Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Fresno Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - April 28, 2026

City Council & Commissions — Tuesday, April 28, 2026

BodyFresno, California

SessionCity Council & Commissions

DateTuesday, April 28, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 1:20:00

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:04

All right, good evening, and we'll call our meeting to order at 6 o'clock.

0:09

Uh we'll start with roll call, please.

0:15

Commissioner Eddings.

0:17

Present.

0:18

Commissioner Johnston.

0:20

Commissioner Laval.

0:21

Present.

0:22

Commissioner Federico.

0:25

Commissioner Holigian.

0:27

Present.

0:27

Vice Chair Hatwick.

0:29

Present.

0:29

Chair Sponsor.

0:31

Present.

0:32

All right.

0:32

We'll move on to item two of procedures.

0:35

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

0:42

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

0:48

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

0:53

Staff may provide a summary if necessary.

0:56

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

1:04

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

1:16

All public testimony will be presented to the Commission at the podium, either in person or electronically.

1:23

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

1:36

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

1:45

With that, we'll move on to item three approval of the March 23rd, 2026 Historic Preservation Commission minutes.

1:53

Did we have any changes or uh that we'd like or additions to the minutes?

1:59

There are no changes to the minutes.

2:01

All right.

2:03

Okay.

2:03

We have a motion.

2:04

Do we have a second?

2:05

Second.

2:05

All right.

2:06

Motion by uh Vice Chair Hatwig, second by Commissioner Laval.

2:11

All in favor signify by saying aye.

2:12

Aye.

2:13

Aye.

2:13

Opposed?

2:14

Minutes are approved.

2:17

Uh now we'll move on to approval of tonight's agenda.

2:20

Are there any changes to the tonight's agenda?

2:24

There are no changes.

2:26

Sorry, go ahead, Ashley.

2:29

There are no changes to the agenda.

2:30

All right, that's been double confirmed that we have no changes to the agenda, so that's good.

2:34

Uh I'll entertain a motion.

2:36

I move that we approve the agenda.

2:39

Okay, we have a motion.

2:40

Oh second.

2:41

All right.

2:42

Motion by Commissioner Laval, second by Vice Chair Hatwig.

2:45

All in favor signify by saying aye.

2:47

Aye.

2:48

Aye.

2:48

Opposed?

2:50

Okay.

2:51

Agenda is approved.

2:52

Having no items on the consent calendar or on the continued matters item.

2:56

We'll go ahead and move into commission items in section 7.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Historic Preservation█████████████████████████████████████████████73%

Public Engagement█████████15%

Procedural████7%

Code Enforcement██4%

Urban Renewal█1%

Summary of Proceedings

Fresno Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - April 28, 2026

The Fresno Historic Preservation Commission met on April 28, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. in City Hall. The agenda included a historic designation request for a church, a parking structure naming proposal, a hearing on the eligibility of the former Fresno Bee building, and updates on Historic Preservation Month. All six present commissioners voted on various items, with one commissioner absent and two abstentions on the Bee building matter.

Public Comments & Testimony

LaShell Aldredge (lifelong Mount Pleasant Missionary Baptist Church member) spoke in support of designating 207 E San Joaquin Street. She confirmed that the application relied on church archives and could not clarify the founding pastor's name. She noted that family members were bricklayers who helped construct the building.
Edward Madrano (Huntington Boulevard resident) expressed frustration that the Huntington Boulevard Historic District was not included in the official Historic Preservation Month calendar despite his coordination with staff. He questioned the lack of support from the Commission.
Pat Hunter (Heritage Fresno) announced a May 28 presentation titled "Saving the Past" about the Caglia family and Warnor's Theatre. She also invited the Commission to Gallery II, which she founded 46 years ago, to view local history exhibits.

Discussion Items

1. Request to Designate 207 E San Joaquin Street (Mount Pleasant Missionary Baptist Church)

Staff (Ashley Atkinson) presented the application, noting the church celebrates its 100th anniversary in August 2026. The current building (1955) was built by church members and features Mid-Century Modern and Art Deco elements. It is largely unaltered and holds cultural significance for the African American community, including the annual All Saints Day Carnival. Staff recommended designation under Criteria a(1)(i) and a(1)(iii).
Commissioners expressed strong support, highlighting the building's vernacular architecture and community narrative. Vice Chair Hatwig noted possible discrepancy in the founder's name (W.A. vs. W.F. Watkins), which staff said could be corrected.
Public comment from LaShell Aldredge (see above).
Motion by Commissioner Laval in memory of Dr. James Aldredge, seconded by Vice Chair Hatwig, to recommend designation to City Council. Unanimously approved (6-0).

