381). CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, reasonably foreseeable future projects may be subject to CDFW’s lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority (Fish & Game Code, Section 1600 et seq.). Likewise, to the extent implementation of reasonably foreseeable future projects may result in “take” as defined by State law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & Game Code, Section 2050 et seq.), related authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code may be required.

Fully Protected Species: CDFW has jurisdiction over fully protected species of birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and fish, pursuant to Fish and Game Code sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515. Take of any fully protected species was previously prohibited and CDFW was not able authorize their incidental take. Senate Bill No. 147, which became effective on July 10, 2023, amended Fish and Game Code sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515, and added section 2081.15 to authorize CDFW to issue a permit that authorizes the take of a fully protected species resulting from impacts attributable to the implementation of specified projects, such as a transportation project, including any associated habitat connectivity and wildlife crossing project, undertaken by a state, regional, or local agency, that does not increase highway or street capacity for automobile or truck travel, if certain conditions are satisfied. Fresno County is known to be inhabited by several fully protected species such as blunt nosed leopard lizard, bald eagle, and golden eagle.

Other Special-Status Species: Species of plants and animals need not be officially listed as Endangered, Rare, or Threatened on any State or federal list pursuant to CESA and/or the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) to be considered Endangered, Rare, or Threatened under CEQA. If a species can be shown to meet the criteria specified in the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, Chapter 3, § 15380), it should be fully considered in the environmental analysis for the Plan.

Bird Protection: CDFW has jurisdiction over actions that may result in the disturbance or destruction of active nest sites or the unauthorized take of birds. Fish and Game Code sections that protect birds, their eggs, and nests include section 3503 (regarding unlawful take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird), section 3503.5 (regarding the take, possession, or destruction of any birds-of-prey or their nests or eggs), and section 3513 (regarding unlawful take of any migratory nongame bird).

DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 141
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024

PLAN DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
Proponent: Fresno Council of Governments
Objective: The Plan is an update to the 2019 Fresno County Regional Active Transportation Plan. It reflects projects that have been newly identified, modified, or completed since the release of the first plan; updated information on disadvantaged communities and safety data; current land use and plans in each city and within Fresno County; and updates to reflect best active transportation planning practices.

The purpose of the Plan is to equip the COG’s member agencies (Fresno County and the fifteen incorporated cities of Clovis, Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Fresno, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cove, Parlier, Reedley, San Joaquin, Sanger, and Selma) with the tools to better compete for funding sources that support ATPs and related projects. The Plan area incorporates Fresno County, and no land designation changes are proposed at this time. In addition, adoption of this CEQA document would not authorize any development.

Location: The Plan area is located throughout Fresno County and covers incorporated cities, unincorporated communities, and Fresno County islands.

Timeframe: Unspecified

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CDFW offers the following comments and recommendations to assist the COG’s in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Plan’s significant, or potentially significant, direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources.

Editorial comments or other suggestions may also be included to improve the CEQA document prepared for this Plan.

COMMENT 1: Protocol-Level Surveys
CDFW did not find any measures included in the IS/ND document indicating the need to consider protocol level surveys that may be needed for future projects tiered from the Plan. While the proposed adoption of the Plan would not result in direct physical changes, future development of project components contained in the Plan could potentially affect protected biological species and/or habitats. Construction and operation of trails, paths, signage, etc. may occur in biologically sensitive areas.

Individual projects tiered from the Plan would be subject to site-specific environmental review, at which time the CEQA lead should identify the potential presence of endangered or listed species.

DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 142
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024
CDFW recommends that for all future projects tiered from this Plan, qualified biologists assist with the scoping effort for projects by conducting additional database searches for potential wildlife, plant, and invertebrate species and rare habitat types, and conduct early consultation with CDFW to help with this identification effort. CDFW also recommends that these qualified individuals subsequently perform appropriate reconnaissance, biological, and/or protocol surveys, as appropriate, as part of the biological technical studies conducted in support of the ensuing CEQA documents tiered from this Plan.

COMMENT 2: Special-Status Species
CDFW did not find any special status species information in the IS/ND. Based on aerial imagery and species occurrence records from the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (CDFW 2024), the proposed Plan area is known to and/or has the potential to support special-status species, and these resources need to be evaluated and addressed prior to any approvals that would allow ground-disturbing activities or land use changes. CDFW is concerned regarding potential impacts to special-status animal species including, but not limited to, the State endangered (SE), State fully protected (FP) and federally endangered (FE) blunt-nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia sila), the SE and FE foothill yellow-legged frog – south Sierra Distinct Population Segment (DPS) (Rana boylii pop. 5), Fresno kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides exilis), giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens), and least bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus); the SE and federally threatened (FT) foothill yellow-legged frog – central coast DPS (Rana boylii pop. 4) and western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis); the SE and FP bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus); the FP Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos); the SE willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii); the State candidate endangered Crotch’s bumble bee (Bombus crotchii) and Temblor legless lizard (Anniella alexanderae; the State Threatened (ST) and FE San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica); the ST and FT California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense pop. 1) and giant gartersnake (Thamnophis gigas); the ST bank swallow (Riparia riparia), Nelson’s (=San Joaquin) antelope squirrel (Ammospermophilus nelsoni), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), and tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor); the FE longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta longiantenna) and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Lepidurus packardi); the FT vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi); the State species of special concern (SSC) and FT California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) and steelhead – Central Valley DPS (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 11); the SSC and federally proposed threatened (PT) western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) and western spadefoot (Spea hammondii); the SSC American badger (Taxidea taxus), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), California glossy snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis), coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), hardhead (Mylopharodon conocephalus), Le Conte’s thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), long-eared owl (Asio otus), mountain plover (Charadrius montanus), northern harrier (Circus hudsonius), northern legless lizard (Anniella pulchra), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), San Joaquin DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 143
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024
coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum ruddocki), short-eared owl (Asio flammeus), shortnosed kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides brevinasus), spotted bat (Euderma maculatum), two-striped gartersnake (Thamnophis gigas), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), Tulare grasshopper mouse (Onychomys torridus tularensis), western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus), western red bat (Lasiurus frantzii), yellow-headed blackbird (Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus), and yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia).

