Agenda packet — Porterville City Council, May 6, 2025 (part 3 of 5)

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT
Della Farms Subdivision
Porterville, CA
APNs: 253 - 080 - 027; 253 - 080 - 028 ( 25.47 acr es , ) Prepared for:

October 31, 2024
Table of Contents

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................................1

1.1 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................1

1.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................1

1.3 REGULATORY JURISDICTION AND BACKGROUND .............................................................................3 WETLAND PROTECTION....................................................................................................................................................3 LISTED PROTECTED SPECIES AND HABITAT PROTECTION.................................................................................................4 CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT .........................................................................................................................5 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT .................................................................................................................6 LAND USE ENTITLEMENTS ...............................................................................................................................................6

2.0 RESOURCES CONSULTED & METHODS...................................................................................................7

2.1 DATA AND LITERATURE REVIEW..............................................................................................................7

2.2 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AND WETLAND MAPPING.............................................................................7

2.3 FIELD INVESTIGATION .................................................................................................................................7

3.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................................9

3.1 PHYSICAL RESOURCES AND ELEMENTS.................................................................................................9 CLIMATE .......................................................................................................................................................................9 TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE ....................................................................................................................................9 LAND USE AND HABITAT ......................................................................................................................................... 9 WATERS/WETLAND..................................................................................................................................................10 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES...........................................................................................................................................10

3.2 CONCLUSIONS...............................................................................................................................................15 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................16 List of Figures
Figure 1: Location Map................................................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2: Study Area.................................................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 3: BIOS Mapping ............................................................................................................................................. 13 List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Special Status Species..............................................................................................................12 Page i

Page 1 ends

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND INTRODUCTION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Argonaut Ecological, Inc. conducted a biological evaluation of an approximately 26 acre, at the southwest corner of the intersection of Morton Avenue and Leggett Street in the City of Porterville, Ca.

The assessment included evaluating the types of habitats present and sensitive species associated with those habitats. The biological evaluation focused on mapping existing habitat types based on a site walk and a review of public and commercial databases, aerial photographs (current and historical), and other published information and available data.

The Study Area is located in an area historically supporting small farms and agriculture, but urban development (predominantly residential homes) occurs near the Study Area. The Study Area has rural a residential home with outbuildings and is surrounded by orchards. There are no sensitive habitats within the Study Area, including waters/wetlands or critical habitat for species of concern.

1.1 INTRODUCTION
The proposed project is located in the City of Porterville, Ca. The project proponent proposes subdividing the roughly 26 acre site into 160 single-family home sites with a gross density of 6.3 units per acre. The project would connect to existing an existing water and sewer mains on Morton Avenue, Leggett Street, and Henry Street. The project would also connect to an existing stormwater main on Cleveland Avenue.

1.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES
This report describes the biological resources present within and adjacent to the Study Area, describes the area's biological characteristics, and evaluates the Study Area's likelihood to support sensitive biological resources (such as wetlands, creeks/drainages, and special status species). This evaluation relied on available literature, aerial photography, historic topographic and aerial maps, and a site visit. For this study, wetland habitat includes those areas possibly considered "Waters of the U.S." by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) or Waters of the State of California.

Section 1.2.1 describes wetlands as a subset of "Waters of the U.S.” under the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA).

This report assesses the project's potential effects on biological resources and evaluates whether any associated regulatory approvals or permits are required. This report also evaluates the potential impacts that site development may have on protected habitat, species protected by the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or those protected under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or California Endangered Species Act (CESA)
Basemap Source: ESRI (2024)
0 1,500 3,000 ´ Feet
Study Area
Figure 1

REGIONAL LOCATION AND VICINITY

DELLA FARMS SUBDIVISION
^_
Project Site
City of Porterville, Tulare County, CA
D:\Projects\Argonaut_Ecological\Loma Vista Recharge BasinPark\MXD\loma_vista_basin_regional_location_figure_1.mxd

Page 3 ends

1.3 REGULATORY JURISDICTION AND BACKGROUND
Several agencies share regulatory jurisdiction over biological resources. The following is a brief description of the primary jurisdiction of each agency.

Wetland Protection
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wetlands are a type of water in the U.S. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulate the placement of fill into the Waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbor Act. For this purpose, "Waters of the U.S." is legally defined under Section 404 of the Federal CWA and includes interstate streams, creeks, and adjacent wetlands. The Army Corps defines wetlands as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions" (Environmental Laboratory 1987). In California, seasonally inundated areas that meet the criteria of all three wetland parameters (soils, hydrology, and vegetation), as defined in the recently issued Wetland Delineation Manual for the Arid West (USACE 2006), are also considered jurisdictional wetlands.

Since 2001, several U.S. Supreme Court rulings regarding the regulation of isolated, intrastate Waters by the Army Corps have limited the scope of federal jurisdiction under the CWA and excluded many California wetlands from federal regulation.

In December 2019, the U.S. EPA and the U.S. Army published the final rule to repeal the 2015 Clean Water Rule. The "Clean Water Rule” clarified what constitutes Waters of the U.S., presumably more precisely defined and made permitting more predictable, thus less costly, and more straightforward.

After several challenges to the “Clean Water Rule,” the U.S. EPA and the Department of the Army proposed the pre-2015 (pre-Obama-era rules) definition “of Waters of the United States,” updated to reflect consideration of Supreme Court decisions. The new rule went into effect on May 23, 2023; however, on May 25, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Sackett v.

Environmental Protection Agency that rolled back the definition of Waters of the U.S. to better align with the original definition as included in the Rapanos decision. The new definition limits “Waters” as “limited geographic[al] features that are described in ordinary parlance as ‘streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes" and to "adjacent wetlands that are 'indistinguishable' from those bodies of water due to a continuous surface connection.” The Court set aside the prior use of a “significant nexus.”
Waters typically do not include prior converted cropland (those areas converted before December 23, 1985). Notwithstanding the classification of a wetland as a prior converted cropland by any federal agency for the CWA, the final authority to determine jurisdiction remains with the U.S. EPA.

Page 4 ends

California State Water Resources Control Board
Since 1993, California has had a Wetlands Conservation Policy (a.k.a. Executive Order W-51 59- 93). It is commonly called the No Net Loss policy for wetlands, establishing a state mandate for developing and adopting a policy framework and strategy to protect the State's wetland ecosystems. The policy was to be implemented voluntarily and was expressly not to be implemented on a "project-by-project" basis (See EO W-59-93, Section III).

In 2020, California adopted the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. The State definition of wetland differs from the Federal definition in that the state definition may include areas with no vegetation, assuming the other criteria are present. Wetlands of the State include 1) natural wetlands, 2) wetlands created by modification of Waters of the State (at any point in history), and 3) artificial wetlands that meet specific criteria. The State definition only exempts a few types of Waters. Water features excluded from the State's definition include industrial or municipal wastewater, certain stormwater treatment facilities, agricultural crop irrigation, industrial processing or cooling, and fields flooded for rice growing.

Listed Protected Species and Habitat Protection
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) implements the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC Section 703-711), Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 United States Code [USC] Section 668), and Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA; 16 USC § 153 et seq.).

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) was first enacted in 1918 to protect migratory birds between the United States and Great Britain (acting on behalf of Canada). The MBTA makes it illegal for anyone to take, possess, import, transport, purchase, barter, offer for sale, or purchase any migratory birds, nests, or eggs unless a federal agency has issued a permit. The USFWS has statutory authority and responsibility for enforcing the MBTA. This act was revised in 2004 to include all species native to the U.S. or its territories due to natural biological or ecological processes (70 FR 12710, March 15, 2005). The MBTA does not include nonnative species whose occurrences in the U.S. result solely from intentional or unintentional human introduction. The USFWS maintains a list of bird species not protected under the MBTA.

In January 2021, the USFWS published a new rule in the Federal Register. Under the rule change, the unintentional killing of migratory birds does not violate the MBTA. Only the intentional "pursuing, hunting, taking, capturing, killing, or attempting to do the same ... directed at migratory birds, their nests, or their eggs" would be illegal under the changes.

The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) prohibits "take" "of any federally listed wildlife species (the destruction of federally listed plants on private property is not prohibited and does not require a permit). "Take" under the federal definition means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct. "Incidental take" is harm or death that may occur during the implementation of an otherwise lawful activity. "Candidate Species” have the full protection of FESA. However, the USFWS advises project applicants that it is prudent to address these species since they could be elevated to "listed status"

Page 5 ends

before the completion of projects with long planning or development schedules.

The Projects that would result in "take" "of any federally-listed threatened or endangered species can obtain authorization from the USFWS through either Section 7 (interagency consultation) or Section 10(a) (incidental take permit) of FESA. The authorization process determines if a project would jeopardize a ‘listed species' continued existence and what mitigation measures would be required to avoid jeopardizing the species.

An Incidental Take Permit (ITP) or Take Permit is required when an activity would either kill, harm, harass, or interrupt a listed species' breeding or nesting. The FESA definition of "harm" is somewhat less definitive since it includes ubiquitous activities. In 1999, the USFWS clarified the term "harm" as it applies to the ESA in the Federal Register. As stated, the final rule defined the term "harm" "to include any act that causes actual harm (kills or injures fish or wildlife) and emphasizes that such actions may have significant habitat modification or degradation that significantly impairs essential behavioral patterns of fish or wildlife.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is a Trustee Agency responsible under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for reviewing and evaluating project impacts on plant and wildlife resources. Under the Fish and Game Code Section 1802, the CDFW has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitats necessary for biologically sustainable populations.TheCalifornia Fish and GameCode also provides authority for the CDFW to regulate projects that could result in the "take" of any species listed by the State as threatened or endangered (Section 2081). CDFW also has authority over all state streams, as described below.

Perennial and intermittent streams also fall under the jurisdiction of CDFW according to Sections 1601-1603 of the Fish and Game Code (Streambed Alteration Agreements). CDFW's jurisdictional extent includes work within the stream zone, including the diversion or obstruction of the natural flow or changes in the channel, bed, or bank of any river, stream, or lake. Before issuing a 1601 or 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement, the CDFW must demonstrate compliance with CEQA. In most cases, CDFW relies on the CEQA review performed by the local lead agency. However, in cases where no CEQA review was required for the project, CDFW would act as the lead agency under CEQA.

The CDFW also has the authority to protect state-listed species issues under Section 2081 Incidental Take Permit if a project has the potential to negatively affect state-protected plant or animal species or their habitats, either directly or indirectly. Protected species include those "listed" by the State as endangered or threatened. Besides listed species, other species protection categories include "fully protected" and California Species of Special Concern (CSC). Adverse impacts to species that are "fully protected" are prohibited.

Under the California Fish & Game Code (FGC Section 3503), "it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird…." Birds of prey (falcons, hawks, owls, and eagles) get extra protection under the law (FGC Section 3503.5).

As with USFWS, CDFW does not have the authority to require a landowner to apply for an ITP authorizing take. Instead, the landowner is legally obligated to avoid taking state-listed species if it

Page 6 ends

does not seek an ITP. CDFW (and USFWS) can initiate an enforcement action if they believe that an illegal take has occurred or will occur.

California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) protects candidate plants and animal species and those listed under CESA as rare, threatened, or endangered. CESA prohibits the taking of any such species unless authorized. Section 2081 authorizes the State to issue ITPs. The state definition of taking applies only to acts that result in death or adverse impacts on protected species. The CESA mirrors the federal regulation as it relates to "take"; however, there is no State equivalent definition of "harm" or "harass." Incidental take is also not defined by the CESA statute or regulation. Unlike FESA, CESA does qualify that incidental take "is not prohibited if it is the result of an act that occurs on a farm or ranch during an otherwise lawful routine and ongoing agricultural activity." Where disagreement occurs (and in some cases, this has been the subject of court cases) is in the common understanding of “routine and ongoing agricultural activity." California Environmental Quality Act
The CEQA Guidelines require a review of projects to determine their environmental effects and identify mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The Guidelines state that an effect may be significant if it affects rare and endangered species. Section 15380 of the Guidelines defines rare to include listed species and allows agencies to consider rare species other than those designated as State or Federal threatened or endangered but that meet the standards for rare under the Federal or State endangered species acts. On this basis, plants designated as rare by non-regulatory organizations (e.g., California Native Plant Society), species of special concern defined by CDFW, candidate species defined by USFWS, and other designations must be considered in CEQA analyses.

Land Use Entitlements
City of Porterville, CA.

The City of Porterville is responsible for all local land-use decisions within its jurisdiction under CEQA and would serve as the lead agency. The project requires approval of a tentative subdivision map, an annexation, a General Plan Amendment, and Condition Use Permit. The current General Plan designation is “parks & recreation, education” and the proposed new General Plan designation would be “low medium density residential”. In addition to the required approval, the City, as the lead agency, will prepare an environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City will consider other responsible agencies' recommendations during the CEQA review.

Page 7 ends

2.0 RESOURCES CONSULTED AND METHODS
The following section describes the methods used to assess the Study Area and includes data review and evaluation, field studies, and aerial photograph interpretations.

2.1 DATA AND LITERATURE REVIEW
Documents and sources of information used to prepare this evaluation include the following:
• Aerial photography (Google Earth®, Bing®, and historic aerials). • California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB/RareFind - Recent version with updates)
• EcoAtlas 2024.
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetland Inventory Map. • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Information Planning and Consultation (IPac). • U.S. Geological Survey, Historical Topographic Map, Porterville Quadrangle, 1924, University of Texas, Austin, Perry-Castañeda Map Collection Before conducting a site review, the California Natural Diversity Database/RareFind (CNDDB) and the USFWS IPaC were consulted to determine the species in the Study Area based on location. This review assesses the likelihood of special status species being present based on the site's distance from documented species occurrences and the presence or absence of habitat types such species use. The CNDDB includes records of reported observations for special status plant and animal species and is queried based on a search radius of United States Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle maps. Argonaut reviewed highresolution aerial photographs before conducting the fieldwork to determine if any areas on the site supported the presence of Waters of the U.S.