2. Naming of Future North Fulton Parking Structure as "Carnegie Library Garage"

Staff explained that City Council Resolution 2020-272 requires Commission review of proposed names to avoid honoring racist or bigoted figures. The name refers to the former Carnegie Library that stood on the site (built 1904, demolished 1959), not to Andrew Carnegie personally. The garage design includes architectural references to the library. Staff recommended approval.
No public comment.
Commissioners supported the naming as a positive step to integrate history into new buildings. Commissioner Halajian cautioned against superficial architectural references.
Motion by Commissioner Eddings, seconded by Commissioner Johnston, to recommend the name to City Council. Approved (6-0).

3. Hearing to Determine Eligibility of 1626 E Street (Former Fresno Bee Building)

Staff (Atkinson) presented the property, built in 1968 for the McClatchy Company, currently owned by the city and proposed for demolition due to catastrophic system failures. The building is an example of New Formalist architecture. A consultant's report found it potentially eligible under communications history and urban renewal, but staff recommended a finding of not eligible. Staff cited that more representative media buildings exist on the National Register and that recognizing urban renewal as a positive theme is problematic due to the displacement of a vibrant African American neighborhood.
Commissioners debated the building's architectural merit and the significance of historical events, such as the 1970s "Bee Four" case. Director Jennifer Clark clarified that the Commission could find the site historically significant for events but not the building itself, which would guide CEQA analysis.
Motion by Commissioner Halajian, seconded by Commissioner Laval, to reject the eligibility findings and require that any future development include interpretive recognition of the full historical context (journalism history and urban renewal impacts). The motion carried 4-0-2, with Chair Sponsler and Commissioner Johnston abstaining. (Vote: Ayes – Vice Chair Hatwig, Commissioners Halajian, Laval, Eddings; Abstentions – Chair Sponsler, Commissioner Johnston; Absent – Commissioner Federico).

4. Update on Historic Preservation Month

Chair Sponsler outlined events including a kickoff on May 7 at Archive on Kern, tea events, a bike ride focused on labor history, and a presentation on 10,000 years of Fresno history by Commissioners Johnston and Federico. Historic photos will be displayed in City Hall’s second-floor lobby.
Commissioners encouraged attendance at the kickoff and events.

5. Monthly Updates

Jose Garcia Brewer Adobe: Staff reported that the 2022 Conditional Use Permit was never finalized, so the only active entitlement (2018) requires full preservation. The owner has been informed; a code enforcement case remains open.
General: Staff completed Section 106 reviews, one mitigation program application, and sent Mills Act letters to historic property owners with applications due in late May/early June.
Subcommittees: The Architectural Review Subcommittee met and reviewed four buildings. The Historic Preservation Month Subcommittee met weekly and developed a broad range of activities aligned with the America 250 initiative.

Key Outcomes

Designation of 207 E San Joaquin Street: Unanimously recommended to City Council for local register listing (6-0).
Carnegie Library Garage Naming: Unanimously recommended to City Council (6-0).
1626 E Street Eligibility: The Commission voted 4-0-2 to deny eligibility for historic resource listing, but required that any future development include interpretive displays covering both the journalism history (including the Bee Four case) and the impacts of urban renewal on the displaced neighborhood.
Brewer Adobe: The property is subject to the 2018 full preservation entitlement; any alternative requires a new application to the Commission.
Next Meeting: Tentatively scheduled for May 18, 2026, pending agenda conference.

Meeting Transcript

All right, good evening, and we'll call our meeting to order at 6 o'clock. Uh we'll start with roll call, please. Commissioner Eddings. Present. Commissioner Johnston. Commissioner Laval. Present. Commissioner Federico. Commissioner Holigian. Present. Vice Chair Hatwick. Present. Chair Sponsor. Present. All right. We'll move on to item two of procedures. For each matter considered by the Commission, there will first be a staff presentation followed by a presentation from the project applicant. The commissioners will then have the opportunity to ask questions of staff and an applicant before opening to the public. Testimony from supporters of the project will be taken, followed by testimony from those in opposition. Staff may provide a summary if necessary. The applicant will have the right to 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 governing the length of public debate, all public testimony from those in support and in opposition to the project will be limited to three minutes per person. All public testimony will be presented to the Commission at the podium, either in person or electronically. Any testimony that references race, religion, ethnicity, economic status, national origin, or any other classification protected under state or federal law in a derogatory manner shall be deemed irrelevant and will not be considered by the commission in making its determinations. If you challenge these matters in court, you may be limited to the raising only those issues you or someone else raised in oral or written testimony or before the close of the hearing. With that, we'll move on to item three approval of the March 23rd, 2026 Historic Preservation Commission minutes. Did we have any changes or uh that we'd like or additions to the minutes? There are no changes to the minutes. All right. Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. All right. Motion by uh Vice Chair Hatwig, second by Commissioner Laval. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Minutes are approved. Uh now we'll move on to approval of tonight's agenda. Are there any changes to the tonight's agenda? There are no changes. Sorry, go ahead, Ashley. There are no changes to the agenda. All right, that's been double confirmed that we have no changes to the agenda, so that's good. Uh I'll entertain a motion. I move that we approve the agenda. Okay, we have a motion. Oh second.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com