Grant and Funding Resources and Information

Grant and Funding Resources and Information

 

By John Quiring, Director of Community Development and Infrastructure Funding

 

Resources and Information

Welcome to our Resources and Information page, with upcoming grant and funding opportunities for the Central Valley region in California. Bookmark this page to stay up-to-date on the latest grants, due dates, and how QK can help.

For more information or for assistance with grant submittals, contact John Quiring, Director of Community Development & Infrastructure Funding at (559) 449-2400 or John.Quiring@qkinc.com.

 

Drought Resiliency Projects

Drought projects look to fund on-the-ground projects and modeling tools that increase water reliability or improve water management. Projects are proactive and supported by an existing drought plan or planning effort. These project types require a minimum 50% non-federal cost share. $17 million is available and 15-20 grants are expected to be awarded.

Projects carried out through Drought Resiliency Project Grants can increase water management flexibility, making our water supply more resilient. This helps to prepare for and address the impacts of drought.  Proposals submitted under this NOFO must demonstrate that the proposed project is supported by an existing drought planning effort. It is a well-established principle that proactively identifying resiliency projects through drought planning, in advance of a crisis, is far more cost effective than emergency response.

Applications are due on October 5, 2021.

Further information can be found at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=335035

 

Outdoor Equity Grants Program – Parks Opportunity

Important new Parks funding program opened by California Department of Parks and Recreation. The Outdoor Equity Grants Program (OEP) supports disadvantaged communities by creating opportunities for residents to connect with outdoor experiences at state parks and other public lands. A very unusual parks funding opportunity arising due to the State’s current budget surplus!

Applications are due by Friday, October 8, 2021 with a maximum of $700,000 per application. Operating costs only – no capital projects.

Further information can be found at http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30443

 

Water and Energy Efficiency Grants

Water and energy grants fund projects that conserve and use water more efficiently, increase renewable energy production, enhance drought resilience, and mitigate risk of future water conflict. Applicants receive additional consideration for delivery system improvements that complement on-farm enhancements supported by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. This program requires a minimum 50% non-federal cost-share. $15 Million is available and about 10 grants are expected to be funded.

The objective of this NOFO is to invite eligible applicants to leverage their money and resources by cost sharing with Reclamation on projects that seek to conserve and use water more efficiently; increase the production of renewable energy; mitigate conflict risk in areas at a high risk of future water conflict; enable farmers to make additional on-farm improvements in the future, including improvements that may be eligible for Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) funding; and accomplish other benefits that contribute to sustainability.

Applications are due on November 3, 2021.

Further information can be found at: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=335103

 

Environmental Water Resources Projects

This is a new funding category under WaterSMART. Projects that benefit plant and animal species, fish and wildlife habitat, riparian areas, and ecosystems directly influenced by water resources management are eligible. Project types can include water conservation and efficiency projects to improve the environment through quantifiable and sustained water savings, mitigation of drought-related impacts, and watershed management or restoration projects with a nexus to water resources or water resources management. Projects under this new category may be eligible for up to 75% federal funding.

Applications are due on December 9, 2021.

Further information can be found at: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=335081

 

Small Community Drought Relief Program – Infrastructure

The State Department of Water Resources announces an important new infrastructure program designed to provide immediate and near term financial and technical support to small communities not served by an urban water supplier with at least 3,000 connections. It’s designed to implement needed resiliency measures and infrastructure improvements for small water suppliers and rural communities. The specific objectives are to implement projects that provide reliable water supply sources, improve water system storage, replace aging and leaking pipelines, and provide alternative power sources for operation (emergency generators).

The State has invested $200,000,000 into this new effort and is accepting applications on a rolling basis. Details can be found at  https://www.grants.ca.gov/grants/small-community-drought-relief-program/

 

Clean California Local Grant Program – Transportation Corridor Infrastructure

Important new transportation funding proposed! Final guidelines coming soon – important to attend Zoom workshop.

The Clean California Local Grant Program, administered by Caltrans, has approximately $296 million over two-years to beautify and improve streets and roads, tribal lands, parks, pathways, and transit centers to restore pride in public spaces. Applicants must be local or regional public agencies or transit agencies.

Final selection criteria and procedures will be discussed at an upcoming workshop.

  • Community need
  • Potential to enhance and beautify public space
  • Potential for greening to provide shade, reduce the urban heat island effect, and use native drought-tolerant plants
  • Potential to improve access to public space
  • Public engagement in the project proposal that reflects community priorities
  • Benefit to underserved communities

The RFP will be issued that will be due in December 2021. Projects must be completed by June 30, 2023. Workshop is set for October 7, 2021.

