OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Fresno Historic Preservation Commission Regular Meeting – February 24, 2026

City Council & CommissionsTuesday, February 24, 2026
BodyFresno, California
SessionCity Council & Commissions
DateTuesday, February 24, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 55:05

Transcript — Verbatim
1:09

They are kind of right on the edge.

1:11

There's a lot of people there.

1:12

They must have been sort of support.

1:18

It's usually about it's so it's probably six o'clock.

1:24

All right, good evening.

1:25

We're gonna call this meeting to order at 6 of PM.

1:34

We're recording normally.

1:35

Great.

1:36

So we'll start with roll call, please.

1:40

Commissioner Eddie.

1:41

Present.

1:42

Commissioner Johnson?

1:44

Present.

1:44

Commissioner LeVot.

1:45

Present.

1:46

Commissioner Federico.

1:49

Commissioner Halisian.

1:51

Present.

1:52

Vice Chair Hatley.

1:53

Present.

1:54

Chair Swanson.

1:55

Here.

1:57

All right.

1:58

Uh thank you.

2:00

Next we're gonna move on to procedures.

2:03

For each matter considered by the Commission, there will first be a staff presentation followed by presentation from the project applicant.

2:09

The commissioners will then take the opportunity to ask questions of staff and applicant before opening to public.

2:14

Testimony from supporters of the project will be taken, followed by testimony from those in opposition.

2:18

Staff can provide a summation if necessary.

2:21

The applicant will have the right to a final rebuttal presentation prior to closing the public hearing, followed by consideration of the item in action, if any by the commission.

2:29

In accordance with section 13 of Article 2 of the historic preservation commission bylaws, government length of public debate, all public testimony from those in support and in opposition of the project will be limited to three minutes per person.

2:41

All public testimony must be presented to the commission at the podium.

2:45

Any testimony that references race, religion, ethnicity, economic status, national origin, or any other classification protected under state or federal law in a directory manner shall be deemed irrelevant and not be considered by the commission in making its determinations.

2:58

If you challenge these matters in court, it may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raise your oral or written testimony or before the close of the hearing.

3:07

With that, we'll move on to item three, which is approving um well, there's no minutes uh currently to be approved.

3:15

So uh we're gonna I'm assuming we're gonna be doing December's minutes next month then.

3:19

Yes.

3:19

Okay, perfect.

3:21

Uh so we'll move on to item four, approval of tonight's agenda.

3:25

Is there any changes to the agenda?

3:27

And no changes to the agenda.

3:29

Okay, with that, I'll entertain a motion.

3:31

I'll motion to approve.

3:32

All right, we have a motion and a second.

3:34

Motion by Vice Chair Hatwig, second by Commissioner Laval.

3:38

All in favor signify by saying aye.

3:40

Opposed.

3:42

Uh agenda is approved.

3:45

Uh we're moving past consent calendar.

3:47

There's no items there and moving on to continued matters.

3:50

Item 6A, file ID 26-94, which is our continued from last meeting, establishment appointment of the municipal co-review subcommittee.

4:01

Um if I do remember last meeting, one of the reasons that we did postpone to this meeting was due to um uh a significant lack of individuals that were there for the December 22nd meeting.

4:15

So now with us having minus one, um, we can entertain uh what we're gonna be looking at for that item.

4:24

Okay.

4:27

So any thoughts or any um uh items with regards to that.

4:32

Um what we will need to look at is not only approval to uh move towards having that subcommittee, but also then who's gonna be sitting on the subcommittee.

4:45

I do two.

4:48

All right.

4:49

So we have three members.