CDFW is also concerned regarding potential impacts to special-status plant species including, but not limited to, the SE and FE California jewelflower (Caulanthus californicus), Hartweg’s golden sunburst (Pseudobahia bahiifolia), and palmate-bracted bird’s-beak (Chloropyron palmatum); the SE and FT San Joaquin adobe sunburst (Pseudobahia peirsonii), San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass (Orcutia inaequalis), and succulent owl’s-clover (Castilleja campestris var. succulenta); the FE San Joaquin woollythreads (Monolopia congdonii); and the California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1B.1 and FE Keck’s checkerbloom (Sidalcea keckii).

CDFW recommends that the IS/ND for this Plan include a cumulative impacts analysis of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects to be implemented within the Plan area on all special-status biological resources. At a minimum, CDFW recommends that each of the species listed above be included in the cumulative impacts analysis conducted as part of the IS/ND for this Plan with specific recommendations for focused biological surveys conducted by a qualified biologist and appropriate permits acquired for future projects tiered from this Plan.

COMMENT 3: Cumulative Impacts
CDFW did not find any analysis of cumulative impacts during review of the IS/ND for the Plan and therefore has the following recommendation: Given that a Transportation Plan serves primarily as a planning tool and that future project-level CEQA documents are expected to be tiered from it, CDFW recommends that a cumulative impact analysis be conducted for all potential biological resources that will either be significantly or potentially significantly impacted by implementation of this Plan, including those whose impacts are determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated or for those resources that are rare or in poor or declining health and will be impacted by the any future project tiered from this Plan, even if those impacts are expected to be relatively small (i.e., less than significant). CDFW recommends cumulative impacts be analyzed using an acceptable methodology to evaluate the impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects on resources and be focused specifically on the resource, not the project. An appropriate resource study area identified and utilized for this analysis is advised. CDFW staff is available for consultation in support of cumulative impacts analyses as a trustee and responsible agency under CEQA.

DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 144
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024
COMMENT 4: California Endangered Species Act
Reasonably foreseeable future projects tiered from this Plan may be subject to CDFWs regulatory authority pursuant to CESA. If species listed under CESA are detected during surveys, consultation with CDFW is warranted to discuss how to implement the Project and avoid “take,” or if avoidance is not feasible, to acquire a State Incidental Take Permit (ITP), pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 2081 subdivision (b), prior to any ground disturbing activities. In addition, CDFW advises that mitigation measures for CESA listed species be fully addressed in the CEQA document prepared for any future project that is tiered from this Plan.

CDFW therefore recommends that the IS/ND for this Plan include information related to these requirements and advises that should any projects be tiered from this Plan, a qualified biologist should be retained to determine if potential impacts to CESA listed species may require the need to obtain an ITP.

COMMENT 5: Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement
Throughout Fresno County there is a wide variety of water features. Project activities that substantially change the bed, bank, and channel of any river, stream, or lake are subject to CDFW’s regulatory authority pursuant Fish and Game Code section 1600 et seq. Fish and Game Code section 1602 requires an entity to notify CDFW prior to commencing any activity that may (a) substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake; (b) substantially change or use any material from the bed, bank, or channel of any river, stream, or lake (including the removal of riparian vegetation): (c) deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream, or lake. “Any river, stream, or lake” includes those that are ephemeral or intermittent as well as those that are perennial and may include those that are highly modified such as canals and retention basins. It is important to note that if projects tiered from this Plan include activities that require notification and subsequently a Lake or Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement, CDFW is required to comply with CEQA in the issuance of the Agreement; therefore, if the CEQA document approved for any project tiered from the Plan does not adequately describe the project and its impacts, a subsequent CEQA analysis may be necessary for LSA Agreement issuance. Additional information on notification requirements is available through the Central Region LSA Program at (559) 243-4593 or [email protected] and the CDFW website:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA.

CDFW therefore recommends that the IS/ND for this Plan include information related to these requirements of Fish and Game code and advises that projects tiered from this Plan retain a qualified biologist to determine if activities within or adjacent to streams or lakes may require notification to CDFW and potentially a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement.

DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 145
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024
COMMENT 6: Botanical Surveys
CDFW did not find any discussion of botanical surveys in the IS/ND. CDFW recommends that the IS/ND for this Plan include a measure requiring that each project site, for projects implemented within the Plan area, be surveyed by a qualified botanist for any possible special-status plants following the “Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities” (2018) during biological technical studies completed in support of the future CEQA documents tiered from this Plan. CDFW recommends that the plant surveys be floristic and, if necessary, utilize a known reference site for any specialstatus plants in order to provide a high level of confidence in the effort and results.