For more information on the workshop, please visit: https://cleancalifornia.dot.ca.gov/local-grants

Further Information – Contact QK

For more information or for assistance with grant submittals, contact John Quiring, Director of Community Development & Infrastructure Funding at (559) 449-2400 or John.Quiring@qkinc.com.

How Does Urban Planning Continue in a Global Pandemic? Meet QK’s Virtual Counter

Qk Virtual Counter

How Does Urban Planning Continue in a Global Pandemic?

 

By Jessica Bispels, Associate Planner

 

Meet QK's virtual counter

Few things are unaffected by the COVID-19 pandemic. While people continue to see changes in their workplace, their schools, the way they purchase goods, and even the way they interact with others, it is clear that for Planning departments, the show must go on. But how? Planners oftentimes work collaboratively, and direct, often face-to-face communication with government officials and the public they serve is an integral part of the Planning profession. Beginning early Spring of 2020, this became a little challenging. And answering the call by the cities we serve to continue our work as closely as possible to a “business as usual” environment, while adhering to safety protocols, QK developed the capacity to assist planning departments with a program we like to call … Virtual Counter.

Virtual Counter is a program designed by QK Planners and IT professionals that uses Microsoft® Bookings and Teams technology to enable to the public to schedule appointments with Planning staff from the comfort of their homes and offices. Our Virtual Counter has access to Planning staff schedules and allows the public to choose and lock in private appointments. Appointments are blocked out in one-hour intervals and can take place via phone or video. QK has implemented a Virtual Counter for the City of Selma, California as part of our on-call Planning services and we are finding great success for both the City and its citizens.

At QK, we understand how important it is for Planning departments to continue to be accessible and available to the public. We also recognize how important it is to get creative and make sure every voice is heard and every concern addressed, while safely maintaining physical distance. Virtual Counter  meets those needs, and is also beneficial for people who previously found it difficult to physically come to the Planning department for face-to-face interaction.

And we don’t think Virtual Counter stops at the end of the pandemic. We foresee the success of Virtual Counter continuing even after the pandemic is over. We believe it to be potentially invaluable for cities and counties to offer a hybrid approach to working with Planning departments where members of the community and land developers will be able to schedule in-person, video, or phone meetings that fit their needs and schedules.

Is your city interested in customizing QK’s Virtual Counter for your Planning department?  Call Principal Planner Steve Brandt today at (559) 733-0440, and learn just how easy it is.

Growing Importance Of Urban Sustainability

3D Rendering of a Sustainable Design

Growing Importance of Urban Sustainability

 

By Jessica Bispels, Associate Planner

Urban Sustainability

Urban sustainability is the idea that a city can be organized and designed to reduce negative environmental and social impacts on future generations. This can include considerations for air quality, clean water, proper waste treatment, buildings that are built to last, and even social equity. Sustainable cities work hard to ensure their citizens, infrastructure, and environments have the chance to thrive for years to come.

Urban sustainability has become increasingly popular in the United States in the past couple of decades. Sustainability though, is not a new concept at all. Nineteenth century planners Ebenezer Howard, Le Corbusier, and Frank Lloyd Wright pioneered planning sustainable cities. Then in the 20th century, innovator Aldo Leopold wrote a piece entitled The Land Ethic, in which he began to encourage citizens to think more about the impact they were placing on the environment. Bill McKibben was thinking along the same lines as Leopold when he wrote, The End of Nature, which is considered the first book to discuss global warming written in an effort to gain public understanding.

In 1992, the United Nations hosted a summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil regarding environment and development, specifically sustainable development. The summit was considered a success because through it, many world leaders adopted the ideas of change in their home countries and have since implemented sustainable development practices in their cities. The success of the summit helped to create the widespread general consensus that the importance of sustainability cannot be denied, or else the future of our planet is in danger.

Since then, planners and scholars in the United States have been working hard to define the necessary components of sustainability and figure out how exactly they must be implemented in our modern democratic system. These ideas have been criticized though, with Agenda 21 being the particular target. As stated on sustainabledevelopment.un.org, “Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.”

Some people thought that these sustainable development practices gave the government too much power. Regardless, people like World Future Council Co-Founder Herbert Girardet, architect and urban designer/planner Peter Calthorpe, Princeton professor of climate change and systems ecology Stephen Pacala, and theoretical physicist and professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering Robert Socolow have been theorizing ways to gauge how much an area like a city is harming the environment, and how to combat that through urban planning.