2.2 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AND WETLAND MAPPING
Aerial photographs of the Study Area from the 1980s were reviewed to identify site features and determine land-use changes over time. Wetland mapping and aerial photographs were also reviewed to determine if the Study Area recently supported wetlands.

2.3 FIELD INVESTIGATION
The Study Area (See Figure 2) was walked on October 26, 2024, and all habitat features were mapped. for raptors, bats, and burrowing owl. Soils, vegetation, and drainage patterns within the Study Area were inspected to determine the habitat present and suitability for species of concern.

N Park St
E Cleveland Ave
Sutter Ave
Sunwood St
E Putnam Ave
N Sierra Vista St
E Morton Ave
N Leggett St
N Sierra Vista St
Aerial Source: Google Earth (03/2024)
0 200 400 ´ Feet
Study Area
Figure 2

STUDY AREA/AERIAL

DELLA FARMS SUBDIVISION
City of Porterville, Tulare County, CA
D:\Projects\Argonaut_Ecological\Della Farms Subdivision\MXD\della_farms_subdivision_study_area_figure_2.mxd

Page 9 ends

3.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES, RESULTS, AND CONCLUSIONS
Section 3.1, below, describesthe physical features(i.e., land use,soils, vegetation, hydrology, etc.) and the study area's biological features. The physical components and land use strongly influence the types of plants and animals present. This section also describes the habitats present and the specific biological resources observed during the site review.

Section 3.2 presents conclusions, and Section 3.3 contains recommended avoidance and minimization measures to avoid potential impacts.

The following is not an exhaustive inventory of plants and animals present. Instead, the discussion provides sufficient information to characterize the habitat and habitat components present on site. This field survey identified the biological resources present. The biological evaluation discusses the habitat present and the potential for that habitat to support any species considered unique, sensitive, or protected by current law.

The conclusion section (3.2) summarizes the results of the data review, fieldwork, and evaluation of biological resources and potential impacts. The conclusion sections also include recommendations for measures to minimize any potential impacts.

3.1 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Climate
The Study Area climate is typical of the central San Joaquin Valley, with long, hot, dry summers and cool, mild winters. In the winter, rainfall averages approximately 9.99 inches per year, falling mainly between November and April (Western Regional Climate Center, 2004). During 2022/2023, the Fresno region had

20.5 inches of rainfall. The regional rainfall near Tulare (2023/2024) totaled 10.05 inches.

Topograph, Drainage and Soils
The property lies within the Central Valley. Historically the Study Area elevation was roughly 500 ft (mean sea level). Since 1929 the overall topographic condition has not significantly changed. The Study Area appears to drain toward the southwest, toward Porter Slough to the south.

There is a single soil type mapped within the Study Area: Porterville clay, 2 – 9% slopes. This sound is found on alluvial fans and is considered prime farmland if irrigated.

Land Use and Habitat
Land Use The Study Area is in a historically rural, agricultural area of Porterville, but the surrounding areas have been developed with residential homes in the past couple of decades. Existing homes on the site have been there since at least the 1970s and are characterized by rural residential. The homes are vacant.

Habitat There are several California habitat classification systems. Most classification systems describe natural communities without established developed or agricultural habitat classifications. CALVEG is a USDA Forest Service product providing a comprehensive spatial dataset of existing vegetation covering California. The data were created using a combination of automated systematic procedures,remote sensing classification, photo editing, and field-based observations. Analyses are based “a combination of the CALVEG classifications to the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR).”

Page 10 ends

Calveg lists the site roughly 75% of the site as “Agricultural/Non-native/Ruderal” and the remainder as “Urban” habitat. Attachment “A” provides photographs of the Study Area. There is an existing residence and outbuilding near the center of the orchards with access off of Morton Avenue. The home is surrounded with landscaping (palm trees, fruit trees, etc.). There is some ruderal habitat around the outer edge of the orchards. The ruderal habitat is supports numerous non-native weedy species (geranium, dove weed, mustard, wild oats).

There is a large pond immediately south of the Study Area and this pond appears to be associated with a developed park (Murry Park) further south. Both ponds and the park have been in existence since at least 1994.

Bird species observed include mourning dove, starling, pigeons, one red-tailed hawk in flight, turkey vulture, white crowned sparrow, raven (in flight), northern mockingbird, and California scrub jay. Three domestic cats were observed within the orchards.

Waters/Wetland
According to the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Map, there are no waters or wetlands within or adjacent to the Study Area. The nearest aquatic feature is the pond on the property south of the Study Area. This feature is shown on the 1929 topographic map as a pond. The entire Study Area was walked to look for any evidence of potential wetlands/waters or any other aquatic habitat (either perennial or seasonal), and none were present.

Special Status Species
A query of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Information Planning and Consultation (IPaC) was performed to determine which special status species could be present within the Study Area. No critical habitat for any species within or near the Study Area.

The CNDDB Bios mapping is shown in Figure 3. This map shows the location of known records of special status species near the Study Area, and Table 1 includes a summary of the CNDDB query results.

Mammals
Three mammals species were identified as potentially present within the region: American badger (Taxidea taxus), San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), and Tipton kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides). No evidence of occupation by any of these species was observed (scat, burrows, tracks).

American badger digs burrows in friable soils and could be present, but no evidence of occupation was found. There is no suitable habitat for Tipton kangaroo rate within or immediately adjacent to the Study Area. They prefer arid grassland habitat. Agricultural lands are not a preferred habitat. San Joaquin kit fox could hunt for prey within the Study Area, but there is no denning habitat or evidence of occupation.

Birds
The CNDDB and the IPaC include bird species potentially present within or near the Study Area, including migratory birds. Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) is a large raptor, a State threatened species that nests in mature trees and forages within agricultural areas. Burrowing owl (Athenea cunicularia) is a small

Page 11 ends

ground-nesting owl (California species of special concern) that depends on ground-burrowing mammals for burrows for nesting, but is also known to nest or overwinter in surplus pipes, cisturns or other farm structures. No evidence of raptor nests were observed.

No evidence of occupation within the Study Area was found. The Study Area does provide some suitable nesting habitat for migratory birds.

Amphibians, Reptiles, and Invertebrates
Numerous invertebrate species, primarily vernal pool fairy shrimp and California linderiella are included in the CNDDB. These invertebrates occur in seasonal wetlands. No suitable habitat is present for the identified species within or near the Study Area.

Plants
The CNDDB includes fourspecial status species listed within the region. No suitable habitat for special status species is present within the Study Area.

Page 12 ends

Table 1
Summary of Special Status Species, Potential Occurrence, and Impact Common Name Scientific Name Status1 Effects2 Occurrence in the Study Area3 Mammals
American badger Taxidea taxus --/-- NE
Absent. Occurs in open areas with a suitable prey
base (small rodents and mammals). Burrows
underground. No evidence of occupation within the
Study Area, and no suitable prey base was observed.

San Joaquin kit fox Vulpes macrotis mutica FE/CT NE
Likely Absent. Species travels long distance for
hunting and dens in sparsely populated areas. No
denning habitat present within the Study Area.

Tipton kangaroo rat Dipodomys nitratoides
nitratoides FE/ NE
Absent. Small mammal that prefers arid grassland
habitat with low shrubs. Suitable habitat not present.

Birds
California condor Gymnogyps
californianus FE/CE NE
Absent. Nests in cliff caves. No suitable habitat
present or nearby.

Burrowing owl Athenea cunicularia --/--SSC NE
Likely absent. Associated with a ground burrowing
population (such as ground squirrels) that provide
burrows. Found in open grassland with suitable prey
base. No ground squirrel populations were observed.

The potential for presence is low.

Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni --/CT ME
Potentially Present. Nests in mature trees. There are
mature trees north of the Study Area, but no nests
observed.

Amphibians, Reptiles, and Invertebrates
Western spadefoot Spea hammondii PT/-- NE
Absent. Requires seasonal wetlands for breeding and
no suitable habitat on or near the Study Area.

Blunt-nosed leopard
lizard Gambelia silus FE/CE NE
Absent. Occurs in grassland habitat with drought
tolerate shrubs, alkali flats, and washes.

Northern California
legless lizard Anniella pulchra --/-- NE
Absent. Occurs in moist, warm loose soil with plant
cover. Moisture is essential. Two individuals
collected in the Fresno region in 1880. No suitable
habitat present within or near the Study Area.

Northwestern pond
turtle (aka western pond
turtle)
Actinemys marmorata PT/--

NE
Absent. Semi-aquatic turtle. No suitable habitat
present within or near the Study Area.

Vernal pool fairy
shrimp Branchinecta lynchi FT/-- NE
Absent. No suitable habitat onsite since there are no
seasonal wetlands or ponds within the Study Area.

Page 13 ends

Crotch bumble bee Bombus crotchii --/CC NE
Likely Absent. Most observations of this species
occur in coastal areas of southern California. One
record from Fresno region (1892). Inhabits grassland
and scrub areas, requiring a hotter and drier
environment than other bumblebee species. Unlikely
that species are present.

Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus --/-- NE
Likely Absent. No suitable for this species is present
within the Study Area. No evidence of milkweed on
site.

Molestan blister beetle Lytta molesta --/--

NE
Absent. It occurs in wetlands and vernal pools, but
there is no specific occurrence. No suitable habitat is present within the Study Area.

Plants
Springville clarkia Clarkia springvillensis FT/CE NE
Absent. Occurs primarily within the Tule River
watershed in Tulare County, and generally grows on
decomposing granite in blue oak woodland
communities. Suitable habitat not present.

Striped adobe-lily Fritillaria striata --/CT NE
Absent. Requires adobe clay soils. Suitable habitat
not present. Nearest known record is north of
Porterville in foothill grassland habitat.

San Joaquin adobe
sunburst Pseudobahia personii FT/CE NE
Absent. Grassland and oak woodland habitat with
heavy adobe clay soils. Suitable soil present, but
suitable habitat not present.

Keck’s checker-mallow Sidalcea keckii FE/ NE
Absent. Foothill woodland habitat. Suitable habitat
not present.
1 Status= Listing of special status species, unless otherwise indicated CE: California listed as Endangered
CT: California listed as Threatened
CC: California candidate species
SSC: California Species of Special Concern
FE: Federally listed as Endangered FT: Federally listed as Threatened 2 Effects = Effect determination
NE: No Effect
ME: May Effect, not likely to adversely affect
Source: CNDDB = CaliforniaNatural DiversityDatabase provided by CDFG and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Accessed online between October 20, 2024.

Definition of Occurrence Indicators: Present/Potentially: Species recorded in the area and some habitat elements in the Study Area similar to known occurrences. Absent/Likely Absent: Species not recorded in Study Area and suitable or critical habitat components are absent.
\
Figure 3
CNDDB BIOS Mapping
Legend
Striped adobe-lily
Crotch bumble bee
Northern
California legless
lizard
San Joaquin kit fox
Townsend’s big-eared bat
San Joaquin adobe sunburst
San Joaquin adobe sunburst
Striped adobe-lily
California condor
Study Area

Page 15 ends

3.2 CONCLUSIONS

CONCLUSIONS
• The Study Area has been developed for rural residential/small farm. • The habitat value of the Study Area is limited but the site supports some birds. • The Study Area has a low potential to support species of special concern. There is no suitable habitat for special status species within the Study Area and no evidence of occupation was found.
• No wetlands (Federal or State waters) exist within or near the Study Area. corridor.

Page 16 ends

References
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Online. Subscription with updates. Available at: URL https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB California Wetlands Monitoring Workgroup (CWMW). EcoAtlas. Accessed [date retrieved]. https://www.ecoatlas.org.

National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), Web Soils Survey.

Available at: URL
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC).

Available at URL: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetland Inventory Maps. Available at URL: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html
U.S. Geologic Survey, Historic topographic Map, Clovis. 1926, University of Texas, Austin, Perry-Castañeda Map Collection. Available at:
https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/
Photo Key
Della Farms Subdivision, Porterville, California
Legend
8 2
1 3
4 5
6 7
9 0
10 0
Photo location
Photographs
Della Farms Subdivision, Porterville, CA
October 26, 2024

Page 1 ends

Photograph 1
View looking west from
northeast corner of Study Area,
looking along Morton Avenue.

Photograph 2
Northeast corner of Study
Area, looking south along
western edge of site.

Photographs
Della Farms Subdivision, Porterville, CA
October 26, 2024

Page 2 ends

Photograph 3
East side of Study
Area, along N.

Leggett Street,
looking north
Photograph 4
Typical view of
orchard (persimmon)
Photographs
Della Farms Subdivision, Porterville, CA
October 26, 2024

Page 3 ends

Photograph 5
View of southern edge of
Study Area, looking
southwest toward adjacent
property with pond
(background).

Photograph 6
View of southern edge of west
side of the Study Area, looking
east along agricultural farm
road.

Photographs
Della Farms Subdivision, Porterville, CA
October 26, 2024

Page 4 ends

Photograph 7
View of southwest corner of Study
Area, looking north.

Photograph 8
Interior view of orchards
Photographs
Della Farms Subdivision, Porterville, CA
October 26, 2024

Page 5 ends

Photograph 9
View looking north of farm building
near residence
Photograph 10
View looking toward residence. Palm
trees line the driveway to the right.