If a special-status plant is found, CDFW recommends that the special-status plant species be avoided whenever possible by delineating and observing a no disturbance buffer of at least 50 feet from the outer edge of the plant population(s) or specific habitat type(s) required by special status plant species. If buffers cannot be maintained, then consultation with CDFW is warranted to determine appropriate minimization and mitigation measures for impacts to special-status plant species. If a State or federally listed plant species is identified during botanical surveys, it is recommended that consultation with CDFW and/or the USFWS be conducted to determine permitting needs.

COMMENT 7: Nesting birds
CDFW did not find any analysis of cumulative impacts on nesting birds in the IS/ND.

CDFW recommends that all projects tiered from this Plan occur during the bird nonnesting season; however, if ground-disturbing or vegetation-disturbing activities must occur during the breeding season (February 1 through September 15), the project applicant is responsible for ensuring that implementation of their project does not result in a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or relevant Fish and Game Codes as referenced above.

To evaluate future project-related impacts on nesting birds, CDFW recommends that a qualified biologist conduct an assessment of nesting habitat during biological surveys in support of the project’s CEQA document, and then conduct pre-activity surveys for active nests no more than one week prior to the start of ground or vegetation disturbance to maximize the probability that nests that could potentially be impacted are detected. CDFW also recommends that surveys cover a sufficient area around each project site to identify nests and determine their status. A sufficient area means any area potentially affected by a project. In addition to direct impacts (i.e., nest destruction), noise, vibration, and movement of workers or equipment could also affect nests. Prior to initiation of construction activities, CDFW recommends that a qualified biologist conduct a survey to establish a behavioral baseline of all identified nests. Once construction DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 146
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024
begins, CDFW recommends having a qualified biologist continuously monitor nests to detect behavioral changes resulting from each project site/area. If behavioral changes occur, CDFW recommends halting the work causing that change and consulting with CDFW for additional avoidance and minimization measures.

If continuous monitoring of identified nests by a qualified biologist is not feasible, CDFW recommends a minimum no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of nonlisted bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of nonlisted raptors. These buffers are advised to remain in place until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or on-site parental care for survival. Variance from these no-disturbance buffers is possible when there is compelling biological or ecological reason to do so, such as when the construction areas would be concealed from a nest site by topography. CDFW recommends that a qualified biologist advise and support any variance from these buffers and notify CDFW in advance of implementing a variance.

COMMENT 8: CEQA Alternatives Analysis
CDFW recommends that the information and results obtained from the cumulative impacts analysis conducted as part of this Plan’s CEQA document be used to develop and modify the Plan’s alternatives to avoid and minimize impacts to biological resources to the maximum extent possible. Please note that for all future projects tiered from this Plan, that when efforts to avoid and minimize have been exhausted, remaining impacts to sensitive biological resources may need to be mitigated to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, if feasible.

CNDDB
Please note that the CNDDB is populated by records through voluntary submissions of species detections. As a result, species may be present in locations not depicted in the CNDDB but where there is suitable habitat and features capable of supporting species.

A lack of an occurrence record in the CNDDB does not mean a species is not present.

All projects tiered from this Plan should adequately assess any potential project-related impacts to biological resources by ensuring biological surveys are conducted by a qualified biologist during the appropriate survey period(s) and using the appropriate protocol survey methodology as warranted in order to determine whether or not any special status species are present at or near the project area.

DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 147
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024
Federally Listed Species
CDFW recommends consulting with USFWS regarding potential impacts to federally listed species including but not limited to the blunt-nosed leopard lizard, foothill yellowlegged frog – south Sierra DPS, Fresno kangaroo rat, giant kangaroo rat, least bell’s vireo, foothill yellow-legged frog – central coast DPS, western yellow-billed cuckoo, San Joaquin kit fox, California tiger salamander, giant garter snake, longhorn fairy shrimp, vernal pool fairy shrimp, vernal pool fairy shrimp, California red-legged frog, steelhead – Central Valley DPS, western pond turtle, western spadefoot, California jewelflower, Hartweg’s golden sunburst, palmate-bracted bird’s-beak, San Joaquin adobe sunburst, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, succulent owl’s-clover, San Joaquin woollythreads, and Keck’s checkerbloom. Take under the ESA is more broadly defined than CESA; take under ESA also includes significant habitat modification or degradation that could result in death or injury to a listed species by interfering with essential behavioral patterns such as breeding, foraging, or nesting. Consultation with the USFWS in order to comply with ESA is advised well in advance of any future project activities tiered from this Plan.

Environmental Data
CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations. (Pub. Resources Code, Section 21003, subd. (e).) Accordingly, please report any special-status species and natural communities detected during any future project surveys to the CNDDB. The CNDDB field survey form can be found at the following link:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data. The completed form can be mailed electronically to CNDDB at the following email address:

[email protected]. The types of information reported to CNDDB can be found at the following link: https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Plants-and-Animals.

Filing Fees
The Plan, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW.

Payment of the fee is required in order for the underlying Plan approval to be operative, vested, and final. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, Section 753.5; Fish & G. Code, Section 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, Section 21089.)
DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 148
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024

CONCLUSION
CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the IS/ND to assist the COG in identifying, analyzing, and mitigating this Plan’s impacts on biological resources.

More information on survey and monitoring protocols for sensitive species can be found at CDFW’s website (https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols).