Urban sustainability continues to be one of the most important issues of modern planning. Planners and builders have been working to create many different kinds of standards, like Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure Envision Sustainability Professional (ENV SP) certifications, that offer certified professionals who can help people, companies, and government organizations plan and design for sustainability. Although many cities all over the United States are working toward being more sustainable, the future of comprehensive urban sustainability will require a complete ideological shift of most Americans.

The Cultural Backlash of The Industrial Revolution: what Three Architects Did To Change The Idea of The City

The Cultural Backlash of The Industrial Revolution

 

By Jessica Bispels, Associate Planner

 

what Three Architects did To Change THe Idea Of The City

(Some of the most influential architects of the post-industrial revolution world were Frank Lloyd Write, Le Corbusier, and Ebenezer Howard. The following is an analysis of the utopian cities they designed to try and make sense of what they felt cities were doing wrong, and what they should look like in the future.)

To both Frank Lloyd Wright and Le Corbusier, the industrial city was not adequate for the needs of the people. To Wright, a big city like Chicago was “a monstrous aberration built by greed, destructive both to efficient production and to human values.” After Corbusier’s move to Paris, he noticed that “the cramped and noisy business center made efficiency impossible; antiquated building codes forbade modern methods of construction; housing was inadequate for all classes….” Wright and Corbusier sought to do more than change the layout of the city; they wanted to reinvent the way in which they’re designed. Both architects wanted to ensure individualism in the average urbanite’s life, while creating a comfortable aesthetic where the built environment is integrated into the vast expanse of nature. It is in their specific methods that the differences arise. Wright’s Broadacre City places responsibility on the individual to create his or her ideal life within his or her own plot of land. Corbusier’s idea of individualism is to create a community in which the mundane tasks of survival are taken care of, and the individual is free to do as he or she pleases. Both Wright and Corbusier’s utopian cities attempt to free the individual, but their contrasting ideas of what the individual wants create differing results.

In Wright’s plan for Broadacre City, he wanted to create an alternative society. His ideal city enabled him to show the workings of government, education, religion, the economy, and the home as integral parts of the total environment. As he witnessed the stock-market crash of 1929, he strengthened his theory that the United States needed a radical physical and economic change. Wright called for a decentralization of urban areas, as he felt that the heavily concentrated city was obsolete. Broadacre City was to be comprised of decentralized units strewn across the rural countryside. He wanted a “marriage of town and country.” By taking away the walking city, Wright relied on technological advancements in transportation to make his city work.

Sketches for the Broadacre City project by Frank Lloyd Wright

Photo By: Kjell Olsen – originally posted to Flickr as Wright Sketches for Broadacre City 2, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=12036508

Wright also witnessed the development of the automobile, and like so many other Americans of his time, he was fascinated by the automobile, convinced of its potential to revolutionize modern life and blind to its limitations. The assumption that every American will own or have access to a car was essential to Broadacre City. Within the city, all families would have at least one acre of land, and have an absolute right to that area. Neither shape nor scale appear recognizably urban: one ‘city’ might sprawl over 100 square miles without any recognizable center. The automobile was needed for this to be effective. As the houses, the factories, the stores, the office buildings, and the cultural centers are all in the midst of farmland, the average American needed to travel by car.

One of Wright’s ideas in his city was to shrink the economic center to the home and use the family as the basic economic unit. This was to ensure that the proletarian could “never be unemployed or a slave to anyone.” He hoped that this would strengthen the family. As a base for production, education, and culture, the family would recapture the centrality which it had surrendered to urban institutions. Broadacre city would be agrarian based, as all individuals would be part-time farmers. This placed a large importance on the individual members of Broadacre city. Wright hoped this responsibility would secure the family’s strength, while ensuring that the individuality which Wright had been preaching would have its base in the very structure of the country.

It’s important to note that the individualism of Wright’s city lies in the individual’s right to run his or her own economic center. The individual can and must do with his or her land what he or she thinks is needed. The freedom comes in the ownership of property. Wright’s concept of freedom and individuality is not interpreted in the same way by all, as is seen in Le Corbusier’s Radiant City.