Attachment B: Special Status Species Database Queries
Project: Della Farms Subdivision, Porterville, California Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.

Extirp. Extirp.

Anniella pulchra
Northern California legless lizard
G3
S2S3
None
None
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
USFS_S-Sensitive
460
460
386
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Bombus crotchii
Crotch's bumble bee
G2
S2
None
Candidate
Endangered
IUCN_EN-Endangered 500
500
443
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
G3
S3
Threatened
None
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable 425
455
804
S:2
0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
G5
S4
None
Threatened
BLM_S-Sensitive
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
412
412
2577
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
Clarkia springvillensis
Springville clarkia
G2
S2
Threatened
Endangered
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.2
SB_UCSC-UC Santa
Cruz
800
800
28 S:1
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Fritillaria striata
striped adobe-lily
G1
S1
None
Threatened
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
SB_SBBG-Santa
Barbara Botanic
Garden
SB_USDA-US Dept of
Agriculture
USFS_S-Sensitive
450
900
23 S:2
0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1
Lytta morrisoni
Morrison's blister beetle
G1G2
S2
None
None
10 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Northern Claypan Vernal Pool
Northern Claypan Vernal Pool
G1
S1.1
None
None
510
510
21 S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Pseudobahia peirsonii
San Joaquin adobe sunburst
G1
S1
Threatened
Endangered
Rare Plant Rank - 1B.1
SB_CalBG/RSABGCalifornia/Rancho
Santa Ana Botanic
Garden
590
650
51 S:2
0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 0
Query Criteria: Quad<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(Porterville (3611911)) Report Printed on Wednesday, October 23, 2024
Commercial Version -- Dated September, 29 2024 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 2 Information Expires 3/29/2025
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly a!ected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of e!ects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional sitespecific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS o"ce(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location
Tulare County, California
Local o"ce
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife O"ce
 (916) 414-6600
 (916) 414-6713
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly a!ected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential e!ects to species, additional site-specific and project-specific information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local o"ce and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an o"cial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field o"ce directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an o"cial species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.

2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.

3. Log in (if directed to do so).

4. Provide a name and description for your project.

5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries ). 1 2
IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).

2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an o"ce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following species are potentially a!ected by activities in this location:

Mammals
Birds
Reptiles
Amphibians
Insects
Crustaceans

NAME STATUS
Fisher Pekania pennanti
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3651
Endangered
San Joaquin Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis mutica
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2873
Endangered
Tipton Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7247
Endangered

NAME STATUS
California Condor Gymnogyps californianus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8193
Endangered

NAME STATUS
Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard Gambelia silus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/625
Endangered
Northwestern Pond Turtle Actinemys marmorata
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1111
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
Western Spadefoot Spea hammondii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5425
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate

NAME STATUS
Flowering Plants
Critical habitats
Potential e!ects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

There are no critical habitats at this location.

You are still required to determine if your project(s) may have e!ects on all above listed species.

Bald & Golden Eagles
There are likely bald eagles present in your project area. For additional information on bald eagles, refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

BREEDING SEASON
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened

NAME STATUS
Keck's Checker-mallow Sidalcea keckii
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5704
Endangered
San Joaquin Adobe Sunburst Pseudobahia peirsonii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2931
Threatened
Springville Clarkia Clarkia springvillensis
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8309
Threatened
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act .

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or golden eagles, or their habitats , should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratorybirds Nationwide conservation measures for birds
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nationwide-standard-conservationmeasures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-goldeneagles-may-occur-project-action 1 2
3 NAME
probability of presence breeding season survey e!ort no data Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey e!ort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey e!ort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey E!ort ( )
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey e!ort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas o! the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Golden Eagle
Non-BCC Vulnerable
What does IPaC use to generate the potential presence of bald and golden eagles in my specified location? The potential for eagle presence is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply). To see a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs of bald and golden eagles in my specified location? The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to o!shore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.

Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in o!shore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur. Please contact your local Fish and Wildlife Service Field O"ce if you have questions.

Migratory birds
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip:
enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur o! the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

BREEDING SEASON
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.

2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratorybirds Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-goldeneagles-may-occur-project-action 1 2
3 NAME
Belding's Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug 15
Bullock's Oriole Icterus bullockii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
Breeds Mar 21 to Jul 25
California Gull Larus californicus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 31
Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2084
Breeds May 20 to Jul 31
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in o!shore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Survey E!ort ( )
Lawrence's Goldfinch Spinus lawrencei
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9464
Breeds Mar 20 to Sep 20
Northern Harrier Circus hudsonius
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8350
Breeds Apr 1 to Sep 15
Nuttall's Woodpecker Dryobates nuttallii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20
Oak Titmouse Baeolophus inornatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9656
Breeds Mar 15 to Jul 15
Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914
Breeds May 20 to Aug 31
Santa Barbara Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia graminea
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5513
Breeds Mar 1 to Sep 5
Tricolored Blackbird Agelaius tricolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3910
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Western Grebe aechmophorus occidentalis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6743
Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
probability of presence breeding season survey e!ort no data Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey e!ort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Belding's Savannah Sparrow

BCC - BCR
Bullock's Oriole

BCC - BCR
California Gull
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Clark's Grebe
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Common Yellowthroat

BCC - BCR
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC Vulnerable
Lawrence's Goldfinch
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Northern Harrier

BCC - BCR
Nuttall's Woodpecker

BCC - BCR
Oak Titmouse
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Olive-sided Flycatcher
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Santa Barbara Song Sparrow

BCC - BCR

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Tricolored Blackbird
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Western Grebe
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specified location? The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location? The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);

2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and

3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for noneagles) potential susceptibilities in o!shore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. o!shore energy development or longline fishing).

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, e!orts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.

Details about birds that are potentially a!ected by o!shore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area o! the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also o!ers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review.

Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.

What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey e!ort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey e!ort is the key component. If the survey e!ort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey e!ort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

There are no refuge lands at this location.

Fish hatcheries
There are no fish hatcheries at this location.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

Wetland information is not available at this time
This can happen when the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map service is unavailable, or for very large projects that intersect many wetland areas.

Try again, or visit the NWI map to view wetlands at this location.

Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional di!erences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands.

These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a di!erent manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may a!ect such activities.

Elev. Element Occ. Ranks Population Status Presence
Name (Scientific/Common)
CNDDB
Ranks
Listing Status
(Fed/State) Other Lists
Range
(ft.)
Total
EO's A B C D X U
Historic
> 20 yr
Recent
<= 20 yr Extant
Poss.

Extirp. Extirp.

Taxidea taxus
American badger
G5
S3
None
None
CDFW_SSC-Species
of Special Concern
IUCN_LC-Least
Concern
430
430
647
S:1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Vulpes macrotis mutica
San Joaquin kit fox
G4T2
S3
Endangered
Threatened
400
510
1020
S:7
0 0 0 1 0 6 7 0 7 0 0
Report Printed on Wednesday, October 23, 2024
Commercial Version -- Dated September, 29 2024 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 2 Information Expires 3/29/2025
Summary Table Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
March 2025 (Revised April 2025)
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Della Farms Residential Subdivision | 154

7.4 Appendix D: CHRIS Search Results
Prepared by Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center dated October 7, 2024.

To: Isaiah Medina Record Search 24-446
Precision Civil Engineering, Inc.
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
Date: October 7, 2024
Re: Della Farms Subdivision
County: Tulare
Map(s): Porterville 7.5’

CULTURAL RESOURCES RECORDS SEARCH
The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) contracts with the California Historical Resources Information System’s (CHRIS) regional Information Centers (ICs) to maintain information in the CHRIS inventory and make it available to local, state, and federal agencies, cultural resource professionals, Native American tribes, researchers, and the public. Recommendations made by IC coordinators or their staff regarding the interpretation and application of this information are advisory only. Such recommendations do not necessarily represent the evaluation or opinion of the State Historic Preservation Officer in carrying out the OHP’s regulatory authority under federal and state law.

The following are the results of a search of the cultural resource files at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center. These files include known and recorded cultural resources sites, inventory and excavation reports filed with this office, and resources listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the OHP Built Environment Resources Directory, California State Historical Landmarks, California Register of Historical Resources, California Inventory of Historic Resources, and California Points of Historical Interest. Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the OHP are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area.

PRIOR CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES CONDUCTED WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND THE ONE-HALF MILE RADIUS
According to the information in our files, there has been one previous cultural resource study completed within the project area: See attached list. There have been 9 cultural resource studies conducted within the one-half mile radius: See attached list.

Record Search 24-446

KNOWN/RECORDED CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND THE ONE-HALF MILE RADIUS According to the information in our files, there is one recorded cultural resource within the project area: See attached list. There are 162 recorded cultural resources within the one-half mile radius: See attached list. These resources consist of historic era canals, a monument, train station, rail roads, a park, roads, trash scatter, community center, and distribution lines.

There are 11 resources that were given a National Register Code of 3S: Appears eligible for National Register individually through survey evaluation.

There is one resource that was given a status code of 3D: Appears eligible for NR as a contributor to a NR eligible multi-component resource through survey evaluation.

There is one resource that was given a National Register Code of 3B: Appears eligible for National Register both individually and as a contributor to a National Register eligible multicomponent resource like a district through survey evaluation.

Please refer to the attached Status Code list for the associated resource numbers. There are no other recorded cultural resources within the project area or radius that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Historical Interest, California Inventory of Historic Resources, for the California State Historic Landmarks.

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We understand the applicant proposes a Tentative Subdivision Map pertaining to two parcels located in Porterville. Further, we understand this project area is outside of the city limits and within the Urban Development Boundary and this project proposes annexation into the city limits and to change the GPLU from Parks and Recreation to Low Medium Density Residential for both parcels. The Tentative Subdivision Map proposes to divide the project site into 160 residential lots. Because annexation of parcels and changing GPLU designations does not require any ground disturbance activities, no further cultural resource investigation is recommended at this time. However, for any future stages of this project that may result in ground disturbance, or alteration or demolition of any existing structures more than 45 years old, we recommend a qualified, professional consultant first conduct a field survey to determine if any cultural resources are present and the structures first be recorded and evaluated for historical significance. Further, if any cultural resources are unearthed during any ground disturbance activities, all work must halt in the area of the find and a qualified, professional consultant should be called out to assess the findings and make the appropriate mitigation recommendations. A list of qualified consultants can be found at www.chrisinfo.org.

We also recommend that you contact the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento. They will provide you with a current list of Native American individuals/organizations that can assist you with information regarding cultural resources that may not be included in the CHRIS Inventory and that may be of concern to the Native groups in the area. The Commission can consult their "Sacred Lands Inventory" file to determine what sacred resources, if any, exist within this project area and the way in which these resources might be managed. Finally, please consult with the lead agency on this project to determine if any other cultural resource investigation is required. If you need any additional information or have any questions or concerns, please contact our office at (661) 654-2289.

By:

Jeremy E David, Assistant Coordinator Date: October 7, 2024 Please note that invoices for Information Center services will be sent under separate cover from the California State University, Bakersfield Accounting Office.

SSJVIC Record Search 24-446
Reports in PA: Reports in 0.5 Mile: Resources in PA: Resources in 0.5 Mile:

TU-00266 TU-00539 P-54-003143 P-54-002805
TU-00630 P-54-002806
TU-01031 P-54-002807
TU-01052 P-54-002808
TU-01061 P-54-002809
TU-01303 P-54-002810
TU-01329 P-54-002811
TU-01669 P-54-002812
TU-01927 P-54-002813
P-54-002814
P-54-002815
P-54-002816
P-54-002817
P-54-002818
P-54-002819
P-54-002820
P-54-002821
P-54-002822
P-54-002823
P-54-002824
P-54-002825
P-54-002826
P-54-002827
P-54-002828
P-54-002829
P-54-002830
P-54-002831
P-54-002832
P-54-002833
P-54-002834
P-54-002835
P-54-002836
P-54-002837
P-54-002838
P-54-002839
P-54-002840
P-54-002841
P-54-002842
P-54-002843
P-54-002844
P-54-002845
P-54-002846
P-54-002847
P-54-002848
P-54-002849
P-54-002850
SSJVIC Record Search 24-446
P-54-002851 P-54-002897 P-54-003201
P-54-002852 P-54-002898 P-54-003202
P-54-002853 P-54-002899 P-54-003203
P-54-002854 P-54-002900 P-54-003204
P-54-002855 P-54-002901 P-54-003205
P-54-002856 P-54-002902 P-54-003206
P-54-002857 P-54-002903 P-54-003207
P-54-002858 P-54-002904 P-54-003213
P-54-002859 P-54-002905 P-54-003218
P-54-002860 P-54-003140 P-54-004032
P-54-002861 P-54-003141 P-54-004309
P-54-002862 P-54-003142 P-54-004354
P-54-002863 P-54-003144 P-54-004355
P-54-002864 P-54-003151 P-54-004356
P-54-002865 P-54-003156 P-54-004358
P-54-002866 P-54-003170 P-54-004359
P-54-002867 P-54-003171 P-54-004360
P-54-002868 P-54-003172 P-54-004361
P-54-002869 P-54-003173 P-54-004632
P-54-002870 P-54-003174 P-54-004700
P-54-002871 P-54-003175 P-54-004701
P-54-002872 P-54-003176 P-54-005097
P-54-002873 P-54-003177
P-54-002874 P-54-003178
P-54-002875 P-54-003179
P-54-002876 P-54-003180
P-54-002877 P-54-003181
P-54-002878 P-54-003182
P-54-002879 P-54-003183
P-54-002880 P-54-003184
P-54-002881 P-54-003185
P-54-002882 P-54-003186
P-54-002883 P-54-003187
P-54-002884 P-54-003188
P-54-002885 P-54-003189
P-54-002886 P-54-003190
P-54-002887 P-54-003191
P-54-002888 P-54-003192
P-54-002889 P-54-003193
P-54-002890 P-54-003194
P-54-002891 P-54-003195
P-54-002892 P-54-003196
P-54-002893 P-54-003197
P-54-002894 P-54-003198
P-54-002895 P-54-003199
P-54-002896 P-54-003200
Resources in 0.5 Mile cont.:

SSJVIC Record Search 24-446
Primary Number Name Location Status Code
P-54-002807 DR. BARBER, SR. HOUSE, WEISENB148 North Murry Street 3S P-54-002822 GARDNER HOUSE, GARDNER HOM308 East Putnam Avenue 3D P-54-002852 VELIE HOME, GUTHRIE HOME 218 East Mill Avenue 3S P-54-002866 Dr. N. Oakley Home 377 East Mill Avenue 3S
P-54-002869 Aubrey Lumley, Senior Home 415 East Mill Avenue 3B P-54-002873 REV. J.A. MILLIGAN HOUSE 441 East Mill Avenue 3S P-54-002901 GRAHAM HOUSE 388 East Oak Avenue 3S
P-54-003140 WILLIAM DUNCAN HOUSE 266 East Morton Avenue 3S P-54-003143 A. G. SCHULZ HOUSE 685 East Morton Avenue 3S P-54-003144 LANA HENRY HOUSE 732 East Morton Avenue 3S
P-54-003156 SANTA FE DEPOT 280 North Fourth Street 3S
P-54-003213 351 North Plano Street 3S
P-54-003218 57 South Corona Drive 3S
National Register Status Code List

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
March 2025 (Revised April 2025)
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Della Farms Residential Subdivision | 155

7.5 Appendix E: NAHC Letter
Prepared by Native American Heritage Commission dated October 2, 2024.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Page 1 of 1 ends

October 2, 2024
Isaiah Medina
Precision Civil Engineering, Inc.

Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Della Farms Subdivision Project, Tulare County
Dear Mr. Medina:

A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The results were negative. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.

Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated; if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information has been received.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify me. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: [email protected].

Sincerely,
Cameron Vela
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment

CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

VICE-CHAIRPERSON
Buffy McQuillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nomlaki

SECRETARY
Sara Dutschke
Miwok

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Wayne Nelson
Luiseño

COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Ohlone-Costanoan

COMMISSIONER
Stanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay

COMMISSIONER
Laurena Bolden
Serrano

COMMISSIONER
Reid Milanovich
Cahuilla

COMMISSIONER
Bennae Calac
Pauma-Yuima Band of
Luiseño Indians

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Raymond C.

Hitchcock
Miwok, Nisenan

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
March 2025 (Revised April 2025)
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Della Farms Residential Subdivision | 156

7.6 Appendix F: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Prepared by Krazan & Associates, Inc. dated July 12, 2024. Note to reader: the Williamson Act Contract referenced under Tulare county Resource Management Agency is valid. Protest of the Williamson Act Contract was approved but will not be terminated until the annexation is approved by LAFCO. & A S S O C I A T E S , I N C.

G E O T E C H N I C A L E N G I N E E R I N G  E N V I R O N M E N T A L E N G I N E E R I N G

C O N S T R U C T I O N T E S T I N G & I N S P E C T I O N 215 West Dakota Avenue • Clovis, California 93612 • (559) 348-2200 • FAX (559) 348-2190 With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final
July 12, 2024 Project No. 024-24037
Mr. Quinn Tedford
Century Communities
7330 N. Palm Avenue, Suite 106
Fresno, California 93711
[email protected]
RE: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Della Farms Property
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Dear Mr. Tedford:

Krazan & Associates, Inc., (Krazan) has completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment at the abovereferenced site summarized in a report dated July 12, 2024. Please note that the earliest date of source review was June 11, 2024. This report is considered viable within 180 days of that date. We appreciate the opportunity to serve your environmental due diligence needs.

During the course of this assessment, Krazan identified no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs), controlled RECs (CRECs) or historical RECs (HRECs) in connection with the subject site as defined by ASTM E 1527-21. However, the following potential area of concern (PAOC), ASTM NonScope Issues and Site Development Issues were identified in connection with the subject site.

PAOC
Krazan’s review of historical aerial photographs indicates that rural residential areas, including dwelling-type structures, barn type structures, and smaller outbuildings, were present in the central portion of the subject site circa 1937. Additionally, historical aerial photographs of the subject site and surrounding vicinity taken between 1937 to present indicate the presence of on- and off-site farming operations during this time interval expected to utilize fuel-powered trucks and tractors/farm equipment. No records of USTs for the subject site are on file with the local regulatory agencies. However, USTs on rural or agricultural properties historically have been exempt from requirements for registration with regulatory agencies. Krazan’s experience with such properties has shown that it is not uncommon for property owners/operators to install USTs for their convenience, especially in the vicinity of structures, which are undocumented and whose presence would remain unknown in spite of the standard data research conducted in the course of this Phase I ESA. It is therefore possible that subsurface features such as unregistered USTs may exist in the vicinity of the existing and/or former on-site structures which remain unknown based upon the absence of any regulatory, municipality, interview data, or other evidence indicating their presence or location. Consequently, despite an absence of data suggesting their presence, the presence or absence of USTs associated with the subject site prior to the current owner of the subject site is unknown.

Project No. 014-24022
Page No. 2
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final
ASTM Non-Scope Issues
The structures located on the subject site appears to have been constructed prior to 1978. It is unknown if the on-site dwelling contains asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) or lead-based paint (LBP). An asbestos and/or LBP survey and sampling of the on-site dwelling was not included within the scope of this assessment. However, based on the apparent dates of construction, ACMs and LBP may be present at the subject site. Prior to the disturbance of any of the suspect ACMs or LBP at the subject site via renovation or demolition, comprehensive asbestos and LBP surveys are recommended.

Site Development Issues
 Krazan’s review of historical aerial photographs indicate at the subject site was utilized as a rural residence and agricultural land, a water well may be associated with these types of operations. If the existing water well and/or any additional water wells identified during the planned redevelopment of the subject site are not to be utilized, it/they should be properly destroyed in accordance with State and local guidelines.
 Septic systems may be located within the subject site. The presence of the septic systems is not anticipated to have adversely impacted the subject site due to their presumed use for domestic purposes only. If a septic system is identified during the planned redevelopment of the subject site, it should be properly abandoned/closed or destroyed in accordance with State and local guidelines.  It has been Krazan’s experience that chemical analysis of shallow soil samples for persistent pesticides/herbicides in current or former agricultural areas does not typically result in concentrations reported above regulatory screening levels; however, it has also been Krazan’s recent experience that Federal, State and local agencies and/or financial lending institutions have at times required “pesticide screening” of properties with current and/or former agricultural uses.

If pesticide screening or further assessment is required by a government agency or financial lending institution, Krazan can assist with those requests.

If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this report, please call me at (559) 348- 2200.

Respectfully submitted,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

Remington Alexander
Environmental Regional Manager
RRA/mlt

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT

DELLA FARMS PROPERTY
685 E. MORTON AVENUE
APNS 253-080-027 & 28
PORTERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 93257
Project No. 024-24037
July 12, 2024
Prepared for:

Mr. Quinn Tedford
Century Communities
7330 N Palm Avenue, Suite 106
Fresno, California 93711
Prepared by:

Krazan & Associates, Inc.
215 West Dakota Avenue
Clovis, California 93612
(559) 348-2200

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 3

2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT ............................................................................... 4

2.1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................................ 4

3.0 SUBJECT SITE SETTING ............................................................................................................. 5

3.1 Geology and Hydrogeology ........................................................................................................... 5

4.0 SITE BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................... 7

4.1 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps ......................................................................................................... 7

4.2 USGS Topographic Quadrangle Maps ........................................................................................... 7

4.3 City Cross Reference Directories ................................................................................................... 8

4.4 Aerial Photograph Interpretation .................................................................................................... 9

4.5 Municipal Records........................................................................................................................ 10

4.6 Previous Environmental Assessments .......................................................................................... 10

4.7 Agricultural Chemicals ................................................................................................................. 10

5.0 USER-PROVIDED INFORMATION .......................................................................................... 12

5.1 Environmental Liens/Activity and Use Limitations Report ......................................................... 12

5.2 Title Report ................................................................................................................................... 12

5.3 Interviews ..................................................................................................................................... 12

5.4 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment User Questionnaire ....................................................... 12

6.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE .......................................................................................................... 14

6.1 Observations ................................................................................................................................. 14

6.2 Adjacent Streets and Property Usage ........................................................................................... 15

6.3 ASTM Non-Scope Considerations ............................................................................................... 16

6.4 Regulatory Agency Records Review ............................................................................................ 18

7.0 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS ...................................................................................................... 25

7.1 Evaluation of Data Gaps/Data Failure .......................................................................................... 25

8.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 27

9.0 RELIANCE..................................................................................................................................... 29

10.0 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 29

11.0 QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................................................................... 30 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 32 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ......................................................................................................................... 33

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

FIGURES
Figure No. 1 Vicinity Map
Figure No. 2 Parcel Map
Figure No. 3 Site Map

PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDICES
Appendix A EDR – Certified Sanborn® Map Report
EDR – Historical Topographic Map Report
EDR – City Directory Image Report
EDR – Aerial Photo Decade Package
Appendix B Environmental Lien Search
Owner and User Environmental Questionnaire
Appendix C EDR – Radius Map Report
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Finaldocx

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Krazan & Associates, Inc. (Krazan) has conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the

25.54-acre property with the address 685 E. Morton Avenue in Porterville, California 93257, with the associated Tulare County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 253-080-027 and 28.

The subject site was developed with a rural residence in 1934 and was primarily utilized for agriculture including an orchard from the early 1930s to the present. At the time of the site reconnaissance, the subject site was occupied with a residential structure, detached garage, a shop, and a barn.

Century Communities plans to develop the subject site into a residential development.

The subject site was not identified on any Federal, State or local regulatory database indicating that a release of hazardous materials has impacted the subject site.

ASTM Non-Scope Issues
The structures located on the subject site appears to have been constructed prior to 1978. It is unknown if the on-site dwelling contains asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) or lead-based paint (LBP). An asbestos and/or LBP survey and sampling of the on-site dwelling was not included within the scope of this assessment. However, based on the apparent dates of construction, ACMs and LBP may be present at the subject site. Prior to the disturbance of any of the suspect ACMs or LBP at the subject site via renovation or demolition, comprehensive asbestos and LBP surveys are recommended.

Site Development Issues
 Krazan’s review of historical aerial photographs indicate at the subject site was utilized as a rural residence and agricultural land, a water well may be associated with these types of operations. If Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 2
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx the existing water well and/or any additional water wells identified during the planned redevelopment of the subject site are not to be utilized, it/they should be properly destroyed in accordance with State and local guidelines.
 Septic systems may be located within the subject site. The presence of the septic systems is not anticipated to have adversely impacted the subject site due to their presumed use for domestic purposes only. If a septic system is identified during the planned redevelopment of the subject site, it should be properly abandoned/closed or destroyed in accordance with State and local guidelines.  It has been Krazan’s experience that chemical analysis of shallow soil samples for persistent pesticides/herbicides in current or former agricultural areas does not typically result in concentrations reported above regulatory screening levels; however, it has also been Krazan’s recent experience that Federal, State and local agencies and/or financial lending institutions have at times required “pesticide screening” of properties with current and/or former agricultural uses.

If pesticide screening or further assessment is required by a government agency or financial lending institution, Krazan can assist with those requests.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 3
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The subject site is located at 685 E. Morton Avenue in Porterville, California 93257. The subject site is approximately 25.54 acres in area and is associated with Tulare County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 253-080-027 & 028 (subject site). The subject site has been developed as rural residence and utilized as agricultural land.

Krazan conducted the Phase I ESA of the subject site in conformance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E 1527-21 Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. This Phase I ESA constitutes all appropriate inquiry (AAI) designed to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the previous ownership and uses of the subject site as defined by ASTM E 1527-21.

ASTM E 1527-21 Section 1.1.1 Recognized Environmental Conditions – In defining a standard of good commercial and customary practice for conducting an environmental site assessment of a parcel of property, the goal of the processes established by this practice is to identify recognized environmental conditions.

The term recognized environmental conditions means: 1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum due to a release to the environment; 2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products due to a likely release to the environment; or 3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions.

It is incumbent upon the user to read this Phase I ESA report in its entirety. If not otherwise defined within the text of this report, please refer to the Glossary of Terms Section following the References Section for definitions of terms and acronyms utilized within this Phase I ESA report.

Previous Environmental Assessments
No previous environmental assessments of the subject site were provided to Krazan by Century Communities for review as part of this Phase I ESA.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 4
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT

2.1 Purpose
According to ASTM E 1527-21, the purpose of this practice is to define good commercial and customary practice in the United States of America for conducting an environmental site assessment of a parcel of commercial real estate with respect to the range of contaminants within the scope of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 U.S.C. §9601) and petroleum products. As such, this practice is intended to permit a user to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitation on CERCLA liability (hereinafter, the landowner liability protections, or LLPs): that is, the practice that constitutes all appropriate inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of the property consistent with good commercial and customary practice as defined at 42 U.S.C. §9601(35)(B).