Questions regarding this letter or further coordination should be directed to Kelley Nelson, Environmental Scientist, at (559) 580-3194 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Julie A. Vance
Regional Manager
ec: California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CESA [email protected]
State Clearinghouse
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
[email protected]
United States Fish and Wildlife
Patricia Cole; [email protected]
DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 For
149
Simran Jhutti, Senior Regional Planner
Fresno Council of Governments
May 16, 2024

REFERENCES
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. Protocols for surveying and evaluating impacts to special status native plant populations and sensitive natural communities. Sacramento, California, USA.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2024. Biogeographic information and observation system [BIOS]. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS. Accessed April 22, 2024.

DocuSign Envelope ID: D5777C7C-855E-4A1D-9509-85A72BAE12D6 150
FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 14-1
This chapter describes the current conditions and future plans for walking and biking in the City of San Joaquin.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The City of San Joaquin is located in central Fresno County, roughly 20 miles southwest of the City of Fresno (see Figure 1-1).

Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
There are 14.7 miles of sidewalks and 2 miles of bikeways within San Joaquin. These networks are summarized in Table 14-1 and depicted in Figures 14-1 and 14-2.

Table 14-1: Summary of Existing Walking & Bicycling Facilities in San Joaquin Facility Type Miles
Sidewalk 14.7
Shared Use Path (Class I) 0.9
Bike Lane (Class II)* 1.1
Bike Route (Class III)* 0.0
Separated Bikeway (Class IV)* 0.0
*Distance measured by centerline
The following conditions are noted relevant to the safety and comfort of bicycling and walking in San Joaquin:
» At the north edge of the city, paths connect to a park with playground equipment and other amenities.
» There are several sidewalk gaps along core roadways, especially along Colorado Road and Main Street.
» Railroad tracks bisect the city and poor pedestrian facilities hinder safe and comfortable crossings.
» Bicycle facilities are intermittent through the city.

Chapter 14

SAN JOAQUIN
151

EXHIBIT B
14-2 FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Ar izona Ave
Ca l iforn ia Ave
Ma in St
S Co l u sa Ave
F ifth St
N in th St
Nevada Ave
W Pa r l ier Ave
F i rst St
W Mann ing Ave
W D inuba Ave
W Sou th Ave
S ixth St
S Yuba Ave
S P l acer Ave
U tah Ave
Pun jab Ave
S Su tter Ave
Oregon Ave
Twe l fth St
Seven th St
E igh th St
E leven th St
Wash ington Ave
Idaho Ave
Cherry Ln
Co lorado Rd
Boston Ave
Ra i l road Ave
S P rune Ave
S Wa lnu t Ave
O l ive Rd S Pea r Rd
P ine Ave
Ch icago Ave
Denver Ave
E l Dorado Ave
A l hamb ra Ave
W Sp r ing fie ld Ave
E l m Ave
S P l acer Ave
E igh th St
Co lorado Ave
Sidewalk Present on Both Sides
Sidewalk Present on One Side
Shared-Use Path (Class I)
City Limits
City Sphere of Influence
County Boundary
Railroad
Canal
Waterway
Park/Open Space
Figure 14-1: Existing Walking Facilities in San Joaquin Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
152
FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 14-3
P
P
P
Ar izona Ave
Ca l iforn ia Ave
Ma in St
S Co l u sa Ave
F ifth St
N in th St
Nevada Ave
W Pa r l ier Ave
F i rst St
W Mann ing Ave
W D inuba Ave
W Sou th Ave
S ixth St
S Yuba Ave
S P l acer Ave
U tah Ave
Pun jab Ave
S Su tter Ave
Oregon Ave
Twe l fth St
Seven th St
E igh th St
E leven th St
Wash ington Ave
Idaho Ave
Cherry Ln
Co lorado Rd
Boston Ave
Ra i l road Ave
S P rune Ave
S Wa lnu t Ave
O l ive Rd S Pea r Rd
P ine Ave
Ch icago Ave
Denver Ave
E l Dorado Ave
A l hamb ra Ave
W Sp r ing fie ld Ave
E l m Ave
S P l acer Ave
E igh th St
Co lorado Ave
P Existing Bicycle Parking
Shared-Use Path (Class I)
Bike Lane (Class II)
Bike Route (Class III)
Separated Bikeway (Class IV)
City Limits
City Sphere of Influence
County Boundary
Railroad
Canal
Waterway
Park/Open Space
Figure 14-2: Existing Bicycling Facilities in San Joaquin Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
153
14-4 FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Plans and Policies Related to Active Transportation
The following city plans and policies are relevant to biking and walking in San Joaquin:
» City of San Joaquin General Plan (2014)
» City of San Joaquin 2040 Community Plan (2011)
» City of San Joaquin Mobility and Revitalization Plan (2013) » Municipal Code of San Joaquin
These plans and policies are discussed in greater detail in Appendix C. Regional, state, and federal plans and policies are also discussed in Appendix C.

Expenditures on Active Transportation Facilities
The City of San Joaquin has spent more than $700,000 on walking and bicycling improvements over the last five years. Recent expenditures on bicycle and pedestrian facilities are summarized in Table 14-2.

Table 14-2: Active Transportation Expenditures in San Joaquin, 2018-2023 Project Project Cost Year Completed
Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail - Elm and First $461,000 2020 Lighting Project on San Joaquin Sports Park Walking Trail $375,000 2021 Main Street Sidewalk and Bicycle Project $235,000 2022
Bike lane, crosswalk, other maintenance, and other misc. $210,000 2019-2023 Source: City of San Joaquin 2023
Maintenance
The city conducts maintenance on biking and walking facilities as needs are identified and resources allow.