4:51

Uh so we have uh vice chair Hatley, Commissioner Logian, Commissioner Johnson.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Historic Preservation█████████████████████████████████████████████58%
Public Engagement█████████12%
Procedural█████████11%
Public Safety█████7%
Technology and Innovation██3%
Homelessness██3%
Municipal Code██2%
Transportation Safety██2%
Code Enforcement██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Fresno Historic Preservation Commission Regular Meeting – February 24, 2026

Note: The official meeting minutes and agenda indicate the meeting occurred on Monday, January 26, 2026. However, per the summary instruction, the meeting date is listed as February 24, 2026. This discrepancy is noted.

The Historic Preservation Commission convened to establish a Municipal Code Review Subcommittee, re‑elect its Chair and Vice Chair, receive an update on a December 2025 Chinatown fire that destroyed two historic structures, and review monthly staff and subcommittee reports. All votes were unanimous (6‑0, with Commissioner Federico absent).

Consent Calendar

  • None.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Three members of the public addressed the Commission during unscheduled items:
    • Nikki: Expressed concern about overall city transparency and advocated for a public information portal to improve access to city processes.
    • Edward Medrano: Described difficulties with both the City’s senior paint program and the County’s lead‑abatement program. He stated that he qualified for assistance but was denied due to budget limits and miscommunication. He urged the Commission to use its influence to improve inter‑agency coordination, noting potential benefits for historic properties.
    • Linda Scambrae (representing Heritage Fresno): Offered partnership and support for May’s Historic Preservation Month. Proposed displaying historic lanterns at public locations, organizing tours of historic buildings, improving exhibit materials, and coordinating publicity. She volunteered to serve on any related committee.

Discussion Items

VI‑A – Establishment and Appointment of the Municipal Code Review Subcommittee (Continued from December 22, 2025)

  • The Commission confirmed the need to form a subcommittee to update the Municipal Code for the digital era. Commissioners Halajian, Johnston, and Vice Chair Hatwig volunteered to serve. Questions about including an attorney directly on the subcommittee were resolved: a fourth member would create a quorum and risk a Brown Act violation, so legal review will occur indirectly through staff. The subcommittee will present updates and seek feedback from the full Commission. Staff outlined a revision process (redlining, advisory input, attorney review, City Council approval). The timeline anticipates monthly meetings over three to four months, with completion by year’s end. No public comment was received.

VII‑A – Annual Election of Commission Chair and Vice Chair

  • Commissioner Laval nominated Chair Sponsler and Vice Chair Hatwig to remain in their positions during the transitional year, citing ongoing Municipal Code Updates and the importance of America 250. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously.

VII‑B – Update on Chinatown Fire (1548 Tulare Street)

  • Representatives from the California High Speed Rail Authority (Augie Blancas and Brenda McKenzie) reported remotely. On December 7, 2025, three trespassers started a fire that destroyed the vacant building. The building had been in poor condition with over ten prior fire incidents. High‑speed rail contractors are conducting demolition and cleanup, expected to take approximately two more months. Asbestos and lead abatement had been underway prior to the fire. Staff clarified the building was not eligible for local, state, or national historic registers, though it had been referenced in past Chinatown surveys. High‑speed rail staff agreed to provide written follow‑up on the last formal evaluation.
  • The adjacent Haruji Ego Family Building (Heritage Property No. 8) sustained severe structural damage from sharing a wall with the burned structure and was demolished on an emergency basis. Staff stated it will be removed from the City’s Heritage Property list as it no longer exists.
  • Commissioners discussed broader concerns about deterioration and fire risks in Chinatown, noting challenges from unoccupied buildings, unclear property ownership, and slow revitalization. Staff emphasized ongoing city investments in public safety, activation, and homelessness response, but noted long‑term improvement depends on property owner maintenance and increased activity in the area.

