Conditional Use Permit Application No. P24-03299 & Minor Deviation Application No. P24-03301

2025070297

City of Fresno

NOE - Notice of Exemption

7/8/2025

7/8/2025

Steven Martinez

City of Fresno

Planner

Lead/Public Agency

2600 Fresno Street, Room 3043
Fresno, CA 93721-3604

(559) 621-8047

steven.martinez@fresno.gov

Charlie Brown

Ghai Management Services, Inc

Project Manager

Project Applicant

25 East Airway Boulevard
Livermore, CA 94551

(559) 720-8638

charlie@ghaimanagement.com

36°43'47.8"N 119°48'1.2"W

Fresno Street and “C” Street

467-152-21 & 467-152-04

Categorical Exemption

Class 3 & Class 32 Sections 15302 and 15332

This project is exempt under Sections 15303/Class 3 and 15332/Class 32 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines as follows: Under Section 15303/Class 3, the proposed project is exempt from CEQA requirements when the project consists of the construction of limited numbers of new, small structures. The numbers of structures described in this class are the maximum allowable on any legal parcel. Examples of this exemption include a store, motel, office, restaurant or similar structure not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, and not exceeding 2500 square feet in floor area. The Project proposes a ± 2,413 square foot Popeyes restaurant which is permissible on the subject property. Additionally, the facility will comply with all laws which dictate restaurant operations and waste management to ensure the facility will not produce or release significant amounts of hazardous substances. Under Section 15332/Class 32, the proposed project is exempt from CEQA requirements when the project is characterized as in-fill development meeting the following conditions: a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations. As conditioned, the proposed Project is consistent with the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, and the applicable Goals and Policies of the Fresno General Plan as follows: Policy UF-12-c: Local-Serving Neighborhood Centers. Design Neighborhood Centers for local services and amenities that build upon the character and identity of surrounding neighborhoods and communities. The proposed development will provide the existing surrounding neighborhoods with an additional local service (restaurant) without requiring residents to travel outside the neighborhood to obtain that service. Policy LU-2-a: Infill Development and Redevelopment. Promote development of vacant, underdeveloped, and re-developable land within the City Limits where urban services are available by considering the establishment and implementation of supportive regulations and programs. The project promotes development of vacant, underdeveloped, and re-developable land within the City Limits where urban services are available, because the contiguous parcels on which this Project is to be developed is currently vacant, and is substantially surrounded by urban uses in an urban part of the City with access to existing infrastructure. Policy LU-6-a: Design of Commercial Development. Foster high quality design, diversity, and a mix of amenities in new development with uses through the consideration of guidelines, regulations, and design review procedures. The proposed project will enhance the existing area and vicinity through the implementation of modern, quality design, and materials and enhanced landscaping. Furthermore, the Project is consistent with the zoning designation and regulations; specifically, Fresno Municipal Code Articles 11 (Mixed-Use Districts), 20 (General Site Regulations), 23 (Landscape), 24 (Parking and Loading), 53 (Conditional Use Permits), and 56 (Minor Deviations). b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The Project is located within city limits on two contiguous parcels--APNs: 467-152-21 & 467-152-0--totaling ± 0.5 acres. The parcel is surrounded by other urban (commercial) uses including fast food restaurants (Dominos, Wendy, Subway), service stations (ARCO, Family Express), and a grocery store anchored shopping center with smaller inline shops (Kearney Palms). c) The project has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The Project site is a previously developed vacant lot characterized by highly disturbed ruderal landcover. Most special-status animal species known to occur in the region are not expected to occur within the Project area based on the lack of suitable habitat, lack of connectivity to natural areas, and frequent site disturbance. Furthermore, the absence of trees at the Project site eliminates the potential for migratory bird species to nest. Therefore, the Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. ? The Project will not result in any significant effects on traffic because the project did not exceed any established City of Fresno thresholds which require a Traffic Impact Study. Furthermore, the project screened out of a VMT analysis as it is classified as local serving retail. The proposed development will provide the existing surrounding neighborhoods with convenient restaurant service without requiring residents to travel outside the neighborhood to obtain that service. This restaurant will be located among other similar uses and near existing residential neighborhoods. Furthermore, the restaurant is not considered a regional business which will attract patrons from outside of the neighborhood. ? The Project will not result in any significant effects to noise because the project will be conditioned to comply with City of Fresno noise standards outline in Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-2506. ? The Project will not result in any significant effects on air quality because the project falls within the thresholds identified on the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s Small Project Analysis Levels (SPAL) document. In the interest of streamlining CEQA requirements, projects that fit the descriptions up to the project sizes indicated and are below both of the corresponding non-heavy-heavy duty trucks (HHDT), and HHDT (i.e. tractor trailers) trip lengths, are deemed to have a less than significant impact on air quality and as such are excluded from quantifying criteria pollutant emissions for CEQA purposes. Specifically, the Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-through land use category requires less than 4,500 square feet in floor area, 1,500 daily one-way trips for all fleet types excluding HHDT, and less than 25 one-way trips for HHDT trips. The project will not exceed any of the identified thresholds. Furthermore, the SJVAPCD reviewed an Air Impact Assessment application for the Project and determined that the baseline emissions for construction and operation will be less than two tons Nox per year and two tons PM10 per year. Pursuant to District Rule 9510 Section 4.3, this Project is exempt from the requirements of Section 6.0 (General Mitigation Requirements) and Section 7.0 (Off-site Emission Reduction Fee Calculations and Fee Schedules) of the rule. The exempt status of the Project confirms the project will not have a significant effect on air quality. ? The Project will not result in any significant effects to water quality because the project will comply with all laws which dictate restaurant operations and waste management. Additionally, the refuse enclosure will have a roof cover which will prevent precipitation from encountering waste and contaminating water. e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The Project has been reviewed by City Departments and Agencies with jurisdiction over the property. As conditioned, the proposed project will comply with all applicable requirements and will be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. Additionally, the Project is located on a parcel fully within City limits and is surrounded by other urban uses. Therefore, adequate public utilities and public services have already been built out in the Project area. Therefore, the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Sections 15303/Class 3and 15332/Class 32 of the CEQA Guidelines. None of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 apply to the project. The exceptions are as follows: (a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. An “environmental resource,” as used in this regulation, refers to “a ‘natural resource of wealth or revenue,” or a nature feature or phenomenon that enhances the quality of human life.’” (Berkeley Hills Watershed Coalition v. City of Berkeley (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 880, 891.) The Project site is not located in a sensitive environment which will impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. It is located on two contiguous vacant parcels which are highly disturbed and were previously occupied by a gas station. There are no known environmental resources on this site. (b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. The Project site is a vacant parcel surrounded by developed parcels with minimal potential for future development of the same scale. However, as aforementioned, the SJVAPCD reviewed an Air Impact Assessment application for the Project and determined that the baseline emissions for construction and operation will be less than two tons Nox per year and two tons PM10 per year. Pursuant to District Rule 9510 Section 4.3, this Project is exempt from the requirements of Section 6.0 (General Mitigation Requirements) and Section 7.0 (Off-site Emission Reduction Fee Calculations and Fee Schedules) of the rule. The exempt status of the Project confirms the Project will not have a significant effect on air quality. Comparable projects of the same type in the place will not have a cumulative impact if none of projects exceed the baseline emissions identified by the SJVAPCD. (c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. The restaurant with drive-through and associate on- and off-site improvements, in conjunction with all codes, rules, regulations, statutes, do not present a reasonable possibility that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. (d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR. The subject site is not located within an area designated as a state scenic highway. (e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. Historically, the Project site was developed with a Chevron gasoline service station from 1970 until 1988. The former gasoline service station contained one 5,000-gallon single-walled steel underground storage tank (UST), two 10,000-gallon single-walled steel USTs and one 1,000-gallon single-walled steel UST that were installed at the subject property in 1970. Fresno County Department of Public Health (FCDPH) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) records indicated that a gasoline release from the supreme grade unleaded product piping was discovered in 1984, and the supreme and regular unleaded gasoline USTs failed tightness testing in 1987. The service station was demolished and the UST systems removed in 1988. Total Volatile Hydrocarbons (TVH) were detected in soil samples collected beneath one of the 10,000-gallon USTs, but not beneath the dispenser islands or product lines. A UST Unauthorized Release (Leak) Contamination Site Report was filed on September 1, 1988, and additional investigation to determine the extent of the release was required. The case was transferred to the RWQCB for oversight in 1989, but an investigation to determine the extent of soil and groundwater contamination was not conducted until 1995. A pump and treat system was installed at the subject property in August 1989 to mitigate groundwater pollution, which operated with limited effectiveness until August 1992. A soil vapor extraction (SVE) system was operated from May 1994 to July 1996, and reportedly removed 200,000 pounds of volatile hydrocarbon source mass. A second, more extensive, SVE and air sparging (AS) system was installed in 2002 to remove additional source hydrocarbon mass from beneath the subject property and adjacent Shell Service Station site (1212 Fresno Street). The SVE and AS systems appear to have been operated from 2002 or 2005 to 2010, that removed approximately 201,540 pounds of source mass as TPH-gasoline and 2,690 pounds of benzene through October 29, 2010 after rebound testing. The consultant estimated that approximately 1,000 pounds of source mass remained in the subsurface and desorption from fine-grained soils might continue for approximately 12.2 years. RWQCB concluded that approximately 400,000 pounds of source hydrocarbon mass had been removed during two periods of SVE and AS remediation. Approximately 1,000 pounds of gasoline constituents may remain in subsurface soil and groundwater at the time of case closure. Gasoline constituents dissolved in groundwater had been reduced to low concentrations that were not migrating offsite. RWQCB indicated that the remaining effects of the UST release were unlikely to threaten the present use of groundwater and public health, and would continue to naturally attenuate. Human health risk from vapor intrusion to workers in future onsite buildings and from direct contact with shallow soil was evaluated in July 2011. Soil-gas samples were collected from 10-feet below ground surface (bgs) from four permanent sampling points. Soil samples were collected at two-foot intervals to a depth to 10-feet bgs. Gasoline constituents and other organic compounds were not detected in the soil and soil-gas samples. The consultant concluded that human health risk from the remaining effects of the UST release was below the level of concern and recommended that the UST release case be closed after public notification of the proposed closure and groundwater monitoring well destruction. Case closure was recommended per RWQCB’s Low Threat UST Case Policy. On July 27, 2012, RWQCB issued a case closure determination to Chevron, which confirmed the completion of the site investigation and corrective action for the USTs formerly located at the subject property. Based on the information in the file and with the provision that the information provided to the agency was accurate and representative of site conditions, the agency found that the site investigation and corrective action carried out at the UST site was in compliance with applicable requirements. The former gasoline service station and closed Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) case with residual subsurface contamination is considered a Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition (CREC). The case closure letter did not indicate land use restrictions or limitations against future development, nor does it stipulate additional requirements for development. Furthermore, Staff have reviewed the California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStore website and determined the Project site is not included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. (f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The subject site does not contain any known historical resource(s). Therefore, the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A categorical exemption, as noted above, has been prepared for the project.