Education & Encouragement Programs
Although efforts have been reduced since the Covid-19 pandemic and due to recent concerns about gang violence, San Joaquin conducted a bike rodeo and education campaign when bike racks were installed at San Joaquin Elementary School. A bike repair workshop was also recently held. Helmets and bikes are frequently given away during the end-of-year holiday season.

San Joaquin police have also conducted crosswalk yielding and speed enforcement in response to notifications from the school and the public about problem locations.

Key Destinations
Figure 14-3 shows key destinations for bicyclists and pedestrians in the City of San Joaquin.

Highlights include San Joaquin Elementary School, San Joaquin Branch Library, and businesses along Main Street.
154
FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 14-5
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
Figure 14-3: Key Destinations in San Joaquin
Ar izona Ave
Ca l iforn ia Ave
Ma in St
S Co l u sa Ave
F ifth St
N in th St
Nevada Ave
W Pa r l ier Ave
F i rst St
W Mann ing Ave
W D inuba Ave
W Sou th Ave
S ixth St
S Yuba Ave
S P l acer Ave
U tah Ave
Pun jab Ave
S Su tter Ave
Oregon Ave
Twe l fth St
Seven th St
E igh th St
E leven th St
Wash ington Ave
Idaho Ave
Cherry Ln
Co lorado Rd
Boston Ave
Ra i l road Ave
S P rune Ave
S Wa lnu t Ave
O l ive Rd S Pea r Rd
P ine Ave
Ch icago Ave
Denver Ave
E l Dorado Ave
A l hamb ra Ave
W Sp r ing fie ld Ave
E l m Ave
S P l acer Ave
E igh th St
Co lorado Ave
Higher Education
Employment Center
Government
Library
Medical Center/Hospital
Retail
Post Office
Public School
Private School
Transit Stop
Senior Facilities
City Limits
City Sphere of Influence
County Boundary
Railroad
Canal
Waterway
Park/Open Space
155
14-6 FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Disadvantaged Communities
San Joaquin meets all of the Active Transportation Program criteria for disadvantaged communities, described in Chapter 2, Existing Conditions. » Median Household Income: All households in San Joaquin make less that 65 percent of the state median.
» Free & Reduced Price Meals for Schools: The single school in San Joaquin, San Joaquin Elementary School, has between 85 percent and 90 percent of students eligible for free or reduced price meals.
» CalEnviroScreen: San Joaquin is within the 15 percent to 20 percent most disadvantaged areas in the state.
» Healthy Places Index: San Joaquin is within the 10 percent most disadvantaged areas in the state.
» Federal Climate & Economic Justice Tool: San Joaquin exceeds 3-4 categories in the Climate & Economic Justice Screen.
» US DOT Equitable Transportation Community Disadvantaged Community Tool: San Joaquin is ranked in the 10 percent most disadvantaged areas in the state. » FCOG Environmental Justice Areas: All of San Joaquin is considered disadvantaged by this definition.

Because all of San Joaquin meets one or more of these criteria for disadvantaged communities, the challenges for walking and biking described at the beginning of this chapter are equity issues.

Peter Rusconi Park
156
FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 14-7
Existing Trips
Based on the U.S. Census American Community Survey, approximately 2 percent of San Joaquin workers commute to work by walking and 0 percent commute to work by bicycling. These shares are lower than the statewide averages, as shown in Table 14-3. However, these statistics only include workers who walk or ride every day, not those who do so occasionally. Reliable data on non-commute trips, including trips to school, trips for shopping, and recreational trips is not readily available and not included in these estimates. Thus, the total number of biking and walking trips in the city is higher than shown here.

Table 14-3: Trips to Work by Walking and Bicycling in San Joaquin Jurisdiction
Walk Bicycle
Estimate Share Estimate Share
San Joaquin 64 2.0% 0 0.0%
California 440,483 2.4% 128,474 0.7%
Note: Workers aged 16 years and older, excludes percentage of employees that work from home.

Source: U.S. Census 2018-2022 American Community Survey, 2023; Fehr & Peers, 2023 Collisions
There were two total injury collisions reported between 2016 and 2021 in San Joaquin. None of the collisions in this time period involved people walking or bicycling. 157
14-8 FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

PLANNED NETWORKS
The planned walking and biking networks for San Joaquin are summarized in Table 14-4 and shown in Figures 14-4 and 14-5. The networks include shared-use paths, bike lanes and routes, sidewalks, and crosswalk improvements. The proposed networks are designed to connect to San Joaquin’s multi-use paths, to provide access to key destinations, and to serve as recreational assets. The sidewalk improvements also fill gaps in the sidewalk network and add crossing improvements to enhance safety near schools and across busy roads. Appendix D includes a list of these network improvements including locations and extents, lengths, high-level estimated cost, and priority. Additionally, several of the high priority projects have been grouped into a single project. Additional information to support a funding application for this project has been combined into a fact sheet, which is included in Appendix F.

Figure 14-5 also presents planned bike parking for San Joaquin. These planned bike parking locations supplement existing locations by adding parking at parks and near retail areas.

Based on the indicators of disadvantaged communities discussed earlier in this section, these facilities all support disadvantaged communities.