VII‑C – Update on Regular Monthly Topics

  • Staff Updates (Ashley Atkinson):
    • Brewer Adobe: The tarp placed by the property owner remains in place and satisfies current requirements. Staff has requested a follow‑up meeting with the owner’s architect and engineer to discuss a demolition plan preserving walls identified by the Commission. The meeting has not yet been scheduled. A joint letter from Code Enforcement and Historic Preservation was issued in fall 2025; staff is preparing to ensure the meeting occurs and will proceed if the owner remains unresponsive.
    • December 2025 Activity Report: Continued review of planning entitlements, many routed to the Architectural Review Subcommittee. A significant number of building‑permit reviews were completed due to the new process for all structures 50 years or older. A small number of Section 106 reviews were conducted; no Mills Act or Mitigation applications were submitted.
  • Subcommittee Updates:
    • Architectural Review Subcommittee (Vice Chair Hatwig): Reported high activity, with at least five buildings reviewed recently, including two earlier that day. Many projects involve structures from the late 1960s or 1970s, reflecting the 50‑year review threshold. The Subcommittee is distinguishing items that can be handled at its level versus those requiring full Commission attention. Members discussed the threshold’s effectiveness, noting it captures notable structures that might otherwise be overlooked.
    • Historic Preservation Month Subcommittee (Commissioner Laval): The subcommittee met recently and will continue developing ideas for May’s calendar. All Commissioners are encouraged to contribute ideas, with a goal to finalize the calendar by March.

Key Outcomes

  • Municipal Code Review Subcommittee Established and Appointed: Commissioners Halajian, Johnston, and Vice Chair Hatwig were appointed to the subcommittee. Commissioner Eddings will provide review through staff as needed. The motion carried 6‑0.
  • Chair and Vice Chair Re‑Elected: James Sponsler and Jason Hatwig were unanimously re‑elected as Chair and Vice Chair, respectively, for the current year.
  • Chinatown Fire Update Acknowledged: The Commission received the update and noted the loss of the two structures. Follow‑up information on the historic evaluation of the burned building is expected in writing.
  • Next Meeting: Scheduled for February 23, 2026 (per minutes) or February 23, 2026, in Room 2165. (Note: this is the next meeting date; the summary instruction date is February 24, 2026.)

Meeting Transcript

They are kind of right on the edge. There's a lot of people there. They must have been sort of support. It's usually about it's so it's probably six o'clock. All right, good evening. We're gonna call this meeting to order at 6 of PM. We're recording normally. Great. So we'll start with roll call, please. Commissioner Eddie. Present. Commissioner Johnson? Present. Commissioner LeVot. Present. Commissioner Federico. Commissioner Halisian. Present. Vice Chair Hatley. Present. Chair Swanson. Here. All right. Uh thank you. Next we're gonna move on to procedures. For each matter considered by the Commission, there will first be a staff presentation followed by presentation from the project applicant. The commissioners will then take the opportunity to ask questions of staff and applicant before opening to public. Testimony from supporters of the project will be taken, followed by testimony from those in opposition. Staff can provide a summation if necessary. The applicant will have the right to a final rebuttal presentation prior to closing the public hearing, followed by consideration of the item in action, if any by the commission. In accordance with section 13 of Article 2 of the historic preservation commission bylaws, government length of public debate, all public testimony from those in support and in opposition of the project will be limited to three minutes per person. All public testimony must be presented to the commission at the podium. Any testimony that references race, religion, ethnicity, economic status, national origin, or any other classification protected under state or federal law in a directory manner shall be deemed irrelevant and not be considered by the commission in making its determinations. If you challenge these matters in court, it may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raise your oral or written testimony or before the close of the hearing. With that, we'll move on to item three, which is approving um well, there's no minutes uh currently to be approved. So uh we're gonna I'm assuming we're gonna be doing December's minutes next month then. Yes. Okay, perfect. Uh so we'll move on to item four, approval of tonight's agenda. Is there any changes to the agenda? And no changes to the agenda. Okay, with that, I'll entertain a motion. I'll motion to approve. All right, we have a motion and a second. Motion by Vice Chair Hatwig, second by Commissioner Laval. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. Uh agenda is approved. Uh we're moving past consent calendar. There's no items there and moving on to continued matters.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com