Great Depression

Le Corbusier was also a witness to the Great Depression. As the Great Depression strengthened Wright’s conviction, it changed Corbusier’s idea of administration in his utopian city. In his first city, The Contemporary City, there was no single power to regulate all the separate private corporations which accomplished the essential work of society. But Corbusier’s faith in the invisible hand of free competition was diminished after the Great Depression. He now held that organization must extend beyond the large corporations. Total administration would replace the marketplace in the Radiant City, and it would be up to experts to “match society’s needs to its productive capacities.” This differs from Wright’s belief that once the utopian city is designed, the individuals would be free to do as they please, in an organic order. Corbusier called for extensive planning and administration the entire way through, and this planned hierarchy of administration would replace the state. To Corbusier, the beauty of the organization was the product of the perfect cooperation of everyone in the hierarchy. It was the expression of human solidarity in creating a civilization in the midst of the hostile forces of nature. The natural hierarchy was one means of attaining the sublime.

Design of Brasilia – based upon the principles of The Radiant City

Photo By: Limongi – originally uploaded to :en at en:File:Monumental axis.jpg,
CC BY  3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5921507

In contrast with Wright’s decentralized Broadacre City, the Radiant City contained centralized towers of residential space in its very core. These towers called “Unités, each contained a neighborhood with 2,700 residents. The apartments are assigned in accordance with the size of the worker’s family and their needs. The individualism of the worker can be expressed in his or her residential space. The citizen in Le Corbusier’s syndicalist society thus experiences both organization and freedom as part of his daily life. His workspace is heavily organized so that he can have freedom outside the workplace.

Corbusier places importance on the family unit as Wright does, but doesn’t give them economic responsibility. Wright hoped that the responsibility he places on the family unit would strengthen the family, but Corbusier wanted to free the family of any economic function. In the Radiant City, the family no longer has an economic function to perform. It exists as an end in itself. There is a strong distinction between work and play in The Radiant City, and the family belongs to the realm of play.

In Corbusier’s free society, men and women would work as full-time individuals. He assumed that there would be an end to the familial economic unit, and women would be free from domestic services like cooking, cleaning, and child raising. All of these tasks are provided by the society. This would therefore free the family to reassemble in the afternoon (after work and school), perhaps around the pool or at the gym, and when the family members return to their apartment they find it already cleaned, the laundry done and returned, the food ordered in the morning already and prepared for serving. This strong distinction of work and leisure is important in the Radiant City, as the individual now has the freedom to enjoy his leisure time as he pleases, instead of his work time like in Wright’s Broadacre City.

 

Howard's Garden City

If Ebenezer Howard was able to have a conversation with Wright and Corbusier about their design, he would notice that the basic principles of his “Garden City” comply with those of the other cities. Howard’s Garden city plan was a community “in which social order and individual initiative would be properly balanced.” He also wanted to give individual liberties to the inhabitants of his city. His ideas differed from Wright and Corbusier’s, which would cause him to critique their work.

Howard would not agree with Wright’s agrarian based society. As a failed farmer himself, he thought that not even a small community could successfully manage all its farms. He thought the community should be a balance of a privately and collectively owned enterprise. Wright’s economic system is too bold for Howard, as he would argue that Wright puts too much responsibility on the people. On the other hand, Corbusier’s system doesn’t give the individual enough responsibility, relative to Howard. Because the administrators would determine even the urbanite’s living space, Howard would see this as an attack on individual liberties.

Howard wouldn’t like the layout of either Wright or Corbusier’s cities. Like Wright, Howard wanted to marry town and country, but not in the same way that Wright proposed. Wright’s Broadacre city would be too decentralized for Howard, as Howard wanted to maintain a centric city model. Howard’s marriage of urban and rural is gradual, as each outward ring is a different type of space. Wright’s complete decentralization, Howard would argue, prevents any kind of community feeling. Corbusier’s model with the skyscraper neighborhoods would be too congested for Howard. Howard’s Garden City had a gradual flow between different spaces (residential, commercial), but Corbusier’s extremely centralized residential space would be taking it too far for Howard.

Garden City Concept by Ebenezer Howard

Photo By: Ebenezer Howard (1850-1928), Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Howard’s desire to revolutionize society through a city plan was not unlike Wright and Corbusier. They all saw what the industrial age did to the city and wanted to draw away from that as much as they saw fit. The Garden City, Broadacre City, and The Radiant City were all planned because of a cultural backlash from the industrial revolution. Howard, Wright, and Corbusier saw the problems that arose in their current cities, and all attempted to solve these problems in their revolutionary utopian societies.

(Much of the analysis of these architects’ city plans and differentials can be found in Robert Fishman’s “Urban Utopias in the Twentieth Century: Ebenezer Howard, Frank Lloyd Wright, Le Corbusier.” I read it in college and believe it to be a great analysis of 20th-century architects trying to make sense of how to plan for cities.)