Table 14-4: Summary of Planned Walking and Biking Facilities in San Joaquin Facility Type Existing
(Miles)
Planned
(Miles)
Total
(Miles)
Sidewalk 14.7 1.9 16.6
Shared Use Path (Class I) 0.9 2.9 3.8
Bike Lane (Class II)* 1.1 1.2 2.3
Bike Route (Class III)* 0.0 0.8 0.8
Separated Bikeway (Class IV)* 0.0 1.0 1.0
*Distance measured by centerline
Sources: Fresno Council of Governments, Fehr & Peers, 2023 Costs to implement these facilities are summarized in Table 14-5.

Table 14-5: Cost of Planned Walking and Biking Facilities in San Joaquin Facility Type Cost Per Mile High Priority Total
Sidewalk $369,600 $286,300 $685,300
Shared Use Path (Class I) $955,700 - $2,761,973
Bike Lane (Class II) $401,400 $244,854 $469,638
Bike Route (Class III) $16,000 $12,960 $12,960
Separated Bikeway (Class IV) $633,600 $443,520 $652,608 Crossing Improvements $724,800 $924,800
Total $1,712,434 $5,507,279
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
158
FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 14-9
Figure 14-4: Planned Walking Facilities in San Joaquin
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
Ar izona Ave
Ca l iforn ia Ave
Ma in St
S Co l u sa Ave
F ifth St
N in th St
Nevada Ave
W Pa r l ier Ave
F i rst St
W Mann ing Ave
W D inuba Ave
W Sou th Ave
S ixth St
S Yuba Ave
S P l acer Ave
U tah Ave
Pun jab Ave
S Su tter Ave
Oregon Ave
Twe l fth St
Seven th St
E igh th St
E leven th St
Wash ington Ave
Idaho Ave
Cherry Ln
Co lorado Rd
Boston Ave
Ra i l road Ave
S P rune Ave
S Wa lnu t Ave
O l ive Rd S Pea r Rd
P ine Ave
Ch icago Ave
Denver Ave
E l Dorado Ave
A l hamb ra Ave
W Sp r ing fie ld Ave
E l m Ave
S P l acer Ave
E igh th St
Co lorado Ave
Park/Open Space
Waterway
Canal
Railroad
County Boundary
City Sphere of Influence
City Limits
Funded Intersection Improvements/Pedestrian Crossings
Intersection Improvements/Pedestrian Crossings
Funded Shared-Use Path (Class I)
Planned Shared-Use Path (Class I)
Funded Sidewalk
Construct Sidewalk
Planned Facilities
Shared-Use Path (Class I)
Sidewalk Present on One Side
Sidewalk Present on Both Sides
Existing Facilities
159
14-10 FRESNO COUNTY REGIONAL ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Figure 14-5: Planned Bicycle Facilities in San Joaquin
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Ar izona Ave
Ca l iforn ia Ave
Ma in St
S Co l u sa Ave
F ifth St
N in th St
Nevada Ave
W Pa r l ier Ave
F i rst St
W Mann ing Ave
W D inuba Ave
W Sou th Ave
S ixth St
S Yuba Ave
S P l acer Ave
U tah Ave
Pun jab Ave
S Su tter Ave
Oregon Ave
Twe l fth St
Seven th St
E igh th St
E leven th St
Wash ington Ave
Idaho Ave
Cherry Ln
Co lorado Rd
Boston Ave
Ra i l road Ave
S P rune Ave
S Wa lnu t Ave
O l ive Rd S Pea r Rd
P ine Ave
Ch icago Ave
Denver Ave
E l Dorado Ave
A l hamb ra Ave
W Sp r ing fie ld Ave
E l m Ave
S P l acer Ave
E igh th St
Co lorado Ave
Park/Open Space
Waterway
Canal
Railroad
County Boundary
City Sphere of Influence
City Limits
Class II or IV
Class II or III
Separated Bikeway (Class IV)
Class III with Multi-use Shoulder
Bike Route (Class III)
Bike Lane (Class II)
Shared-Use Path (Class I)
Bicycle Facility Classification
Planned Bicycle Facility
Funded Bicycle Facility
Existing Bicycle Facility
Bicycle Facility Status
P Proposed Bicycle Parking
P Existing Bicycle Parking
160

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Elizabeth Cabrera, City Manager
DATE: August 6, 2024
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Discuss the State Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Application and possible activities and projects

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the City Council: 1) review the program and available funding options and staff recommendations; 2) open the public hearing; 3) receive public comment regarding the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and possible activities and projects to be considered for funding under the upcoming NOFA process; 4) close the public hearing; 5) discuss potential applications/recommendations; and 6) direct staff to prepare a CDBG application for Council consideration.

BACKGROUND
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program authorizes the use of funds to assist low- and moderate-income families or aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight. There are two types of CDBG programs:
“entitlement” and “non-entitlement”. Metropolitan cities and urban counties are entitled to receive annual grants under the “entitlement” program – direct from HUD. Metropolitan cities are principal cities or Metropolitan Areas (MAs) or other cities within MAs that have populations of at least 50,000. Urban Counties are within MAs that have population of 200,000 or more excluding the population of metropolitan cities within their boundaries. The “non-entitlement” program is administered by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and where the City can apply for funding under a competitive application process.

The City has been successful in utilizing CDBG funds in the past. Below is a brief summary of recent projects completed with CDBG dollars in the last 5 years:

Well #6 $2,950,000
Waterline Replacement $2,900,000
Youth Intervention Program $500,000
The Community Development and Economic Development Allocations of the State CDBG program will be published in a “Notice of Funding Availability” (NOFA) each program year.