2.2 Scope of Work
The scope of work for this Phase I ESA conforms to ASTM E 1527-21. The Phase I ESA includes the following scope of work: a) a site reconnaissance of existing on-site conditions and observations of adjacent property uses, b) a review of user-provided documents and search of available current land title records compiled by AFX Corp., Inc., c) a review of historical aerial photographs, a review of pertinent building permit records, cross-reference directories, historical Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps (SFIMs), and interview(s) with person(s) knowledgeable of the previous and current ownership and uses of the subject site, d) a review of local regulatory agency records, and e) a review of local, State, and Federal regulatory agency lists compiled by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR).

Krazan was provided written authorization to conduct the Phase I ESA on June 7, 2024 by Mr. Quinn Tedford with Century Communities in response to Krazan’s May 23, 2024 Proposal/Cost Estimate No.

P23-234.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 5
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

3.0 SUBJECT SITE SETTING
The subject site is located southeast of the intersection of Leggett Street & Morton Avenue, Porterville, California. The subject site parcel measures approximately 25.54 acres. The subject site is located within a low to medium density residential use area of Tulare County. General property information and property use are summarized in the following table. Refer to Figures No. 1 – 3 for subject site details.

Subject Site Information Summary
Current Owners: Drew Della, Truste of the Drew Revocable Trust Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 253-080-027 & 028
Addresses: 685 E. Morton Avenue
Historical Addresses: None Listed
General Location: Southeast Corner of Leggett Street & Morton Avenue Acreage: 25.54 Acres
Zoning: Low Medium Density Residential (RM-1)
Existing Use: Rural Residence, Agricultural Land
Number of Buildings: Four (4)
Original Construction Date: At least 1934
Proposed Use: Residential Development
Electricity: Southern California Edison Company
Natural Gas: Southern California Gas Company
Potable Water: City of Porterville
Sanitary Sewer: City of Porterville
Latitude / Longitude: 36.0717390, -119.0023256
Topographic Map: U.S. Geological Survey, 7.5-minute Porterville & Success Dam, CA, 2021
Topographic Map Location: 25 acres of NE ¼ of the SE ¼ of Section 25, Township 21 South, Range 27 East, Mount Diablo Baseline and
Meridian
Topography: Approximately 497 feet above mean sea level (asml) Approximate Depth to Groundwater: 115 feet below ground surface (bgs)* Regional Groundwater Flow Direction: West, DWR*
Note: * State of California, Department of Water Resources, Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Data Viewer, Fall 2023

3.1 Geology and Hydrogeology
The subject site is located within the San Joaquin Valley, a broad structural trough bound by the Sierra Nevada and Coast Ranges of California. The San Joaquin Valley, which comprises the southern portion of the Great Valley of California, has been filled with several thousand feet of sedimentary deposits.

Sediments in the eastern valley, derived from the erosion of the Sierra Nevada, have been deposited by major to minor west-flowing drainages and their tributaries. Near-surface sediments are dominated by sands and silty sands with lesser silts, minor clays, and gravel. The sedimentary deposits in the region form large coalescing alluvial fans with gentle slopes. According to the United States Department of Agriculture Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 6
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, accessed February 27, 2024, the type of soil at the subject site is Porterville clay. Groundwater in the subject site vicinity was reported to be first encountered at a depth of approximately 115 feet bgs in Fall 2023. The groundwater flow direction in the area of the subject site was reported to be toward the west.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 7
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

4.0 SITE BACKGROUND
A review of historical Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps (SFIMs), historic USGS topographic maps, reasonably ascertainable city cross-reference directories, historical aerial photographs, local agency records and previous environmental reports, as made available to Krazan, were utilized to assess the history of the subject site.

4.1 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
Krazan reviews SFIMs to evaluate prior land use of the subject site and the adjacent properties. SFIMs typically exist for cities with populations of 2,000 or more, the coverage dependent on the location of the subject site within the city limits. Krazan contracted with Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) to provide copies of available SFIMs for the subject site and the adjacent properties. EDR’s search of Sanborn Insurance maps revealed no coverage for the subject site and the adjacent properties. Refer to Appendix A – EDR – Certified Sanborn® Map Report for details.

4.2 USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map
Krazan reviewed the 1904, 1909, and 1937 7.5-minute, Kaweah, California topographic quadrangle map; 1929, 1942, 1951, 1969, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021 7.5-minute, Porterville, California topographic quadrangle map;1956, 1961, 1977, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021 7.5-minute Success Dam, California topographic quadrangle map; and 1957 15-minute, Springville, California topographic quadrangle map.

Subject site and adjacent/vicinity property usage is summarized in the following table. Refer to Appendix A – EDR - Historical Topo Map Report for details.

Topographic Maps Summary
Year Site Usage Adjacent Property Usage
1904, 1909 The subject site is not depicted on the 1904 and 1909 map. Leggett Street is depicted to
the east of the subject site.

The properties to the north, south, and west
of the subject site is not depicted. A rural
residence is depicted to the east of the
subject site.
1929, 1937 A signal structure is depicted on the subject site. The remainder of the subject site is
depicted as undeveloped Morton Avenue is
depicted to the north and Henry Street is
depicted to the west.

Rural residence is depicted to the north and
east of the subject site. Undeveloped land
is depicted to the south and west of the
subject site.
1942 A signal structure is depicted on the subject
site. The remainder of the subject site is
utilized as agricultural land. The eastern
portion of the subject site is not depicted.

Rural residence is depicted to the north.

Agricultural land is depicted to the south.

Undeveloped land and residential lots is
depicted to the west of the subject site. The
eastern properties are not depicted.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 8
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Topographic Maps Summary (continued)
Year Site Usage Adjacent Property Usage
1951, 1956,
1957, 1961,
1969, 1977,
A rural residence and outbuilding is
depicted in the central portion of the subject
site. The remainder of the subject site is
utilized as agricultural land. Cleveland
Avenue is depicted to the south of the
subject site (1957).

Rural residence is located to the north.

Rural residence and residential lots is
located to the east. Commercial and
residential lots is located to the south.

Residential lots and agricultural land is
depicted to the west of the subject site.
2012, 2015,
2018, 2021
Map details included streets, highways and
freeways, waterways, and surface elevation
contours. Individual structures or features
are not denoted.

Map details included streets, highways
and freeways, waterways, and surface
elevation contours. Individual structures
or features are not denoted.

4.3 City Cross-Reference Directories
Krazan contracted with EDR to provide a review of available cross-reference directories for the subject site address and adjoining properties. EDR provided a listing of directories dated between 1959 and 2020 for the subject site address. The summary of cross-reference directory information for the subject site address and surrounding properties is presented in the following table. Refer to Appendix A – EDR - City Directory Image Report, dated for details.

Cross-Reference Directories Summary
Address Owner / Occupant Years
Subject Site
Current
685 E. Morton Avenue Orlin Shires
William Shires
1967 – 2005
2014 – 2017
Historic
None identified Not Listed N/A
Adjacent/Vicinity Properties
Adjacent to the North
416 N. Park Street Not Listed N/A
732 E. Morton Avenue Residential 1967 – 2017
738–792 E. Morton Avenue 1922 – 2020
Adjacent to the East
290–304 Leggett Street Not Listed N/A
812 E. Cleveland Avenue Not Listed N/A
837 E. Morton Avenue Residential
Sanders Floyd Electric Contractors
Church of Jesus of LTTR Day Saints
1971 – 1995
1971 – 1986
2000 – 2020
Adjacent to the South
260 N. Sierra Vista Street Not Listed N/A
604 E. Putnam Avenue Not Listed N/A
681 E. Cleveland Avenue Not Listed N/A
725–791 E. Cleveland Avenue Not Listed N/A
Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 9
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Cross-Reference Directories Summary (continued)
Address Owner / Occupant Years
Adjacent/Vicinity Properties
Adjacent to the West
282–308 Park Avenue Not Listed N/A
321–381 N. Henry Street Not Listed N/A
581 E. Morton Avenue Vacant
Residential
1981
1986 – 2014
Information obtained from the review of cross-reference directories is consistent with that obtained from other historical sources during the course of this assessment.

4.4 Aerial Photograph Interpretation
Historical aerial photographs were obtained from EDR and reviewed to assess the history of the subject site. The aerial photograph summary is provided in the following table. Refer to Appendix A – Aerial Photo Decade Package for details.

Aerial Photograph Review Summary
Year Site Use Adjacent Properties
1934, 1937,
1940
A rural residence and two (2)
outbuilding are located on the subject
site. The remainder of the subject site is
utilized as agricultural land. Morton
Avenue is located to the north, Leggett
Street is located to the east, and Henry
Street is located to the west of the
subject site.

Rural residence and agricultural land is located
to the north and east of the subject site.

Undeveloped land is located south of the
subject site. Agricultural land is located to the
west of the subject site.
1952, 1957,
1969, 1972,
1977
A rural residence, a detached garage,
and an outbuilding are located on the
subject site. The remainder of the
subject site is utilized as agricultural
land. Cleveland Avenue is located to
the south of the subject site.

Rural residence is located to the north and
south of the subject site. Rural residence and
agricultural land is located to the east of the
subject site. Residential lots and agricultural
land is located to the west of the subject site.

Residential lots are located to the south and
east of the subject site (1957)
1985, 1994,
2006
A rural residence, a detached garage,
and two (2) outbuilding are located on
the subject site. The remainder of the
subject site is utilized as agricultural
land.

Rural residence is located to the north of the
subject site. Rural residence and residential lots
is located to the east of the subject site.

Commercial building and residential lots are
located to the south. Residential lots are located
to the west of the subject site. A church is
located to the east of the subject site (1994).
2009, 2012,
2016, 2020
The subject site is relativity similar to
the 2006 photograph.

Rural residence and residential lots is located
to the north. A church and residential lots is
located to the east. A commercial building and
Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 10
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Aerial Photograph Review Summary (continued)
Year Site Use Adjacent Properties
2009, 2012,
2016, 2020
residential lots is located to the south.

Residential lots is located to the west. The
commercial building located to the south was
removed in 2016.

The subject site was developed as agricultural land and rural residence from at least 1934 to the present.

4.5 Municipal Records
City of Porterville Building Department
On July 1, 2024, the City of Porterville Building Department (PBD) was contacted to request potential records of building construction and demolition, hazardous materials, and spill/release incidents for the subject site address and APN. On July 1, 2024, Ms. Sarai Vargas, with City Clerk of the City of Porterville, indicated the subject site is outside the jurisdiction of the City of Porterville.

Tulare County Resource Management Agency
The Tulare County Resource Management Agency (RMA) was contacted regarding potential hazardous materials records including building and planning permits and code compliance records for the subject site and adjacent properties. According to the response from RMA representatives on July 9, 2024, the only permits on record for the subject site include the “Williamson Act Contract,” which was cancelled in February 2024.

4.6 Previous Environmental Assessments
No previous environmental assessments or reports regarding the subject site or adjacent properties were provided to Krazan by Century Communities during the course of this assessment.

4.7 Agricultural Chemicals
Review of historical aerial photographs indicates that the subject site was utilized for agricultural purposes from at least 1934 to the present. Although the potential exists that environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides may have been historically applied to crops grown on the subject site circa 1930s to 1970s; 1) no material evidence of the use or storage of environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides was obtained during the course of this assessment, and 2) it is anticipated that any environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides potentially located on site will be dislocated and diluted as a result of the grading and trenching operations which will be conducted in connection with the planned redevelopment of the property. Consequently, given the above-referenced factors and Krazan’s experience in the subject site Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 11
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx vicinity, the potential for elevated concentrations of environmentally persistent pesticides/herbicides related to crop cultivation to exist in the near-surface soils of common agricultural ground at concentrations which would require regulatory action appears to be low.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 12
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

5.0 USER-PROVIDED INFORMATION
A review of user-provided information was conducted in order to help identify pertinent information regarding potential environmental impacts associated with the subject site.

5.1 Environmental Liens/Activity and Use Limitations Report An Environmental Lien/Activity and Use Limitations (EL/AUL) Reports for the subject site APNs were requested as part of this report by the Client and the Phase I ESA user, Century Communities. The EL/AUL search determined both parcels (APNs: 253-080-027 & 028) had no environmental liens, no AULs, and no leases found.

5.2 Title Report
A title report is reviewed to identify potential environmental deed restrictions, environmental liens, or environmental activity and use limitations (AULs) which may have occurred on or exist in connection with the subject site. Neither a Preliminary Title report nor Final Title Report for the subject site parcel numbers were provided to Krazan by Century Communities.

5.3 Interviews
Krazan conducts interviews with the owner of the subject site, a key site manager, subject site occupant(s), and/or the previous owner/occupant(s) of the subject site. The interview(s) is/are designed to provide pertinent information regarding potential environmental impacts associated with the subject site.

Subject Site Owner
A completed Phase I ESA Owner Questionnaire was not received by Krazan as of the date of this report.

Consequently, information regarding uses of the subject site obtained from an interview with the current owner constitutes a data gap.

Previous Subject Site Owner/Occupant
A Phase I ESA interview with a previous owner and/or occupant of the subject site was not reasonably available. Consequently, information regarding the history and historical uses of the subject site obtained from an interview of a previous owner and/or occupant constitutes a data gap.

5.4 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment User Questionnaire In order to qualify for one of the Landowner Liability Protections (LLPs) offered by the Small Business Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 13
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2001 (the Brownfields Amendments), the user must provide the following information (if available) to the environmental professional. Failure to provide this information could result in a determination that all appropriate inquiry is not complete. The user is asked to provide information or knowledge of the following:

1. Environmental cleanup liens that are filed or recorded against the site.

2. Activity and land use limitations that are in place on the site or that have been filed or recorded in a registry.

3. Specialized knowledge or experience of the person seeking to qualify for the LLPs.

4. Relationship of the purchase price to the fair market value of the property if it were not contaminated.

5. Commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the property.

6. The degree of obviousness of the presence or likely presence of contamination at the property, and the ability to detect the contamination by appropriate investigation.