 

Client Focused and Business as Usual

Client Focused and Business As Usual

 

By Ron Wathen, PE

 

A message From president & CEO

March 24, 2020

External Message to Clients, Teaming Partners and Vendors

Last Thursday March 19, 2020, as Governor Newsom implemented a shelter in place policy, simultaneously QK was transitioning to a fully remote workforce (TELEWORK).  Given the implications of the COVID-19 public health crisis and the need for reducing the spread, QK has the ability to work effectively with YOU (our clients and Agency Partners) through Microsoft Teams and other collaboration software from a remote work environment.  Our remote workforce and use of collaboration technology allows QK to advance your projects and maintain a safe work environment during this unprecedented time.

QK remains focused on YOUR projects, deliverables and schedules.  Through utilizing a team approach with our clients and agency partners, I know we can continue through this difficult public health crisis together!  With that in mind, I want to share the following:

  • QK is open for business, our teams are working remotely and ready to continue serving you.
  • Our focus is on your project: The times have changed but our focus remains the same and that is getting your project completed and providing innovative solutions to your needs.
  • We continue to be one connected team with our clients and agency partners.  We are available to meet using Microsoft Teams, other video conferencing tools as needed to keep you connected.
  • QK can still be contacted via office phone, cell phones, email, or text at any time.  QK is committed to making this transition and collaboration easier for everyone.
  • Our field operations will CONTINUE for construction observation, biological monitoring and land surveying and YES, we are practicing appropriate social distancing practices for a safe work environment.
  • WE CAN DO THIS!

Whether it’s project specific or something we can do to support your overall organization, we are here for you.

Why Zoning Codes Have Height Limits and Building Setbacks

QK Equitable Building

Why zoning codes have height limits and building setbacks

 

By Steve Brandt, AICP, Principle Planner

Equitable building - manhattan

 

On a cold morning in 1912, the Equitable Building at 120 Broadway in New York City caught fire from a carelessly thrown match into a trash can.  Firefighters tried to save the building but -20oF temperatures turned the water from their firehoses into frosty icicles. The structure was lost.  The Equitable Building had been constructed in 1870 on a roughly one-acre block bounded by four streets. It was one of New York’s first skyscrapers, coming in at a whopping eight stories.  However, by 1912, the newer buildings surrounding it were over twice as tall. When the rubble was removed and the site cleared, something unexpected happened.

Workers in the lower floors of the surrounding buildings experienced sunlight shining into their windows for the first time ever. The air seemed cleaner. People were happier and felt healthier. They were so overjoyed with their changed urban environment that they petitioned City Hall to purchase the land and build a city park. Instead of selling, the property owner constructed a massive 36-story office building that dwarfed its neighbors, housed 15,000 workers, and ominously covered every inch of the site.   It was the largest building in the world. It cast a shadow roughly six times the size of its footprint, completely engulfing adjacent buildings in even more darkness.

At that time, real estate developers enjoyed unfettered private property rights supported by decades of court precedent. The property owner had full control, and technological innovations were allowing buildings to be taller and bulkier.  The sky really was the limit. But even though you could build anything you wanted, so could your neighbor. Because of the uproar over the new Equitable Building, people began to realize that the unconstrained power of the individual property owner was creating too much uncertainty and volatility in the real estate market and was hurting the collective health of the community.

A lawyer, subway planner, and activist named Edward Bassett had an idea. He theorized that the only government power that the courts might consider superior to private property rights was the police power to protect public health and safety.  He did experiments and prepared studies that scientifically documented how sunlight and clean air could not reach the street level around these massive skyscrapers.  He proposed government-regulated building height limits and building setbacks whereby the first few floors of a building could cover the entire site, but as the building got taller, successive floors had to be set back to lessen the bulk of the building as it rose to the sky. He divided the city into zones, each with different height limits and setbacks. After much politicking and coalition building, his codes were adopted in 1916. Some architects designed literally to the code’s limits, creating skyscrapers that looked like awkward stair steps. Others turned the limitations into inspiration, designing masterpieces like the Empire State Building and the Chrysler Building.

Cities around the country adopted their own zoning ordinances. Having been denied a permit to construct industrial buildings in a residential zone by the Village of Euclid, Ohio, the Ambler Realty Company sued, taking their challenge all the way to the Supreme Court.  In 1920, the Supreme Court ruled six to three in favor of Euclid, confirming that zoning ordinances were Constitutional. The Court’s majority relied on Bassett’s argument that zoning limitations are a legitimate use of a city’s police power to protect the public health and safety of a community.