Although the NOFA has not been released yet, staff are estimating that approximately $45 million will be made available statewide based on HCD guidance. Under the Community Development Allocation, eligible cities and counties will be allowed to apply for a maximum of $3,600,000 for up to three activities. The NOFA will again include an “Over the Counter” (OTC) component for infrastructure, housing, and economic development, as well as a competitive component for planning and public service programs.

Eligible activities under the above allocations in the NOFA consist of the follow OTC categories:
public improvements, public facilities, homeownership assistance, housing rehabilitation, business assistance and microenterprise activities. The other options allowed under the 161
Staff Report: CDBG Funding Page 2
August 6, 2024
competitive component are planning studies and public service programs. Eligible activities paid for with state CDBG funds must meet one or more of the three national objectives listed in CDBG federal statutes as follows: benefit to low-income households or persons; elimination of slums and blight; or meeting urgent community development need (a need from a state or federally declared disaster
Staff anticipates submitting an application under the 2024 NOFA. OTC activities are those that are funded on a first come first served basis and are not ranked by competitive criteria. The eligible activities under the 2024 CDBG NOFA may include the following up to the maximum of $3,600,000:
• Public Service (maximum grant of $300,000), for one service. Examples include childcare, health care, recreation programs, fair housing counseling, drug and alcohol abuse counseling and testing, homeless services, food bank, senior services, and nutrition services benefiting low- and moderate-income persons.
• Planning and Technical Assistance (maximum grant of $250,000 for one study/plan). The product must show a connection to assisting with an eligible CDBG activity that, if implemented, meets a National Objective. Completed planning documents are submitted to the State at the time of completion. The grants may require match; in the past a $5,000 cash match to be expended prior to expenditure of CDBG funds – the NOFA will outline this final amount. Examples include studies, analysis, data gathering, preparation of plans, and identification of action that will implement plans, NEPA and environmental plans.
• Housing Programs (maximum grant of $1,500,000 – OTC Activity):
 Homeownership Assistance Program: assistance with down-payment or closing costs.
 Housing Rehabilitation Program for Single Family Homes: include repairs and improvements of owner-occupied units.
• Business Assistance or Microenterprise Assistance (maximum grant of $1,500,000 for either Business Assistance or Microenterprise Assistance – OTC Activity). Examples of Business Assistance include financing of working capital, furniture, equipment, and property repairs/improvements. Examples of Microenterprise include business training, financing of working capital, furniture, equipment, and property repairs/improvements. • Public Infrastructure (maximum grant of $3,300,000 – OTC Activity). Provides funding for all construction, project implementation, design, federal compliance and overlay requirements, environmental and other soft costs related to the project. Projects may include water, sewer, storm drain, sidewalks, roadways, wells, water storage tanks and other public infrastructure systems.
• Public Facility (maximum grant of $3,300,000 – OTC Activity). Provides funding for project equipment, construction of community/senior centers, homeless facilities, park and recreation facilities, fire stations, fire equipment, health facilities, and other public facilities that meet the national objective of the program.
162
Staff Report: CDBG Funding Page 3
August 6, 2024
DISCUSSION:

The purpose of this public hearing is to solicit ideas and input from the general public, discuss staff recommendations and provide direction to staff on potential programs to include in the CDBG applications (NOFA and Program Income).

The application may include the following:

Maximum Award: $3,600,000
Maximum Activities: 3
Public Service/Planning Grant: Up to $300,000
OTC Activities: Up to $3,300,000
Other grant requirements include:
• Activities should address serious health & safety needs • Activities should primarily benefit lower income households (defined as at or below 80% of the median income)
• Applicants must demonstrate capacity to complete the project within the grant term (36 months)
• OTC projects and programs must be ready to bid or implement the program within 90 days of contract execution
• Single audit must be completed and submitted
• Housing Element must be up to date with HCD
• Sam.Gov registration must be active
Staff have reviewed projects/programs that meet the requirements of the CDBG program. Based on staff’s internal discussion and initial outreach, it is recommended the City Council consider submittal of an application for up to $3,600,000 to include one OTC project and one public service competitive application which are further described below.

OTC Project – Sports Park Complex Expansion. Anticipate $3.3 Million Public Service Application – Salvation Army Food Distribution Program. Anticipate $150-$200k.

FISCAL IMPACT
The City’s grant consultant for CDBG, Adams Ashby Group, will be completing the application.

The application cost is an eligible expenditure under the City’s open contract with general administration funds. The application cost will be $7,500.

If awarded, CDBG funds are 100% grant.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Open the public hearing

2. Receive public comment

3. Close hearing

4. Review potential projects and select the projects for inclusion in the State CDBG application, and provide direction for staff to proceed with preparing an application; or

5. Provide alternative direction to staff.
163

STAFF REPORT
Date: August 6, 2024
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Matt Flood, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT:

Authorizing Voting Delegates for the Upcoming League of California Cities Conference.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Council authorize a Voting Delegate and up to two alternates for the upcoming issues to be voted upon at the 2024 LOCC Annual Conference.

BACKGROUND:

Every year the League of California Cities main Annual Conference is held with the purpose of educating public servants, voting on important issues, and networking. This year’s conference in Long Beach from October 16th through the 18th will include the usual opportunity for cities to vote on issues of important to Cities, which directs not only the policies of the LOCC, but also how the LOCC will lobby State and Federal representatives to influence legislation beneficial to communities.