7. The reason for preparation of this Phase I ESA.

A completed Phase I ESA User questionnaire dated July 11, 2024, and completed by Mr. Quinn Tedford, a representative for Century Communities, Krazan’s client and the Phase I ESA user. According to the questionnaire responses, Mr. Tedford, to the best of their knowledge as a representative of the user of this Phase I ESA, was not aware of any environmental cleanup liens and/or AULs which have been filed or recorded against the subject site or nearby properties. Mr. Tedford indicated they have no specialized knowledge or experience related to the subject site. Mr. Tedford indicated the purchase price being paid for the subject site reasonably reflects the fair market value. They were not aware of commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the subject site that would help the environmental profession to identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases such as, the past use of the subject site, specific chemicals that were present or once present on the subject site, spills and other chemical releases that may have occurred at the subject site, or any environmental cleanups that have taken place at the subject site. Mr. Tedford was not aware of any obvious indications pointing to the presence or likely presence of contamination of the subject property. Mr. Tedford indicated the reason for preparation of this Phase I ESA is related to the purchase of the subject site. Refer to Appendix B – Phase I ESA Questionnaires for details.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 14
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

6.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE
A site reconnaissance, which included a visual observation of the subject site and surrounding properties, was conducted by Mr. Remington Alexander, Krazan’s Environmental Professional, on July 1, 2024. Mr.

Alexander was not escorted during the site reconnaissance. The objective of the site reconnaissance is to obtain information indicating the likelihood of identifying recognized environmental conditions, including hazardous substance and petroleum products, in connection with the property (including soils, surface waters, and groundwater).

6.1 Observations
The following table summarizes the subject site features encountered during the site reconnaissance.

Observed features are noted in the table below and described in detail below the table. Refer to Figure No. 3 - Site Map and Photographs for locations and details pertaining to site-specific features discussed in this section of the report.

Site Reconnaissance Summary
Features Observed Not
Observed
Structures (existing) X
Evidence of Past Uses (foundations, debris) X
Hazardous Substances and/or Petroleum Products (including containers) X Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs) X
Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) or evidence of past UST usage X Evidence of Underground Pipelines (non-irrigation) X
Strong, Pungent, or Noxious Odors X
Pools of Liquid likely to be Hazardous Materials or Petroleum Products X Drums X
Unidentified Substance Containers X
Potential Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB)-Containing Equipment X Subsurface Hydraulic Equipment X
Heating/Ventilation/Air Conditioning (HVAC) X
Stains or Corrosion on Floors, Walls or Ceilings X
Floor Drains, Sumps, or Oil/Water Clarifiers X
Storm Drains X
Pits, Ponds, or Lagoons X
Stained Soil and/or Pavement X
Soil/Debris Piles X
Stressed Vegetation X

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 15
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Site Reconnaissance Summary (continued)
Features Observed Not
Observed
Waste or Wastewater (including stormwater) Discharges to Surface/Surface Waters X
Wells (Irrigation, Domestic, Dry, Injection, Abandoned, Monitoring Wells) X Septic Systems X
High-voltage, tower-mounted transmission lines X
At the time of the site reconnaissance, the subject site was occupied with a rural residence, a detached garage, and two (2) outbuildings; the remainder of the subject site was primarily utilized as agricultural land.

The rural residence is a two-story structure that appears to be utilized as multi-family apartments. The detached garage is located near the rural residence, and no vent pipes were observed. No hazardous materials were observed near or around the rural residence. No soil staining was observed around the rural residence.

To the south of the rural residence are two (2) outbuildings. One (1) outbuilding is a single-story shop building, and the other outbuilding is an abandoned barn structure. Nothing was stored in or around the abandoned barn structure. No hazardous material or vent pipes were observed around the shop building.

The shop building had a bay door; however, the interior of the structure was inaccessible during the site reconnaissance. No soil staining was observed around the outbuildings.

The remainder of the subject site is utilized as agricultural land. Some irrigation pipes and standpipes were observed around the agricultural land. No agricultural chemical mixing areas were observed.

During the visual observations of the subject site, no obvious evidence (vent pipes, fill pipes, dispensers, etc.) of USTs or ASTs was noted within the areas observed. No stressed vegetation was observed, and no indications of former permanent structures were observed on the subject site.

6.2 Adjacent Streets and Property Usage
The following table summarizes the current adjacent streets and adjacent property uses observed during the site reconnaissance:

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 16
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Adjacent Streets and Property Usage
Direction Adjacent Street Adjacent Property Usage
North Morton Avenue Rural Residence / Residential Lots
East Leggot Street Church & Residential Lots
South Cleveland Avenue Residential Lots / Vacant
West Henry Street Residential Lots
Based on the observed uses of the properties located immediately adjacent to the subject site, it is unlikely that significant quantities of hazardous materials currently are stored at these properties.

6.3 ASTM Non-Scope Considerations
According to ASTM E 1527-21, there may be environmental issues or conditions at assessed properties that are outside the scope of the Phase I ESA practice (non-scope considerations). Some substances may be present in quantities and under conditions that may lead to contamination of the subject site or of nearby properties but are not included in CERCLA’s definition of hazardous substances (42 U.S.C. §9601[14]).

ASTM Non-scope considerations appropriate for the subject site are discussed below.

Asbestos-Containing Materials
Asbestos is a group of naturally occurring mineral fibers that have been used commonly in a variety of building construction materials for insulation and as a fire-retardant. Because of its fiber strength and heat resistant properties, asbestos has been used for a wide range of manufactured goods, mostly in building materials, vehicle brakes, and heat-resistant fabrics, packaging, gaskets, and coatings. When asbestoscontaining materials (ACMs) are damaged or disturbed by repair, remodeling, or demolition activities, microscopic asbestos fibers may become airborne and can be inhaled into the lungs, where they can cause significant health problems.

The residential structure and detached garage located on the subject site was constructed prior to 1978. It is unknown if the on-site dwelling contains ACMs. An asbestos survey and sampling of the on-site dwelling and out-buildings was not included within the scope of this assessment; however, based on the date of construction, ACMs may be present at the subject site. Prior to the disturbance of any of the suspect ACMs at the subject site via renovation or demolition, a comprehensive asbestos survey is recommended.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 17
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Lead-Based Paint
Although lead-based paint (LBP) was banned in 1978, many buildings constructed prior to 1978 have paint that contains lead. Lead from paint, chips, and dust can pose serious health hazards if not addressed properly.

The residential structure and detached garage located on the subject site was constructed prior to 1978. It is unknown if the on-site structure contains LBP. An LBP survey and sampling of the on-site dwelling and out-buildings was not included within the scope of this assessment; however, based on the date of construction, LBP may be present at the subject site. Prior to the disturbance of any suspect LBP at the subject site via renovation or demolition, a comprehensive LBP survey is recommended.

Radon
Radon is a radioactive gas that is found in certain geologic environments and is formed by the natural breakdown of radium, which is found in the earth’s crust. A radon survey was not included within the scope of this investigation; however, the State of California Department of Public Health (CDPH) maintains a statewide database of radon results in designated geographic areas. Radon detection devices are placed in homes throughout the study region to determine geographic regions with elevated radon concentrations.

The U.S. EPA has set the safety standard for radon gas in homes to be 4.0 pico-Curies per liter (pCi/L).

The US EPA has prepared a map to assist National, State and local organizations to target their resources and to implement radon-resistant building codes. The map divides the country into three Radon Zones, Zone 1 being those areas with the average predicted indoor radon concentration in residential dwellings exceeding the EPA Action Limit of 4.0 pCi/L. It is important to note that the EPA has found homes with elevated levels of radon in all three zones, and the EPA recommends site-specific testing in order to determine radon levels at a specific location. However, the map does give a valuable indication of the propensity of radon gas accumulation in structures. Review of the EPA Map of Radon Zones places the Property in Zone 2, where there is a potential for radon levels between 2 pCi/L and 4.0 pCi/L. Therefore, the available data suggests that there is a potential for radon to adversely impact the subject site. However, because radon levels may vary locally from one area to another, the only way to determine the potential for radon to be present in on-site structures is to conduct site-specific testing.

Wetlands
As defined by the U.S. EPA and the Department of Army, Corps of Engineers, wetlands are “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 18
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.” Jurisdictional wetlands are regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (1972, 1977, and 1987, and also the 1985 and 1990 Farm Bills), and are important for protection of aquatic waterfowl and species, water purification, and flood control. According to Corps of Engineers standards initially developed in 1987, three basic criteria are currently used to define wetlands:
 Wetland hydrology - areas exhibiting surface or near-surface saturation or inundation at some point in time (greater than 12.5 percent of growing season defined on basis of frost-free days) during an average rainfall year.
 Hydrophilic vegetation - frequency of occurrence of wetland indicator plants (plant life growing in water, soil, or substrate that is periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content).
 Hydric soil - landscape patterns identified by saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season (generally seven days) which develop characteristic color changes in the upper part of the soil as a result of anaerobic conditions.

According to Krazan’s July 1, 2024 review of the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory for surface waters and wetlands available via the USFWS Internet website, no natural wetlands have been identified on the subject site. Based on Krazan’s site reconnaissance, there was no evidence to suggest that the subject site may contain a natural wetland.

Environmental Non-Compliance Issues
No material non-compliance issues were identified in connection with the subject site in the process of preparing this report.

Activity and Use Limitations
No activity and use limitations were identified in connection with the subject site in the process of preparing this report.

6.4 Regulatory Agency Records Review
A review of Federal and State regulatory databases was conducted to help determine if hazardous materials have been handled, stored, or generated on the subject site and/or the adjacent properties and businesses.

The Federal and State environmental databases consulted in the course of this assessment were compiled by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) and identified facilities within the search distances specified in ASTM 1527-21. Krazan verified the location and distances of the properties Krazan deemed as having the potential to adversely impact the subject site. The actual location of the listed properties may differ Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 19
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx from the EDR listing. No EDR-listed unmapped (non-geocoded) sites identified were determined to be located on or adjacent to the subject site. Refer to Appendix C – EDR Radius Map Report for details.

Regulatory records are reviewed based on the following criteria: 1) properties with known soils and/or groundwater releases considered to represent the potential for impact to the subject site that are located within 1,760 feet of the subject site for constituents of concern impacts or 528 feet of the subject site for petroleum hydrocarbon impacts; 2) properties that are adjacent or in proximity to the subject site included within the EDR regulatory database report or noted during the site reconnaissance to possibly handle, store, or generate hazardous materials. Applicable property records are discussed below.

No Federal Superfund – National Priorities List (NPL) sites were determined to be located within a onemile radius of the subject site according to the State of California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) – Department of Toxic Substances Control Envirostor database and the EDR database report.

State of California Environmental Protection Agency
Krazan’s July 1, 2024 review of the State of California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) – Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Envirostor database available via the DTSC’s Internet Website indicated that no records of cleanup sites including State response sites, voluntary cleanup sites, school cleanup sites, military or school evaluation sites or corrective action sites are listed for the subject site, the adjacent properties, or properties located within a 500-foot radius of the subject site. Based on the site reconnaissance and records review, DTSC sites are not considered a concern to this assessment.

State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board - GeoTracker Krazan’s July 12, 2024 review of the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) GeoTracker database available via the RWQCB Internet Website did not identify any cleanup sites including LUST sites, cleanup program sites, land disposal sites, or military sites at the subject site or adjacent properties. A vicinity property was identified and is discussed below:

Sunrise Handy Market/Mr. C’s
809 East Putnam Avenue
450 feet to the south
According to records on file with the RWQCB, this property is currently under investigation for a release of gasoline to groundwater. An incident in March 1984 resulted in a release of approximately 20,000 gallons of gasoline. Groundwater was found to be impacted with total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g), benzene, 1,2-Dichloroethane (1,2-DCA), ethylene dibromide (EDB), and lead. One recovery well and 22 monitoring wells were installed from 1984 to 1989 to determine the extent of the release. Groundwater was pumped and treated from March Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 20
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx 1986 until August 1990 and approximately 2,500 gallons of free product was removed from the site. Additional monitoring conducted in 2004 detected methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE), indicating that there was another release at the property. Groundwater sampling conducted in April 2008 indicated that groundwater was impacted with benzene, TPH-g, and MTBE at concentrations as high as 5,200 micrograms per liter (µg/L), 26,000 µg/L, and 500 µg/L, respectively. During groundwater sampling in June 2008, groundwater was found to be impacted with benzene, TPH-g, and MTBE at maximum concentrations of 10,000 µg/L, 62,000 µg/L and 6,800 µg/L, respectively.