The court case is Euclid v. Ambler. A code that establishes zones with allowed uses, height limits, and building setbacks is now known as a Euclidean zoning code. And the (new) Equitable Building is now 105 years old and designated a National Historic Landmark. One of its many tenants is the New York City Department of City Planning.

A Decade Of Community Service

A decade of community service

 

By Mike Ratajski

 

Extreme Makeover: Home Addition

 

QK and its team members have been active participants in community service activities in the central valley for more than a decade. There are numerous reasons why we should volunteer. Studies show that volunteers are happier and healthier than non-volunteers. Volunteers establish strong relationship. Volunteering is good for your career and good for society.  Volunteering gives you a sense of purpose.  Many QK’ers have offered time and energy to make the communities they live in a better place for their neighbors and, in many instances, total strangers, some of whom they may never meet.   The following represents a decade of our volunteer activities.

In August 2019, several Clovis QK’ers braved the brutal summer heat and helped build a new home from the ground up for a deserving family in Clovis. A local fireman lost his wife during childbirth and was forced to raise his children, with the help of their grandmother, in the small space they live in. With the leadership and generosity of DeYoung Properties, a new home was built complete with in-ground swimming pool and playhouse for the kids.   Not many QK staff members know this, but a decade earlier, QK helped build a home in central Fresno for the remake of that same television show in 2009. Led again by our generous client, De Young Properties, QK was involved with assisting 5,000 volunteers who demolished a 1955 ranch home that was in serious need of repair and renovations. The homeowner, born without legs and only one fully developed arm, needed a wheelchair friendly home for her and her four children. This project began a decade long list of community involvement and public services that QK has been unselfishly engaged.

I spoke with members of the QK team who helped the television show achieve a better environment for the homeowner, and here is what they remember about that event. Jessica Louie: “It was a very cold day as we waited for the television crew to set up and film the episode. The QK volunteers arrived early in the morning and spent the entire winter day shivering while waiting for the big reveal…and I never met Ty Pennington”. She added, “I saw him, but never met him”. Scott Zaayer: “De Young Properties was the true hero here. They devoted an incredible amount of time and resources for the new home”. He added, “We had to jump through hoops just to get the house staked on the lot.” The home was completed in less than ten days from tear down to opening day. The new home was one of the earliest in Fresno that included a solar energy system cutting electricity use by 75 percent.

Ace

 

The ACE Mentor Program is an afterschool program that introduces students to careers in architecture, construction management, and engineering and oftentimes, other related disciplines. QK’s involvement with ACE mentorship began in 2011 and ended in 2014. I first became involved with ACE in 2012 teaching the students at Edison High School in southwest Fresno all about planning. Other mentors assisted with engineering, architecture, construction, estimating, and even biology. The Aquarius Aquarium Institute, a 501(c)(3) organization, establishes environmental teaching programs utilizing aquariums to help bring educational parity to central San Joaquin Valley students and citizens of all backgrounds and cultural groups in addition to being the organization behind the Fresno Aquarium project. A ten-acre site was donated at the intersection of the San Joaquin River and Highway 99 – a gateway entry site to the City of Fresno. In 2011, the Fresno Aquarium became the selected project to be studied by the Edison High students. The students developed 3-D models and presented their projects at a special event hosted by the Central California Builders Exchange. The previous project was the Dickey Park Youth Center near downtown Fresno. Following the aquarium project, students later chose to select their own projects for detailed studies. The selected project in 2013-14 was a Family Entertainment Center, an all-in-one arcade that included golf carts, video arcade, trampolines, batting cages, laser tag and more. Teaching high school students all about planning, architecture, engineering, and construction can be a rewarding experience.

 

Lowell Community Gardens

In 2012, QK worked with City of Fresno, Caltrans, PG&E and the Fresno Metro Ministry to develop a community garden for the Lowell neighborhood north of downtown Fresno. QK provided the preliminary site plan, topographic survey, grading plan, permitting, irrigation plans, construction staking, and even helped with construction of the facility. Designed with raised beds for the disabled and thirty garden plots, the community garden “brought people from different walks of life together” and “helped the community spirit bloom” said PG&E representatives. The gardens won a 2012 Green Dot Award in the Service category for designing a resource for green living and a 2012 San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Award of Excellence.