Therefore, the LOCC asks that each City designate their representative to be present to vote on these issues. They allow for up to two alternates in order to ensure someone is able to be there to represent the City.

ATTACHMENTS:

Delegate Information Packet
164
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org

DATE: Wednesday, July 10, 2024
TO: Mayors, Council Members, City Clerks, and City Managers RE: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES
League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Oct. 16-18, 2024 Long Beach Convention Center
Every year, the League of California Cities convenes a member-driven General Assembly at the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. The General Assembly is an important opportunity where city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy.

Taking place on Oct. 18, the General Assembly is comprised of voting delegates appointed by each member city; every city has one voting delegate. Your appointed voting delegate plays an important role during the General Assembly by representing your city and voting on resolutions.

To cast a vote during the General Assembly, your city must designate a voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity. Voting delegates may either be an elected or appointed official.

Action by Council Required. Consistent with Cal Cities bylaws, a city’s voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council. Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone.

Following council action, please submit your city’s delegates through the online submission portal by Wed., Sept. 25. When completing the Voting Delegate submission form, you will be asked to attest that council action was taken. You will need to be signed in to your My Cal Cities account when submitting the form.

Submitting your voting delegate form by the deadline will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternate records prior to the conference and provide pre-conference communications with voting delegates.

Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. Conference registration is open on the Cal Cities website.

Council Action Advised by September 25, 2024
165
For a city to cast a vote, one voter must be present at the General Assembly and in possession of the voting delegate card and voting tool. Voting delegates and alternates need to pick up their conference badges before signing in and picking up the voting delegate card at the voting delegate desk. This will enable them to receive the special sticker on their name badges that will admit the voting delegate into the voting area during the General Assembly.

Please view Cal Cities’ event and meeting policy in advance of the conference.

Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting delegate card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but only between the voting delegate and alternates. If the voting delegate and alternates find themselves unable to attend the General Assembly, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official.

Seating Protocol during General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

The voting delegate desk, located in the conference registration area of the Long Beach Convention Center in Long Beach, will be open at the following times: Wednesday, Oct. 16, 8:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. and Thursday, Oct. 17, 7:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. On Friday, Oct. 18, the voting delegate desk will be open at the General Assembly, starting at 7:30 a.m., but will be closed during roll calls and voting.

The voting procedures that will be used at the conference are attached to this memo.

Please share these procedures and this memo with your council and especially with the individuals that your council designates as your city’s voting delegate and alternates.

Once again, thank you for submitting your voting delegate and alternates by Wednesday, Sept. 25. If you have questions, please contact Zach Seals at [email protected].

Attachments:
• General Assembly Voting Guidelines
• Information Sheet: Cal Cities Resolutions and the General Assembly 166
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org General Assembly Voting Guidelines

1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.

2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the voting delegate form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee.

3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting delegate desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the voting delegate desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the General Assembly.

4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the credentials committee at the voting delegate desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution.

5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and voting tool; and be registered with the credentials committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate nor alternate.

6. Voting Area at General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the credentials committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the General Assembly.
167
Sixty days before the
Annual Conference
and Expo, Cal Cities
members may submit
policy proposals on
issues of importance
to cities. The resolution must
have the concurrence of at least
five additional member cities or
individual members.

How it works: Cal Cities
Resolutions and the General Assembly
General Assembly
General Resolutions Policy Committees
Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure Cal Cities represents cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities’ advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policies that erode local control.

The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how resolutions and the General Assembly work.

The petitioned
resolution is an
alternate method
to introduce policy
proposals during
the annual conference. The
petition must be signed by
voting delegates from 10% of
member cities, and submitted to
the Cal Cities President at least
24 hours before the beginning
of the General Assembly.

Petitioned Resolutions
The Cal Cities
President assigns
general resolutions
to policy committees
where members
review, debate, and recommend
positions for each policy proposal.

Recommendations are forwarded
to the Resolutions Committee.

Who’s who
The Resolutions Committee
includes representatives
from each Cal Cities
diversity caucus, regional
division, municipal
department, and policy
committee, as well as
individuals appointed by
the Cal Cities president.

Voting delegates
are appointed by each
member city; every city
has one voting delegate.

The General Assembly is a
meeting of the collective
body of all voting
delegates —one from
every member city.

Seven policy committees
meet throughout the year
to review and recommend
positions to take on bills
and regulatory proposals.

Policy committees include
members from each Cal
Cities diversity caucus,
regional division, and
municipal department,
as well as individuals
appointed by the Cal
Cities president.

During the General Assembly, voting delegates
debate and consider general and petitioned
resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions
Committee. Potential Cal Cities bylaws
amendments are also considered at this meeting.

Cal Cities policy
development is a memberinformed process,
grounded in the voices and
experiences of city officials
throughout the state.

For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo
Resolutions Committee
The Resolutions
Committee considers
all resolutions. General
Resolutions approved1 by
either a policy committee
or the Resolutions Committee are next
considered by the General Assembly.

General resolutions not approved, or
referred for further study by both a
policy committee and the Resolutions
Committee do not go to the General
Assembly. All Petitioned Resolutions
are considered by the General
Assembly, unless disqualified.2
During the Annual Conference and Expo
1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f). 168

San Joaquin City CouncilAugust 6, 2024

San Joaquin City Council
August 6, 2024