Free product was observed during the sampling events conducted in July 1984, March 1989, April 2008, and June 2008. Groundwater sampling conducted in November 2009 detected TPH-g, benzene, and MTBE at maximum concentrations of 74,000 µg/L, 21,000 µg/L, and 3,400 µg/L, respectively. Additionally, the results of the soil vapor survey indicated that soil vapor migration was found to significantly impact the indoor air and was considered an unacceptable risk to human health. Pilot tests for soil vapor extraction (SVE) and dual phase extraction (DPE) were conducted in October 2008 and September 2009 to evaluate vapor and groundwater flow characteristics and to evaluate the effectiveness of the remedial systems. Based on the results of the pilot tests, the SVE system appeared to be an efficient method of remediation. Based on the low groundwater production rates, DPE can be potentially used as needed in conjunction with a high vacuum SVE system. A remedial action plan (RAP) incorporating the use of a high vacuum SVE system was recommended for the site. Additional groundwater monitoring conducted in July 2016 detected concentrations of TPH-g, benzene, and MTBE at maximum concentrations of 8,000 µg/L, 15,000µg/L, and 4,400 µg/L, respectively. Free product was observed in some of the wells ranging from 0.10 feet to 5.18 feet. Based on the results of the 2016 Groundwater Monitoring Report, the RWQCB requested additional monitoring be conducted to determine groundwater flow direction and gradient and the extent of the MTBE plume to the north and west of the site. According to the pathway to closure plan dated June 6, 2024, in order for this property to receive closure, the site needs to meet the following criteria: a conceptual site model that assesses the nature, extent, and mobility of the release; the secondary source must be removed to the best practical extent; the contaminant plume that exceeds water quality objectives must be stable or decreasing in areal extent, and must meet all of the additional characteristics of one of the five classes of sites. The site will not be considered a low-threat for direct contact and outdoor air exposure until these criteria are met.

The data from this LUST site indicates the subject site is cross-gradient and the underground plume is traveling away from the subject site. WM-9 is located nearest to the subject site (450 feet) with a MTBE groundwater concentration of 4,400 µg/L in 2015; however, WM-9 is still located on the LUST site, and the MTBE concentration of 5.2 µg/L is approximately 50 feet south of WM-9. This reading could indicate that the MTBE plume is either a hot spot or is traveling along the subject site's cross-gradient. Furthermore, the recorded data from a 2008 sampling indicated that monitoring well C-12 located between the LUST site and subject site had TPH-g concentrations of less than 50 g/L, BTEX concentrations of less than 1.5 g/L, and MTBE concentrations of less than 11 g/L. The potential for the LUST groundwater plume to travel onto the subject site and have an environmental impact is minimal. While the groundwater plume will naturally attenuate into soil vapor. The soil vapor wells, VP-1 and VP-2, did not reveal any significant concentrations of constituents of concern at the LUST site, indicating that this groundwater plume is not currently producing any actionable soil vapor concentrations at the release source. The likelihood that this groundwater plume will produce soil vapor concentrations at an actionable level and travel to the subject site is low. Based on the information provided about this LUST and the subject site being approximately 450 feet away and cross-gradient, the evidence suggests this LUST site is not an environmental concern in connection with the subject site.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 21
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Environmental Protection Agency – UST Finder
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed UST Finder, a web map application containing a comprehensive national map of USTs. UST Finder contains information about the proximity of UST facilities and UST releases to surface and groundwater public drinking water protection areas.

Krazan’s July 1, 2024 review of the UST Finder database found that no USTs were reported on or within the given radius of the subject site.

CalEPA Regulated Site Portal
CalEPA Regulated Site Portal is a searchable database that brings together information about California's environmentally regulated sites and facilities. It has information from Cal/OSHA inspections, CalEPA's California Environmental Reporting Systems (CERS), the State Water Resources Control Board's California Integrated Water Quality System (CIWQS), the US Environmental Protection Agency's Air Emission Inventory System (EIS), the Department of Toxic Substances Control's EnviroStor, the State Water Recourses Control Board's GeoTracker and SMARTS, CalRecycle's Solid Waste Information System (SWIS), and the US Environmental Protection Agency's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI).

Krazan’s July 1, 2024, review of the CalEPA Regulated Site Portal indicated that no regulated sites are located on or adjacent to the subject site.

California Department of Conservation, California Geologic Energy Management Division Krazan’s July 1, 2024 review of the State of California Department of Conservation, California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) GIS Online Mapping System indicated that no plugged and abandoned or producing oil wells are located on or adjacent to the subject site.

Environmental Protection Agency – California State Institutional Controls/Engineering Control Krazan’s July 1, 2024 review of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s California State Institutional Controls/Engineering Control registries indicated no engineering controls are located on or adjacent to the subject site.

State of California Office of Emergency Services – Spills Database Krazan’s July 1, 2024 review of the State of California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) Spill Reports database, available via the Cal OES website indicated that no hazardous materials spill reports are included in the Cal OES Spill Reports database for the subject site.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 22
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx U.S. Department of Transportation – Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Krazan’s review of the U.S. Department of Transportation – Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) National Pipeline Mapping System database available via the U.S. Department of Transportation website, accessed July 1, 2024 indicated that no buried liquified high pressure gasoline or liquified petroleum pipelines traverse the subject site.

Tulare County Self-Service Portal
The Tulare County Self-Service Portal was accessed on July 1, 2024 to search for records in connection with the subject site APN and address including permits for building construction, demolition, and installations and removals of USTs and ASTs. No records were identified for the subject site APN and address.

Tulare County Environmental Health
The California Environmental Protection Agency designated the Tulare County Environmental Health (TCEH) as the CUPA for Tulare County and is responsible for overseeing hazardous materials programs and inspecting facilities that handle, generate, and treat hazardous materials, own/operate underground storage tanks, own/operate aboveground petroleum storage tanks, or handle other materials subject to the California Accidental Release Program (CARP). A public records search for environmental documents was conducted via the Tulare County Citizen Self Service Portal for the subject site APNs 253-080-027, 028, and address 685 E. Morton Avenue; no records were identified during the portal search. Additionally, a request for public records was submitted to the TCEH. As the date of this report, TCEHD responded that no records are on file for the subject site.

Local Area Tribal Records
No Indian reservations, USTs on Indian land, or LUSTs on Indian land were reported on the subject site, adjacent properties, or vicinity properties in the EDR-provided database report.

Regulatory Database Review
Several agencies have published documents that list businesses or properties which have handled hazardous materials or waste or may have experienced site contamination. The lists consulted in the course of our assessment were compiled by EDR and Krazan and represent reasonably ascertainable current listings.

Krazan did not verify the locations and distances of every property listed by EDR. Krazan verified the location and distances of the properties Krazan deemed as having the potential to adversely impact the Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 23
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx subject site. The actual location of the listed properties may differ from the EDR listing. No EDR-listed unmapped (non-geocoded) sites identified were determined to be located on or adjacent to the subject site.

Target Property
There were no database listings for the subject site listed in the EDR report.

Adjacent Properties
 Guinn Farm
612 E. Morton Avenue
North of the subject site
According to the EDR report, this facility registered an unleaded gasoline 350-gallons UST with SWRCB in 1988. No violations or releases were reported for this facility. Based on the limited information provided, the evidence suggests this facility is not an environmental concern in connection to the subject site.
 Floyd Sanders Electric
837 E. Morton Avenue
East of the subject site
According to the EDR report, this facility registered an regular motor vehicle fuel 550-gallons UST with SWRCB in 1988. No violations or releases were reported for this facility. Based on the limited information provided, the evidence suggests this facility is not an environmental concern in connection to the subject site.

Hazardous Materials Migration in Soils and/or Groundwater The remaining properties within the specified search radius of the subject site which appeared on local, state, or federally published lists of sites that use or have had releases of hazardous materials or petroleum products are of sufficient distance and/or situated hydraulically cross- or downgradient from the subject site such that impact to the subject site via groundwater migration is unlikely. In general, potentially hazardous materials released from facilities located generally hydraulically upgradient within subject site vicinity, or in a hydraulically cross-gradient direction in proximity to the site, may have a reasonable potential of migrating to the subject site via groundwater flow. This opinion is based on the assumption that nonvaporous hazardous materials generally do not migrate large distances laterally within the soil, but rather tend to migrate with groundwater in the general direction of groundwater flow. However, the potential for migration of volatile hazardous materials may include movement within soils, groundwater flow or potentially omni-directionally if present in a vaporous state.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 24
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx Hazardous Materials Migration in Vapor
Hazardous materials or petroleum product vapors which may have the potential to migrate into the subsurface of the subject site may be caused by the release of vapors from contaminated soil or groundwater either on or in the vicinity of the subject site from current or historical uses of the subject site and/or adjacent or vicinity properties. Current or past land uses such as gasoline stations (using petroleum hydrocarbons), dry cleaning establishments (using chlorinated volatile organic compounds), former manufactured gas plant sites (using volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds), and former industrial sites such as those that had vapor degreasing or other parts-cleaning operations (using chlorinated volatile organic compounds) are of particular concern. Constituent of concern vapors are capable of migrating great distances omnidirectionally along subsurface conduits such as pipelines, utility lines, sewer and stormwater lines, and building foundations.

Based on Krazan’s observations and review of State and local regulatory agency records and the EDR regulatory database report, no listings of concern related to potential vapor migration were determined to be associated with the subject site, adjacent properties, or properties located within the subject site vicinity.

The rationale supporting this opinion includes the following:
 Relevant sites had undergone investigation and remediation sufficient to receive regulatory agency closure.
 Sites with reported releases of minor quantities of constituents of concern (COCs) or COCs of limited volatility impacting soil only were considered of minimal concern.  Sites with reported releases of COCs including volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were either of sufficient distance or hydraulically down- or cross-gradient from the subject site such that they do not appear to represent a significant potential for vapor migration on to the subject site.

No engineering control sites, sites with institutional controls, or sites with deed restrictions were listed for the subject site, adjacent sites or vicinity properties in the EDR Report.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 25
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

7.0 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
Summary of Conclusions
Apparent Evidence of RECs or PAOCs from Not Noted Noted Historical Uses X
Current Uses X
Adjacent of Vicinity Property Uses X
Historical Uses
Based on Krazan’s review of historical aerial photographs, historical topographic maps, and historical cross-reference directories, and contacts with the local regulatory agencies, there is no material evidence to suggest that RECs exist in connection with the historical uses of the subject site; however, a potential areas of concern (PAOC) were noted. A complete discussion of the PAOC is presented in the Conclusions section (8.0) of this report.

Current Uses
Based on Krazan’s site reconnaissance, contacts with local regulatory agencies, and an interview with a representative of the owner of the subject site, there is no material evidence that RECs or PAOCs exist in connection with the current uses of the subject sites.

Adjacent or Vicinity Property Uses
Based on Krazan’s field observations, review of the EDR government database report, and consultation with local regulatory agencies, there is no material evidence that RECs or PAOCs exist in connection with the subject site from adjacent or vicinity property uses.

7.1 Evaluation of Data Gaps/Data Failure
In accordance with ASTM E 1527-21 guidance, data gaps represent a lack of or inability to obtain information required by this practice despite good faith efforts by the environmental professional to gather such information. Data gaps may result from incompleteness in any of the activities required by this practice. Data failure represents the failure to achieve the historical research objectives of this practice even after reviewing the standard historical sources that are reasonably ascertainable and likely to be useful.

Data failure is one type of data gap. The following is a summary of data gaps encountered in the process of preparing this report including an observation as to the presumed significance of that data gap to the conclusions of this assessment:

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 26
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx  Absence of Interview with Owner, User, & Previous Owner (Section 5.3) A Phase I ESA interview with the Owner and previous owner of the subject site was not reasonably ascertainable. Consequently, information regarding the history and historical uses of the subject site obtained from an interview of the previous owner of the subject site constitutes a data gap.

Taken in consideration with the available information obtained in the course of preparing this report in connection with professional experience, there is no evidence to suggest that this data gap might alter the conclusions of this assessment.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 27
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

8.0 CONCLUSIONS
We have conducted a Phase I ESA of the subject site in conformance with the scope and limitations of the ASTM E 1527-21 Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process guidance documents. Any deviations from this practice were previously described in this report.

ASTM Non-Scope Issues
The structures located on the subject site appears to have been constructed prior to 1978. It is unknown if the on-site dwelling contains asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) or lead-based paint Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 28
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx (LBP). An asbestos and/or LBP survey and sampling of the on-site dwelling was not included within the scope of this assessment. However, based on the apparent dates of construction, ACMs and LBP may be present at the subject site. Prior to the disturbance of any of the suspect ACMs or LBP at the subject site via renovation or demolition, comprehensive asbestos and LBP surveys are recommended.

If pesticide screening or further assessment is required by a government agency or financial lending institution, Krazan can assist with those requests.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 29
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

9.0 RELIANCE
This report was prepared solely for use by Client and should not be provided to any other person or entity without Krazan & Associates’ prior written consent. No party other than Client may rely on this report without Krazan & Associates’ express prior written consent. Reliance rights for third parties will only be in effect once requested by Client and authorized by Krazan & Associates with authorization granted by way of a Reliance Letter. The Reliance Letter will require that the relying party(ies) agree to be bound to the terms and conditions of the agreement between Client and Krazan & Associates as if originally issued to the relying party(ies), or as so stipulated in the Reliance Letter.

10.0 LIMITATIONS
The site reconnaissance and research of the subject site has been limited in scope. This type of assessment is undertaken with the calculated risk that the presence, full nature, and extent of contamination would not be revealed by visual observation alone. Although a thorough site reconnaissance was conducted in accordance with ASTM Guidelines and employing a professional standard of care, no warranty is given, either expressed or implied, that hazardous material contamination or buried structures, which would not have been disclosed through this investigation, do not exist at the subject site. Therefore, the data obtained are clear and accurate only to the degree implied by the sources and methods used.