Caltrans State Roadway Clean-Up

In 2012, QK worked with City of Fresno, Caltrans, PG&E and the Fresno Metro Ministry to develop a community garden for the Lowell neighborhood north of downtown Fresno. QK provided the preliminary site plan, topographic survey, grading plan, permitting, irrigation plans, construction staking, and even helped with construction of the facility. Designed with raised beds for the disabled and thirty garden plots, the community garden “brought people from different walks of life together” and “helped the community spirit bloom” said PG&E representatives. The gardens won a 2012 Green Dot Award in the Service category for designing a resource for green living and a 2012 San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Award of Excellence.

Imagine U Children's Museum

The Imagine U Children’s Museum is located one block east of the transit center in the City of Visalia. The museum first opened its doors in October 2015 with a mission to inspire children through interactive educational experiences by providing multicultural, hands-on learning through the sciences, environmental conservation, and the arts. By empowering children and their families in a fun environment, they seek to transform lives and enhance the community. The 15,000-square-foot building was paid for by a $5.4 million Proposition 84 grant.  The facility, known for its indoor tree house and kid’s auto repair clinic, is in need to expand for additional interactive activities in its outdoor space.   The 18,000 square foot outdoor space represents a great opportunity for the facility to expand as its membership grows. Led by Ron Wathen, QK CEO, Dan Garber, Steve Brandt, and I assisted in the conceptual planning for the unique outdoor space. An additional 15,000 square feet east of this space represents another opportunity for future expansion. The QK Team prepared a plan in late 2018 that includes an outdoor amphitheater, barn, maze, themed play equipment, and unique bio-fuel exhibit so children can learn about energy alternatives at an early age. The project is currently seeking funding.

Much More

These five projects represent specific activities or events. We won’t overlook the many QK staff members who took the initiative to run a charity drive or fund-raising activity and the many employees who donated. In addition, every Christmas season, needy children and families have seen our QK Team fill the boxes in our lobbies with generous toys and gifts that have put smiles on local faces for many years. QK has truly been a leader in volunteerism and charity drives. Thanks to everyone who has been a part of the generous giving of time, money, clothing, food, and toys. Lets keep up the great work!

Harry A. Tow, PE, AICP – A Visalia Legend

Harry A. Tow, PE, AICP

 

By Mike Ratajski

 

A Visalia Legend

It is with great sadness and heavy hearts that we share the peaceful passing of QK co-founder Harry Tow, PE, AICP. He was 94 years old.

Throughout his 48 years at Quad, Quad Knopf, and now QK, Harry shared his insight and wisdom with those of us who had the privilege to work with him. He was an incredible mentor, friend, and positive influence, and was devoted to service of his community through his consulting work, literally for as long as possible.

Over the last 60+ years, Harry established an extraordinary record of service to our Central Valley community as a city official, professional engineer and planner, business owner, mentor, and church, and community leader. He has been recognized for his professional skills in civil engineering, environmental planning and city management, as well as his personal contributions in leading young adults and passion for creating economic growth in the Central Valley.

As an ASCE Lifemember (ASCE member since 1974), Harry was a tireless ambassador for the engineering community.  He served on many boards and engineering committees with professional organizations where service to the ASCE organization was leveraged ten-fold by his professionalism and involvement with other services to his profession.

Harry had been on the water engineering front decades before the California water crisis and was a key member of the State Water Resources Control Board (the “old” statewide unpaid board, which included representatives from industry, districts, environmental community, etc. and preceded the present structure). He was also:

  • Chair of the League of Cities Environmental Committee
  • President of the California Water Environment Association (CWEA, previously known as WDCF)
  • President of the Water Environment Federation (WEF)
  • A Lifemember of APWA as well as long-time member of environmental and planning organizations

As a child in 1938, Harry moved with his parents to Long Beach, CA, from his small town of Marshalltown, Iowa. After graduating high school, he enlisted in the Navy V-12 fliers program while concurrently attending university. Harry graduated with a bachelor’s degree from USC in civil engineering in 1947, as well as a master’s degree in 1952 in the same field.

After receiving his undergraduate degree, Harry secured his first professional employment with the County of Ventura as an assistant hydraulic engineer in 1947. Within a year, he had advanced to the City of Los Angeles as a design engineer, and provided supplemental design work to the private international firm of Daniel, Mann, Johnson, and Manderhall.

In 1956, Harry and his family moved to Visalia, where he remained a public employee as the City Engineer. In 1958, Harry became the City Manager for Visalia, where he remained for 14 years. Harry’s tenure as a City Manager included the revitalization of downtown. The emphasis on preserving downtown during Harry’s time as City Manager was very important because that was when downtown was first being challenged economically by the first shopping centers and malls along Hwy 198 and Mooney Blvd. in Visalia.

Harry Tow’s tenure as a City Manager for Visalia oversaw incredible improvements and development for the community. Along with a number of dedicated city councils and exceptional staff members, Harry was instrumental in helping to shape the community as it stands today. Among the achievements that he takes pride for his share in their evolution are: the successful creation of the downtown Visalia convention center; the transfer of Kaweah Delta Hospital from the City to the Kaweah Delta Hospital District and the further development and expansion of the current facility; the revitalization of the North Visalia community; the preliminary steps to protect, preserve, and revitalize the City’s downtown area, as well as provide crucial parking capacity.

Even though Harry’s schooling was in engineering, he is also an expert in California environmental law (CEQA) and earned his AICP certification from the American Institute of Certified Planners. He had been preparing EIRs since CEQA first became law in 1970 for projects throughout the Central Valley as diverse as hospitals, shopping centers, colleges, large dairies, and manufacturing complexes. He used his engineering and planning expertise to help lay the groundwork for City’s plan policy and the development of the Plaza Regional Park Facility.

Eventually, in 1972, Harry left the City and co-founded Quad Consulting to provide engineering, planning, and management assistance to both public and private clients. In 1998, Quad merged with Knopf Engineering and formed what is now operating as QK (an employee owned company) with offices in Visalia, Clovis, Merced, Bakersfield and Porterville. Harry continued his lifelong mentorship to others while continuing working almost full time as a Principal Engineer and Environmental Planner until the age of 94.

Harry gave selflessly of his time and experience by helping people in the art of professionalism and ethical practices.

During the formation of Quad Knopf, Harry took a firm stand of the ethics and values that one must possess while representing a client as a City Engineer or a hired consultant. With the Board of Directors, they established that the company would operate as “uncompromisingly ethical” in all business endeavors. At times when contracts were vague or lines were unclear, the guidance that Harry provided centered on the question “which decision is morally sound?” Harry would rather lose business or profit than compromise the integrity of the firm or the staff employed.

As a community member, Harry instilled these ethics into our youth as a Boy Scout Cub master and committee member of a local service club-sponsored troop.  His enduring mark is imprinted on the lives of all who were fortunate enough to work with him.

In addition to his lifelong leadership with the Boy Scouts, Harry served on the board for the College of the Sequoias Foundation, Kaweah Delta Hospital Foundation, St Paul’s Episcopal School, and Diocese of Camp San Joaquin. He was also the former President of the Tulare County Industrial Park, Visalia Rotary Club, and San Joaquin Valley City Manager’s Association.

Harry and his high school sweetheart, Shirley, were married for 73 years. Together they had three sons; their late son John, Bill who resides in Australia and works as the head of the Department of International Relations and University of Australia, and Robert who owns an electronics business in Three Rivers, CA.

Harry left an incredible legacy – one our Central Valley community will forever be grateful for. We will miss him very much and cherish the time that we worked alongside him.

Thank you, Harry. For everything.

Grant Funding Opportunity For Municipalities and Districts

CA State Water Boards Prop 1 Storm Water Grant Program

 

By John Quiring

 
 

Prop 1 Storm Water Grant Program

The State Water Resource Control Board’s Proposition 1 Storm Water Grant Program is happy to announce that the Round 2 solicitation is now open and accepting applications! Please refer to the Solicitation Notice and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for more information about this solicitation and how to apply at the Website below:

  • https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/grants_loans/swgp/prop1/

Due Date: July 2, 2020

Matching Funds: 50%

Purpose:  For multi-benefit storm water management projects which may include, but shall not be limited to, green infrastructure, rainwater and storm water capture projects and storm water treatment facilities.

Available Funding:  $100 million

Maximum/minimum Funding:

  • Per Applicant:  Minimum – $250,000; Maximum – $10 million
  • An applicant may apply for as many projects as it can manage within the term of the SWGP.

Project Type: Implementation Grants Only (no planning grants)

Special Considerations: Must provide multiple benefits (see NOFA for examples), be included in a local IRWM Plan as well as a Local Resource Plan.

Applications will be accepted online through the Financial Assistance Application Submittal Tool (FAAST) under the Request For Proposals (RFP) titled: “Prop 1 Round 2 Storm Water Grant Program (SWGP) Project Proposals”.

A webinar for applicants is scheduled for May 12th at 2:00PM to discuss program and application requirements. Login details will be posted on the SWGP webpage above at a later date.

For more information, contact John Quiring, Director of Community Development & Infrastructure Funding at (559) 449-2400 or John.Quiring@qkinc.com.