Commissioners press airport officials on plan to replace historic air traffic control tower; request further study and preservation mitigation

The Fresno City Historic Preservation Commission on July 28 reviewed the draft Environmental Assessment (EA) and Section 106 materials for the proposed replacement of the air traffic control tower (ATCT) at Fresno Yosemite International Airport and pressed airport officials and consultants to explore additional alternatives and preservation options.

Karen Bowler of RS&H, the project consultant, told commissioners the cultural resources study completed in September 2024 identified the existing control tower as the only resource within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C as a ‘‘highly intact representative of the International style’’ and the work of architect Alan Liu. Because demolition of the building would remove that eligible resource, Bowler said, ‘‘there would be an adverse effect under Section 106.’’ The draft EA evaluates seven alternatives and identifies demolition and replacement as the preferred alternative, Bowler said, and the project team is developing a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to specify mitigation.

Bowler described four proposed mitigation measures within the draft MOA: (1) a Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) level‑2 documentation package, (2) an interpretive sign and plaque inside the airport terminal noting the historic tower and architect, (3) an exhibit in partnership with the Fresno County Historical Society that would expand the existing Chinese artifact exhibit to include the tower and architect, and (4) posting collected materials and records on the city/airport website with QR codes on interpretive signs.

Commissioners across the dais called demolition ‘‘undesirable’’ and urged the city, SHPO and FAA to do more to analyze whether adaptive reuse or in‑place preservation might be feasible. ‘‘This is a fantastic piece of mid‑century modern architecture, and I don't see that demolition is a really good thing for the city of Fresno,’’ one commissioner said. Several commissioners asked the project team to analyze an alternative that treats the tower as immovable, and to consider salvage and reuse of building materials if retention in place proves infeasible.

Francisco Partida, interim director of aviation for the City of Fresno, said the need for a new tower stems from safety, building code and FAA standards: the existing tower lacks required height and some controllers do not have unobstructed lines of sight, elevators and other systems are obsolete, and security and operational requirements for modern FAA towers cannot be met in the current structure. Partida said the airport has evaluated locations across the airfield, and that seven alternatives reached detailed analysis after a multi‑stage site‑selection process. He also said the ARFF (airport rescue and firefighting) station is being addressed on a separate capital schedule and that operational and FAA security requirements limit where a new tower can be sited.

Commissioners pressed for more detail on alternatives analysis and asked the project team to treat the draft EA as an opportunity to test additional assumptions. Several commissioners asked the airport and FAA to consider incorporation of original materials into terminal exhibits or a local museum and urged that the MOA include binding commitments and accountability mechanisms. Project staff said they had revised the MOA to add signage options, salvage language (dependent on hazardous‑materials conditions such as asbestos/lead paint), and expanded exhibit language with the Fresno County Historical Society.

No final decision was made at the meeting. Staff reminded the commission that the draft EA public comment period closes August 6, 2025, at 5 p.m. Pacific and that comments will be addressed in the final documents. Commissioners indicated they will submit formal comments asking for additional study of alternatives that prioritize preservation and for clearer, enforceable mitigation language in the MOA and CEQA/NEPA documentation.

Background: Bowler said the cultural resources report, prepared during 2024, included site visits and literature review across the APE and concluded that the ATCT is eligible under Criterion C. The FAA is treated as the federal lead agency for NEPA and the SHPO is the concurrence party for the Section 106 process; the project team has routed a draft MOA to consulting parties, including the Fresno County Historical Society and the Historic Preservation Commission, for comment.