The findings presented in this report were based upon field observations during a single property visit, review of available data, and discussions with local regulatory and advisory agencies. Observations describe only the conditions present at the time of this investigation. The data reviewed and observations made are limited to accessible areas and currently available records searched. Krazan cannot guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the regulatory agency records reviewed. Additionally, in evaluating the property, Krazan has relied in good faith upon representations and information provided by individuals noted in the report with respect to present operations and existing property conditions, and the historical uses of the property. It must also be understood that changing circumstances in the property usage, proposed property usage, subject site zoning, and changes in the environmental status of the other nearby properties can alter the validity of conclusions and information contained in this report. Therefore, the data obtained are clear and accurate only to the degree implied by the sources and methods used.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 30
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx This report is provided for the exclusive use of the client noted on the cover page and shall be subject to the terms and conditions in the applicable contract between the client and Krazan. Any third-party use of this report, including use by Client’s lender, shall also be subject to the terms and conditions governing the work in the contract between the client and Krazan. The unauthorized use of, reliance on, or release of the information contained in this report without the express written consent of Krazan is strictly prohibited and will be without risk or liability to Krazan.

Conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on the evaluation of information made available during the course of this assessment. It is not warranted that such data cannot be superseded by future environmental, legal, geotechnical or technical developments. Consequently, given the possibility for unanticipated hazardous conditions to exist on a subject site which may not have been discovered, this Phase I ESA is not intended as the basis for a buyer or developer of real property to waive their rights of recovery based upon environmental unknowns. Parties that choose to waive rights of recovery prior to site development do so at their own risk.

Parties who seek to rely upon Phase I Environmental Site Assessment reports dated more than 180 days prior to the date of reliance do so at their own risk. This limitation in reliance is based on the potential for physical changes at the site, changes in circumstances, technological and professional advances, and guidance related to the continued viability of Environmental Site Assessment reports, user’s responsibilities, and requirements for updating of components of the inquiry as stated in the ASTM Standard E 1527-21.

11.0 QUALIFICATIONS
This Phase I ESA was conducted under the supervision or responsible charge of Krazan’s undersigned environmental assessor with oversight from the undersigned environmental professional. The work was conducted in accordance with ASTM E 1527-21 guidance, generally accepted industry standards for environmental due diligence in place at the time of the preparation of this report, and Krazan’s qualitycontrol policies.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 31
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of environmental professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR 312 and we have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

Respectfully submitted,
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

Remington Alexander
Environmental Regional Manager
RRA/mlt
Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 32
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

REFERENCES
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Process, ASTM Designation: E 1527-21.

ASTM, Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions, ASTM Designation E 2600-10.

City of Porterville Building Department (PBD).

Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR), Aerial photographs, Microsoft® Research Maps.

Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR), Certified Sanborn Map Report.

Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR), City Directory Abstract.

Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR), Regulatory Database Report.

Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR), Topographic Map Report.

Tedford, Mr. Quinn, with Century Communities, the Phase I ESA User.

State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Envirostor Website:
http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public
State of California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) Maps Website:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/calgem/Pages/WellFinder.aspx State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board, GeoTracker Website:
http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov
State of California, Department of Water Resources, California’s Groundwater Live: Groundwater Levels, Fall 2023, California's Groundwater Live: Groundwater Levels (arcgis.com) Tulare County Environmental Health Division (TCEHD).

Tulare County Resource Management Agency (RMA)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Map of Radon Zones.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Wetlands Mapper:
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html
Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 33
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Subject Site: The real property being investigated under this Phase I ESA.

Adjacent Properties: Properties which are contiguous with the subject site, or would be contiguous except for a street, road, or other public thoroughfare.

Subject Site Vicinity: Properties located within a 500-foot radius of the subject site.

Environmental Professional: A person meeting the education, training, and experience requirements as set forth in 40 CFR §312.10(b). The EP may be an independent contractor or an employee of the user.

User: The party seeking to use Practice E 1527 to complete an environmental site assessment of the subject site. A user may include, without limitation, a potential purchaser of the subject site, a potential tenant of the subject site, an owner of the subject site, a lender, or a property manager.

Recognized Environmental Condition (REC): In defining a standard of good commercial and customary practice for conducting an environmental site assessment of a parcel of property, the goal of the processes established by this practice is to identify recognized environmental conditions. The term recognized environmental conditions means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions.

Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition (CREC): A recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk-based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls). For example, if a leaking underground storage tank has been cleaned up to a commercial use standard, but does not meet unrestricted residential cleanup criteria, this would be considered a CREC. The “control” is represented by the restriction that the property use remain commercial. A condition considered by the environmental professional to be a CREC shall be listed in the findings section of the Phase I ESA report and as an REC in the conclusions section. A condition identified as a CREC does not imply that the environmental professional has evaluated or confirmed the adequacy, implementation, or continued effectiveness of the required control that has been, or is intended to be, implemented.

Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC): A past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls). Before calling the past release an HREC, the environmental professional must determine whether the past release is an REC at the time the Phase I ESA is conducted (for example, if there has been change in the regulatory criteria).

If the EP considers the past release to be an REC at the time the Phase I ESA is conducted, the condition shall be included in the conclusions section of the report as an REC.

Della Farms Property Project No. 024-24037
Porterville, California Page No. 34
KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

With Offices Serving the Western United States
024-24037 Della Farms Property Phase I Report Final.docx GLOSSARY OF TERMS (continued)
Potential Area of Concern (PAOC): A term adopted to provide an alternative designation to the REC and HREC for a range of environmental issues related to current subject site uses, historical subject site uses, or from adjacent and/or vicinity property uses. The PAOC is utilized to emphasize full disclosure and provide the User with conclusions and recommendations related to potential environmental issues in connection with the subject site based on Krazan’s professional experience in cases where official documentation or other evidence may be absent in order to identify an REC or HREC, thereby aiding the User’s considerations of environmental due diligence risk tolerance.

Migrate/migration: For the purposes of this practice, “migrate” and “migration” refer to the movement of hazardous substances or petroleum products in any form, including, for example, solid and liquid at the surface or subsurface, and vapor in the subsurface. Vapor migration in the subsurface is described in ASTM E 2600-10 guidance; however, nothing in the E 1527-21 practice should be construed to require application of the E 2600-10 standard to achieve compliance with AAI.

De minimis condition: A condition that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Condition determined to be de minimis conditions are not RECS or CRECs.

Data Gap: A lack of or inability to obtain information required by this practice despite good faith efforts by the Environmental Professional to gather such information. Data gaps may result from incompleteness in any of the activities required by this practice, including, but not limited to the site reconnaissance and interviews.

Data Failure: A failure to achieve the historical research objectives even after reviewing the standard historical sources that are reasonably ascertainable and likely to be useful. Data failure is one type of data gap.

Legend
Subject Site Boundary
Vicinity Map Scale:
1"=2,300′
Date:

July 2024
Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Drawn By:

RA
Approved By:

RA
Project No: 024-24037Figure No: 1
1,150 4,600

Legend
Subject Site Boundary
Parcel Map Scale:

NTS
Date:

July 2024
Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APN: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Drawn By:

RA
Approved By:

RA
Project No:
024-24037
Figure No:
2 Site Map Scale:
1" = 200′
Date:

July 2024
Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Drawn By:

RA
Approved By:

RA
Project No:
024-24037
Figure No:
3 Legend
Residence Residence
Residence
Residence
Residence
Vacant
Vacant
Church
Agriculture
Agriculture
Morton Avenue
Cleveland Avenue
Henry Street
Leggett Street
Subject Site
Existing Structures
100 400

Photo 1: View of the rural residence located on the subject site,

Photo 2: View of the orchards located on the subject site.

Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Project No. 024-24037
Date: July 2024
Approved by: RA

SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS
With Offices Serving the Western United States

Photo 3: View of the orchards located on the subject site.

Photo 4: View of the shop located on the subject site.

Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Project No. 024-24037
Date: July 2024
Approved by: RA

SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS
With Offices Serving the Western United States

Photo 5: View of the barn located on the subject site.

Photo 6: View of the rural residence located on the subject site.

Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Project No. 024-24037
Date: July 2024
Approved by: RA

SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS
With Offices Serving the Western United States

Photo 7: View of the detached garage located on the subject site.

Photo 8: View of the rural residence located north of the subject site.

Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Project No. 024-24037
Date: July 2024
Approved by: RA

SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS
With Offices Serving the Western United States

Photo 9: View of the church located east of the subject site.

Photo 10: View of the residential lots located south of the subject site.

Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Project No. 024-24037
Date: July 2024
Approved by: RA

SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS
With Offices Serving the Western United States

Photo 11: View of the residential lots located west of the subject site.

Della Farms
685 E. Morton Avenue
APNs: 253-080-027 & 28
Porterville, California 93257
Project No. 024-24037
Date: July 2024
Approved by: RA

SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS
With Offices Serving the Western United States

Certified Sanborn® Map Report
Inquiry Number:
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Delta Farms Property 685 East Morton Avenue Porterville, CA 93257 June 11, 2024 7678583.3 Certified Sanborn® Map Report
Certified Sanborn Results:

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, LLC or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
- page
The Sanborn Library includes more than 1.2 million
fire insurance maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris &
Browne, Hopkins, Barlow and others which track
historical property usage in approximately 12,000
American cities and towns. Collections searched:

Library of Congress
University Publications of America
EDR Private Collection
The Sanborn Library LLC Since 1866™
Limited Permission To Make Copies
Sanborn® Library search results
EDR Inquiry # Contact:

Site Name: Client Name:

Certification #
PO #
Project
06/11/24 685 East Morton Avenue Delta Farms Property Krazan & Associates, Inc. 215 West Dakota Porterville, CA 93257 7678583.3 Clovis, CA 93612 Melanie Thomas The Sanborn Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by Krazan & Associates, Inc. were identified for the years listed below. The Sanborn Library is the largest, most complete collection of fire insurance maps. The collection includes maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris & Browne, Hopkins, Barlow, and others. Only Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is authorized to grant rights for commercial reproduction of maps by the Sanborn Library LLC, the copyright holder for the collection. Results can be authenticated by visiting www.edrnet.com/sanborn.

The Sanborn Library is continually enhanced with newly identified map archives. This report accesses all maps in the collection as of the day this report was generated. 44CB-46DF-A807 02424037.RA UNMAPPED PROPERTY Delta Farms Property This report certifies that the complete holdings of the Sanborn Library, LLC collection have been searched based on client supplied target property information, and fire insurance maps covering the target property were not found.

Certification #: 44CB-46DF-A807
Krazan & Associates, Inc. (the client) is permitted to make up to FIVE photocopies of this Sanborn Map transmittal and each fire insurance map accompanying this report solely for the limited use of its customer. No one other than the client is authorized to make copies. Upon request made directly to an EDR Account Executive, the client may be permitted to make a limited number of additional photocopies. This permission is conditioned upon compliance by the client, its customer and their agents with EDR's copyright policy; a copy of which is available upon request.

This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, LLC. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. This Report is provided on an “AS IS”, “AS AVAILABLE” basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY

KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN

THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,

COMPREHENSIVENESS, SUITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MISAPPROPRIATION, OR OTHERWISE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC OR ITS

SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,

CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE OR KIND (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF USE, OR LOSS OF DATA), ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT.

Copyright 2024 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. 7678583 3 2 EDR Historical Topo Map Report
Inquiry Number:
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
with QuadMatch™
Delta Farms Property 685 East Morton Avenue Porterville, CA 93257 June 11, 2024 7678583.4 EDR Historical Topo Map Report
EDR Inquiry #
Search Results:

P.O.#
Project:

Maps Provided:

Latitude:

Longitude:

UTM Zone:

UTM X Meters:

UTM Y Meters:

Elevation:

Contact:

Site Name: Client Name:
2021
2018
2015
2012
1977
1969
1961
1957
1951, 1956
1942
1937
1929
1909
1904
06/11/24 Delta Farms Property Krazan & Associates, Inc. 685 East Morton Avenue 215 West Dakota Porterville, CA 93257 Clovis, CA 93612 7678583.4 Melanie Thomas EDR Topographic Map Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by Krazan & Associates, Inc. were identified for the years listed below. EDR’s Historical Topo Map Report is designed to assist professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDRs Historical Topo Map Report includes a search of a collection of public and private color historical topographic maps, dating back to the late 1800s.
02424037.RA 36.071824 36° 4' 19" North Delta Farms Property -119.001858 -119° 0' 7" West Zone 11 North 319729.69 3993769.54 497.28' above sea level This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, LLC. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. This Report is provided on an “AS IS”, “AS AVAILABLE” basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY

KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN

THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,

SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,

Copyright 2024 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. 7678583 4 2 page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
2021 Source Sheets
2021
Porterville

7.5-minute, 24000
2021
Success Dam

7.5-minute, 24000
2018 Source Sheets
2018
Porterville

7.5-minute, 24000
2018
Success Dam

7.5-minute, 24000
2015 Source Sheets
2015
Porterville

7.5-minute, 24000
2015
Success Dam

7.5-minute, 24000
2012 Source Sheets
2012
Porterville

7.5-minute, 24000
2012
Success Dam

7.5-minute, 24000
7678583 4 3
page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
1977 Source Sheets
1977
Success Dam

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1977
1969 Source Sheets
1969
Porterville

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1969
1961 Source Sheets
1961
Success Dam

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1955
1957 Source Sheets
1957
Springville
15-minute, 62500
Aerial Photo Revised 1955
7678583 4 4
page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
1951, 1956 Source Sheets
1951
Porterville

7.5-minute, 24000
1956
Success

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1955
1942 Source Sheets
1942
Porterville
15-minute, 62500
1937 Source Sheets
1937
Kaweah
30-minute, 125000
1929 Source Sheets
1929
Porterville

7.5-minute, 31680
7678583 4 5
page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
1909 Source Sheets
1909
Kaweah
30-minute, 125000
1904 Source Sheets
1904
Kaweah
30-minute, 125000
7678583 4 6
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT: