Porterville City Council
September 16, 2025

RESOLUTION NO. -2025

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE 2030 GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE 2030

GENERAL PLAN AS PART OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY INCREASE

PROJECT
WHEREAS: At a regular meeting on December 7, 2021, the City Council did consider information from staff regarding historical residential densities in the City; and WHEREAS: At said regular meeting, the City Council did direct staff to initiate amendments to both the Porterville 2030 General Plan (General Plan) and the Porterville Development Code to provide a slight increase to permissible density within the High-Density Residential Land Use designation and the RM-3 zoning district; and WHEREAS: At a regular meeting on September 2, 2025, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider a change to the text of the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the maximum permissible residential density within the High-Density Residential Land Use designation from 24.0 units per acre to 30.5 units per; and WHEREAS: Notice of said hearing was published in The Porterville Recorder on August 14, 2025, and was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website on August 14, 2025; and WHEREAS: Due to a concern about notification of a companion item, the City Council opened the public hearing for the item and continued it to the September 16, 2025, regular meeting; and
WHEREAS: Pursuant to Government Code Section 65358(b), a city may not amend any one mandatory element of its general plan more than four times per calendar year; and WHEREAS: Amendment of a General Plan expressly constitutes a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq.; and
WHEREAS: On March 4, 2008, the City Council of the City of Porterville did certify an environmental impact report (EIR; SCH No. 2006011033) prepared for the City of Porterville 2030 General Plan; and
WHEREAS: An addendum to the EIR has been prepared consistent with the CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, which addendum determined that the conclusions of the EIR remain valid for the scope of this project, that no additional mitigation is required, and no additional environmental review is necessary.

Resolution No. __-2025

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Porterville finds and determines that:

1. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) or 15163, calling for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, respectively, have occurred.

2. No new circumstances or changes have occurred, nor has any new information been identified requiring new analysis or verification since the certification of the EIR.

3. The conclusions of the City of Porterville 2030 General Plan Environmental Impact Report remain valid for this project and the addendum has been prepared consistent with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

4. The addendum is hereby adopted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Porterville hereby amends the Land Use Element of the City of Porterville General Plan as follows:

1. The description of the “High Density Residential” land use designation contained within Section 2.3 General Plan Land Use Diagram shall read as follows: “High Density Residential. This classification is intended to accommodate attached homes, two- to four-plexes, and apartment buildings. The maximum residential density is 24.0 30.5 units per gross acre.”

2. The “Maximum Residential Density (du/gross acre)” for “High Density Residential” illustrated in Table 2-2: Standards for Density & Development Intensity shall be changed from “24.0” to “30.5”.

The amendment to the City of Porterville General Plan approved herein constitutes the first amendment to the Land Use Element for Calendar Year 2025.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 2025. ____________________________
Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:

Richard Tree, Interim City Clerk
By: ___________ _____________________
Fernando Gabriel-Moraga,
Chief Deputy City Clerk

ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING THE TEXT OF SECTION 200 OF CHAPTER 21 (PORTERVILLE DEVELOPMENT CODE) OF THE

PORTERVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE IN THE MATTER OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE

RESIDENTIAL DENSITY INCREASE PROJECT
WHEREAS: At a regular meeting on December 7, 2021, the City Council did consider information from staff regarding historical residential densities in the city; and WHEREAS: At said regular meeting, the City Council did direct staff to initiate amendments to both the Porterville 2030 General Plan (General Plan) and the Porterville Development Code to provide a slight increase to permissible density within the High-Density Residential Land Use designation and the RM-3 zoning district; and WHEREAS: At a regular meeting on September 2, 2025, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider a change to the text of the Porterville Development Code to increase the maximum permissible residential density within the RM-3 High Density Residential zoning district from 30.0 units per acre to 30.5 units per acre; and WHEREAS: Notice of said hearing was published in The Porterville Recorder on August 14, 2025 and was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website on August 14, 2025; and WHEREAS: Due to a concern about notification of a companion item, the City Council opened the public hearing for the item and continued it to the September 16, 2025, regular meeting; and
WHEREAS: Amendment of a zoning ordinance expressly constitutes a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq.; and
WHEREAS: Via adoption of Resolution No. ____-2025, the City Council has adopted an addendum to the City of Porterville 2030 General Plan Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS: Also, via adoption of Resolution No. ____-2025, the City Council has amended the Land Use Element of the General Plan to accommodate the same increase in maximum permissible density within the High-Density Residential Land Use designation, for which the RM-3 zoning district is the implementing zone; and WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville determined that the proposed text amendment is consistent with the guiding and implementation policies of the General Plan.

Ordinance No. __________

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS by the City Council of the City of Porterville:

Section 1: The preceding recitals are true and accurate.

Section 2: Section 201.01 of Article 201 of Series 200 of Chapter 21 of the Porterville Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
201.01: PURPOSE:

The specific purposes of the “Residential” Districts are to:

A. Maintain and enhance the city’s neighborhoods.

B. Ensure the provision of services and facilities needed to accommodate planned population densities.

C. Provide a basis for the evaluation of development proposals for appropriate densities within the given ranges.

D. Implement and provide appropriate regulations for General Plan classifications of “Very Low Density Residential”, “Low Density Residential”, “Low-Medium Density Residential”, “Medium Density Residential”, and “High Density
Residential”.

Additional purposes of each “Residential” District:

RS-1 Very Low Density Residential. To provide areas for large lot or executive home single-family subdivisions with a maximum
residential density is 3.1 units per net acre. This district also allows for limited uses such as day care homes and religious facilities that are appropriate in a very lowdensity residential environment.

RS-2 Low Density Residential. To provide areas for attached or detached single family homes with a maximum residential density of 7.5
units per net acre. This district also allows for limited uses such as day care homes, parks, and religious facilities that are appropriate in a low-density residential environment.

RM-1 Low-Medium Density Residential. To accommodate low-medium densities and more varied forms of residential development,
including small-lot single-family homes, detached zero lot line developments, duplexes, townhouses, and garden
apartments with a maximum residential density of 11.3
units per net acre This district also allows for limited uses such as day care homes, parks, schools and religious
facilities that are appropriate in a low-medium density residential environment. This district provides for a
transition from lower-density residential neighborhoods Ordinance No. __________

to medium-density multi-family areas.

RM-2 Medium Density Residential. To accommodate a variety of housing types, such as small-lot single-family homes, detached zero lot line developments, duplexes, townhouses, and garden
apartments with a maximum residential density of 15.0
units per net acre. This district is intended to be located closer to community and retail services, mixed use areas, parks, and areas where greater access can be provided. In addition to residential uses, this district allows for a variety of public and semi-public uses such as cultural institutions and religious facilities that are appropriate in a mediumdensity residential environment. This district provides for a transition from lower-density residential neighborhoods to higher-density multi-family development and
commercial areas.

RM-3 High Density Residential. This classification is intended to accommodate attached homes, two- to four-plexes, and apartment
buildings with a maximum residential density 30.0 30.5
units per net acre. This district allows for a variety of public and semi-public uses such as clubs and lodges, cultural institutions, and religious facilities that are appropriate in a high-density residential environment.

Section 3: Table 201.03 of Section 201.03 of Article 201 of Series 200 of Chapter 21 of the Porterville Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Standard RS-1 RS-2 RM-1 RM-2 RM-3 Additional Regulations Lot and density standards:

Minimum
lot area
(sq. ft.)
12,500 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Subsection 201.04C,
“Reduced Minimum Lot
Size, Width, And
Depth”
Minimum
lot width
(ft.)
90 60 60 60 60 Subsection 201.04C,
“Reduced Minimum Lot
Size, Width, And
Depth”
Minimum
lot depth
(ft.)
100 75 75 75 75 Subsection 201.04C,
“Reduced Minimum Lot
Size, Width, And
Depth”
Ordinance No. __________

Maximum
density
(units/net
acre)

3.1 7.5 11.3 15.0 30.0

30.5 Minimum
density
(units/net
acre)
n/a n/a n/a n/a 10.0
Minimum
area per
dwelling
unit (sq.
ft.)
n/a n/a 3,000 1,500 1,000
Building form and location:

Maximum
height
(ft.)
35 35 35 50 50 Section 201.03(a); and
section 300.06,
“Heights And Height
Exceptions”
Minimum
yards (ft.):

Residence
(front)
15 15 15 15 15 Section 201.03(b); and
section 300.01,
“Building Projections
Into Yards”
Porch
(front)
10 10 10 10 10
Garage
(front)
20 20 20 20 20
Interior
side
5 5 5 5 5 Section 201.03(c), (d)
and (f); and
section 300.01,
“Building Projections
Into Yards”
Street
side
10 10 10 10 10 Section 201.03(e); and
section 300.01,
“Building Projections
Into Yards”
Rear 10 5 5 10 10 Section 201.03(f); and
section 300.01,
Ordinance No. __________

“Building Projections
Into Yards”
Maximum
building
coverage
(% of lot)
30 45 45 50 60
Minimum
courtyard
dimension
n/a n/a n/a 20 20 Section 201.03(g)
Additional standards:

Private
open
space (sq.
ft. per
unit)
n/a n/a 200 75 50 Subsection 201.04B,
“Residential MultiFamily Development”
Common
open
space (sq.
ft. per
unit)
n/a n/a n/a 100 100 Subsection 201.04B,
“Residential MultiFamily Development”
Section 4: Severability: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases have been declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 5: Effective Date and Posting of Ordinance: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of final passage. The City Clerk of the City of Porterville shall cause this Ordinance to be published at least once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation in Tulare County with the names of those City Council Members voting for or against the Ordinance.

Ordinance No. __________

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED on the _____ day of September, 2025.

Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:

Richard Tree, Interim City Clerk
By:

Fernando Gabriel-Moraga,
Chief Deputy City Clerk

RESOLUTION NO. ___-2025

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE CONTAINING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS IN SUPPORT OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PRC 2018-024-C),

AUTHORIZING THE HENDERSON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND THE SALE OF ALCOHOL UNDER A TYPE 21 GENERAL OFF-SALE LICENSE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HENDERSON AND STATE ROUTE 65
WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville, at its regular scheduled meeting of September 2, 2025, opened and continued a public hearing to September 16, 2025, to consider the Henderson Commercial Development Project (Project) at the northwest corner of Henderson and State Route 65 (APNs 246-111-065, -026, -06, 043 and -045 and 246-240-020) and comprising approximately 10.54 acres; and
WHEREAS: On August 8, 2025, a notice was published in The Porterville Recorder setting the date, and place of a public hearing for Tuesday, September 2, 2025, and similar notices were sent to owners of property within 500 feet radius of the site and posted at City Hall and the City’s website announcing the same; and
WHEREAS: On September 3, 2025, Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was provided to the three commenters; and WHEREAS: On September 5, a NOA of the FEIR was published to the Porterville Recorder, City Website and posted at City Hall and the Temporary Porterville Library; and WHEREAS: Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C) is proposed to facilitate development and operation of a mixed commercial center of approximately 92,000 square feet, including the sale of alcohol under a Type 21 off-sale general; and WHEREAS: PDO Section 604.04. provides an avenue by which the City Council, upon making necessary findings for approval of a Conditional Use Permit; and WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville received testimony from all interested parties related to the Project; and
WHEREAS: The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) allows for a specific number of licenses per census tract, based on population. The subject site is located within Census Tract 35.04 and allows for four (4) On-Sale and five (5) Off-Sale alcohol licenses, without being deemed over-concentrated. Census Tract 35.04 currently contains three (3) OnSale licenses for alcohol sales and five (5) Off-Sale licenses for alcohol sales.

Resolution No. ____-2025

WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville authorized Mayor Meister to sign the Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity due to the undue concentration of alcohol licenses within Census Tract 35.04; and
WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville adopted Resolution No. ___-2025, thereby certifying an environmental impact report (SCH# 2023060320) for the Henderson Commercial Development Project, of which Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C) is a component; and
WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville received testimony from all interested parties related to said Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C); and WHEREAS: The City Council made the following findings pursuant to PDO Section 604.04, the evidence for said findings substantiated in the record:

1. That the proposed project will advance the goals and objectives of, and is consistent with, the policies of the General Plan and any other applicable plan that the City has adopted.
• LU-G-1: Promote a sustainable balanced land use pattern that responds to existing needs and future needs of the city.
• ED-G-2: Retain, improve, and promote existing businesses in Porterville. • ED-G-5: Retain existing local businesses and foster local start-ups. • ED-G-7: Create an image for Porterville that will attract and retain economic activity.

2. The subject site is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning Standards for CR (Retail Centers). The CR designation is intended to maintain a full range of retail uses. The proposed convenience store with alcohol sales would suit the purpose of the zone designation. The convenience store is a permitted use in the CR Zone, and alcohol sales may be permitted in that zone with the requested Conditional Use Permit.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Porterville that the Henderson Commercial Development Project is hereby approved subject to compliance with all comments outlined in the PRC Comments provided for PRC 2018-024. / / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
Resolution No. ____-2025

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 2025. ____________________________
Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:

Richard Tree, Interim City Clerk
By _________________________________
Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Item No. 17.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – SEPTEMBER 16, 2025
SUBJECT: Continued Public Hearing to Consider the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Henderson Commercial Development, amending the General Plan to reflect the Land Use Designation for the site to Retail Centers and approving the Conditional Use permit for PRC-2018-24-C
SOURCE: Community Development
COMMENT: This item was first scheduled for City Council consideration on September 2, 2025. Due to concerns regarding notification of the availability of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), the Council opened the public hearing and continued it to September 16, 2025, to allow for proper notification.

The City has received an application for a proposed Henderson Commercial Development. The item was heard by the Project Review Committee (PRC) on June 27, 2018, to begin the assessment of the project (PRC 2018-024). During the PRC meeting, staff provided comments to the applicant pertaining to the proposed project which outlined the entitlement process and departments’ development standards.

The approximately 10.54-acre Project site is located in north-central Porterville at the northwest corner of State Route (SR) 65 and West Henderson Avenue.

The project includes six parcels: Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 246-111- 065, -026, -046, -043, -045 and 246-240-020. Lands directly surrounding the proposed Project are described as follows: north: Low Density Residential homes; south: Commercial/retail businesses, West Henderson Avenue; east:

SR 65 and commercial/retail businesses and Hayes Field; west: Residential homes, vacant land with no existing entitlements.

The Project’s development components include the following: General Plan amendment to APN 246-240-020 from Low Density Residential to Retail Centers to accommodate the project.

PARCEL GENERAL
PLAN
(EXISTING)
ZONING
(EXISTING)

GENERAL
PLAN
(PROPOSED)
ZONING
(PROPOSED)
246-240-020 High Density Retail Retail CR
Item No. 17.

Residential Center Center
RM-3= High Density
Residential
CR= Retail Centers
To provide consistency with SB 300's requirement for no net loss of housing capacity, as a separate but related action, the city is concurrently processing a text amendment to the Porterville Development Ordinance to increase the maximum density allowed in the RM-3 (High Density Residential) zone district.

The second entitlement requested is a Conditional Use Permit for a commercial establishment larger than 50,000 square feet or more, as well as a request for a Type 21 Off-sale General Alcohol License.

The Project’s Development Components are further broken down as follows:
• Development of approximately 92,060 square feet consists of:

1. Three quick-serve drive-thru buildings:
+/- 3,750 square feet
+/- 5,500 square feet
+/- 4,500 square feet

2. Inline major buildings and retail buildings totaling +/- 77,585 square feet to be used for:

General Retail
Grocery store with alcohol sales
24-hour drug store
• Installation of a new eastbound left turn lane off West Henderson Avenue • New signage includes:

1. 80’ pylon sign in the northeast site corner

2. 60’ pylon sign in the southeast site corner
• 20’ monument sign along West Henderson Avenue.
• Associated improvements including parking areas, nighttime lighting, and site landscaping, in accordance with Porterville City standards.

The Henderson Commercial Project qualifies as a “Commercial Center” per the Porterville Development Ordinance (PDO), and as such would be required to provide entry plazas to each anchor tenant, pedestrian walkways, an integrated theme, four-sided architecture, and landscaping consistent throughout the site. Conditions are in place to require that the site provides cohesive development and that the theme, materials, and paint colors be consistent. As noted in Section 601.09(c), if a request is received for a change in approval of the approved building or site plan it shall be treated as a new application, except that such changes determined to be minor, in the opinion of the Zoning Administrator, may be approved by the Zoning Administrator.

The request for a Type-21 Off-Sale Alcohol License would be the second Item No. 17.
component requested under the Conditional Use Permit. The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) allows for a specific number of licenses per census tract, based on population. The subject site is located within Census Tract 35.04 and allows for four (4) On-Sale and five (5) Off-Sale alcohol licenses, without being deemed over-concentrated. Census Tract 35.04 currently contains three (3) On-Sale licenses for alcohol sales and five (5) OffSale licenses for alcohol sales. Whenever the ratio of On-Sale or Off-Sale alcohol licenses to population in a census tract exceeds the average ratio for the county, an “undue concentration” of licenses is determined to exist.

Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. PRC 2018-024-C would increase the number of Off-Sale licenses within the census tract to six (6). Census Tract

35.04 has an undue concentration, which would require a Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity to be sent from the mayor to ABC in support of the issuance of this license.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: During early review of the project, the City contracted with Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. to prepare an initial study (IS) to analyze the potential for environmental effects that could result from the project. Pending the results of technical studies being prepared in conjunction with the IS, the City made the determination that an environmental impact report (EIR) would be required. On June 13, 2023, the City issued a notice of preparation (NOP) of an environmental impact report indicating a comment period starting on June 13, 2023, and ending on July 13, 2023, along with the IS, which identified the potential for impacts on Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Transportation. The NOP was provided to several public agencies as well as to the owners of real property within 500 feet of the project site, and a duly noticed scoping meeting was conducted on June 27, 2023. Several comments were received in response to the NOP. Based off comments from the scoping meeting held on June 27, 2023, a new traffic study was conducted related to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). A new NOP was recirculated from July 25, 2023, through August 25, 2023.

Upon completion of the Draft EIR, which can be located on the City's website, www.ci.porterville.ca.us, the notices of availability and completion were filed in accordance with CEQA. Again, owners of property within 500 feet of the project site were notified of the availability of the document. The Draft EIR was circulated for a review period of 45 days. The local review period started on December 24, 2024, and ended on February 9, 2025, with the Public Review period starting on December 26, 2024, and ending on February 10, 2025.

As circulated, the Draft EIR addressed impacts to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology & Soils, and Transportation.

The Final EIR (“FEIR”) consists of the DEIR plus the Response to Comments Item No. 17.
document in which the City must address all comments and possibly propose changes to the DEIR, if needed. After the close of the public review period for the DEIR, the City prepared formal responses to the written comments received. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088(b), requires the City’s responses to comments to be provided to commenting public agencies 10 days prior to final certification of the FEIR. Three (3) comment letters were received, and the letters are contained in the Response to Comments, which are provided in the FEIR. On September 3, 2025, Notice was provided to the three commenters of the availability of the FIER.

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: The MMRP contains a table with the required mitigation measures, the responsible party or parties for implementing the measure, and the timing of implementation. The MMRP is contained in the EIR & MMRP.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Open the continued public hearing to receive comments on the Henderson Commercial Project;

2. Adopt the Draft Resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report and adopting the mitigation monitoring and reporting program;

3. Adopt the Draft Resolution amending the General Plan to reflect the Land Use Designation of the site, APN 246-240-020 as Retail Centers; and

4. Adopt the Draft Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C).

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Locator Map

2. SITE PLAN

3. ABC Map

4. Henderson Commercial FEIR (Exhibit A to CEQA Resolution)

5. Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity

6. Henderson-65 CEQA Resolution

7. Henderson-65 GPA Resolution

8. Henderson-65 CUP Resolution

9. Exhibit B to the CEQA Resolution
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

Claudia Calderon, Community Development Director
Item No. 17.

Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk

EXISTING CELL

TOWER SITE

TO REMAIN PROPOSED NEW SHARED DRIVEWAY

WEST HENDERSON AVE
OFF RAMP FROM HWY 65 HIGHWAY 65 SOUTHBOUND HIGHWAY 65 NORTHBOUND

PROPOSED TURN LANE
25'-0"

BY PASS LANE
MONUMENT SIGN 194'-8"
50'-0" 176'
45'-0"
30'-0"

RELOCATE (E) DRIVEWAY TO WEST RELOCATE (E) DRIVEWAY

TO EAST

CROSS ACCESS

EASEMENT

RELOCATE (E) DRIVEWAY TO WEST

CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT EXISTING ACCESS EASEMENT
CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT PHASE 1 INSTALLED WITH FUTURE PROPOSED NEW SHARED DRIVEWAY

INSTALL MEDIAN CURB
MAJOR 2
±25,000 SF 30'-0" 18'-0"
MAJOR 1
±18,000 SF
120' 140' 147'-2"
30'-0"
5'-0"
40 PYLON
18'-0" LOADING DOCK

LOADING DOCK
62' 178'
MAJOR 4
±25,099 SF 25'-0"
TE
TE 30'-0" 5'-0" 18'-0" 2'-0"
PLAZA
50 6'-0"
5'-0"
30'-0"
41 40'-0"
39 42
25'-0" 40'-0" 25'-0" 25'-0" 40'-0" 25'-0" 18'-0" 40'-0" 27 18 20'-0"
15 7
PAD 2
±4,500 SF 9'-0" 12'-0" 28'-0"
12'-0" 28'-0"
TE
25'-0"
137'-0" c c
38 40'-0"
10'-0"
16 25'-0" c 10'-0" 10'-0" c c c c c c c c c c 5 12'-0" 3'-0" 12'-0" PATIO
PAD 1
±3,750 SF
TE
25'-0" 18'-0"9'-0"18'-0" 25'-0" 16'-0" 153' 194'-8" MAJOR 3 ±9,486 SF 125'
SIGN
5'-0" TE LOADING AREA
TE
31'-3" 8 9 7 PAD 3
±5,500 SF
TE N

NOT TO SCALE
810 W ACEQUIA AVENUE
VISALIA CA 93291
(559)713-6139

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT
Henderson Commercial Project
August 2025
PREPARED BY:

Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc.
113 N. Church Street, Suite 310
Visalia, CA 93291
PREPARED FOR:

City of Porterville
291 N. Main Street
Porterville, CA 93257
Final Environmental Impact Report
Henderson Commercial Project
State Clearinghouse #2023060320
Prepared for:

City of Porterville
291 N. Main Street
Porterville, CA 93257
Contact: Claudia Calderon, Community Development Director Phone: (559) 782-7460
Prepared by:

Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc.
113 N. Church Street, Suite 310
Visalia, CA 93291
Contact: Emily Bowen
(559) 840-4414
August 2025
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page |1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE - Introduction........................................................................................................................2 Introduction....................................................................................................................................................2 Summary of Project Description..................................................................................................................2 CEQA Evaluation Background....................................................................................................................5 CEQA Requirements .....................................................................................................................................6 Use of the Final EIR.......................................................................................................................................7 CHAPTER TWO – Comments and Responses ..............................................................................................9 Introduction....................................................................................................................................................9 Comment Letters .........................................................................................................................................10 CHAPTER THREE – Errata / Text Changes to the DEIR ...........................................................................64 CHAPTER FOUR – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.......................................................67 Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page |1 CHAPTER ONE - Introduction
Introduction
As defined by Section 15050 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the City of Porterville (City) is the Lead Agency for the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Henderson Commercial Project (Project or proposed Project, SCH No 2023060320). The Final EIR presents the environmental information and analyses that have been prepared for the proposed Project, including comments received addressing the adequacy of the Draft EIR, and responses to those comments. In addition to the responses to comments, clarifications, corrections, or minor revisions have been made to the Draft EIR. The Final EIR, which includes the responses to comments, the Draft EIR, and the Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program, will be used by the Porterville City Council in the decision-making process for the proposed Project.

This Final EIR is an informational document intended to disclose to the decision makers of the City, and the public, the environmental consequences of approving and implementing the Project or one of the alternatives to the proposed Project, which are described in the Draft EIR. All written comments received during the public review period (December 24, 2024 through February 9, 2025) of the Draft EIR are addressed in this Final EIR.

The responses in the Final EIR clarify, correct, and/or amplify text in the Draft EIR. Therefore, no significant revisions have been made which would require recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 (Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification). The Final EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21177).

Summary of Project Description
The proposed Project consists of the development of retail and restaurant buildings on approximately 10.54 acres of land, up to a total of 92,060 square feet of building area. The proposed Project components are described below.

Project Components
• Development of approximately 92,060 square feet consisting of o Three quick serve drive-thru buildings
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 3  +/- 3,750 square feet
 +/- 5,500 square feet
 +/- 4,500 square feet
o Inline major buildings and retail buildings totaling +/- 77,585 square feet to be used for:
 General Retail
 Grocery store with alcohol sales
 24-hour drug store
• Installation of a new east-bound left turn lane off West Henderson Avenue • New signage including:
o 80’ pylon sign in the northeast site corner
o 60’ pylon sign in the southeast site corner
• 20’ monument sign along West Henderson Avenue.
• Associated improvements including parking areas, nighttime lighting, and site landscaping, in accordance with Porterville City standards.

Site Circulation and Access
Access to the project site would be provided by the two driveways that are shown on Figure 3. The easterly driveway would accommodate right-in and right-out turning movements. The westerly driveway would allow for right-in, right-out and eastbound left turns in to the site.

Roadway Descriptions
• Henderson Avenue is a major (four-lane) east-west arterial that provides access to State Route 65 and residential and commercial land uses.
• Newcomb Street is a major (four-lane) north-south arterial located approximately 0.75 miles west of State Route 65. Within the study area, it provides access to residential land uses and Monache High School.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 4 • Porter Road is a north-south collector that runs parallel to and directly east of State Route 65 from Olive Avenue to Henderson Avenue. It provides access primarily to residential and commercial land uses within the study area.
• Prospect Street is a north-south roadway located approximately 0.25 miles west of State Route 65. It is designated as a major (four-lane) arterial between Morton Avenue and Westfield Avenue and provides access to residential and commercial land uses within the study area.
• State Route 65 is a north-south state highway that begins at State Route 99 north of Bakersfield and terminates at State Route 198 north of Exeter. It exists as a four-lane freeway through Porterville with an interchange connection at Henderson Avenue.

The Project will be responsible for construction of internal roadways as well as for potential improvements to surrounding roadways to accommodate the Project. The Project also includes improvements and landscaping along the frontage roads and within the site itself.

Infrastructure
Existing City services (water, sewer, and stormwater) are located in W. Henderson Avenue and the applicant will be required to tie into these existing facilities. The proposed Project will require gas, telephone, cable, and electrical improvements. Natural gas will be provided by The Gas Company; telephone services will be provided by AT&T; electric power will be provided by Southern California Edison Company (SCE); and cable television will be provided by Charter Communication. The extent of work required for utilities and gas will be determined during final Project design.

Entitlements
Since the development is proposed to be greater than 50,000 square feet, a Conditional Use Permit is required for project approval and a General Plan Amendment is required to change APN 246- 240-020 from Low Density Residential to Retail Centers. Additionally, a Parcel Map may be required to reconfigure parcel lines and/or create new parcels meeting the requirements of all applicable codes for sale or lease. To offset the reduction of potential residential development resulting from the proposed land use change, the City will concurrently increase the permissible density in the RM-3 zone district from 30.0 to 30.5 units per acre.

Project Location
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 5 The proposed Project is located on approximately 10.54 acres in the north-central area of Porterville and is generally bound by West Henderson Avenue to the south, State Route 65 to the east, and North Prospect Street to the west. The site comprises six parcels: Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 246-111-065, -026, -046, -043 and -045, and 246-240-020. APNs 246-111-065, -026, -046, -045, -043 are currently designated as Retail Centers. APN 246-240-020 is currently designated as Low Density Residential.

Project Objectives
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b), the following are the City of Porterville’s Project objectives:
• To provide a commercial/retail development area at pricing appropriate for the market, within an established area of the City of Porterville that satisfies the City of Porterville’s policies, regulations and expectations as defined in the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and other applicable plans, documents, and programs adopted by the City.
• To provide conveniently located commercial development to serve north and central Porterville residents in an established urban area of the City of Porterville. • To provide a sense of community and walkability within the development using street patterns, parks/open space areas, landscaping, and other project amenities.

CEQA Evaluation Background
Notice of Preparation
The City of Porterville circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed Project from June 13, 2023 through July 13, 2023 to trustee and responsible agencies, the State Clearinghouse (SCH #2023060320), and the public. Following publication of the original NOP, a comment at the June 27, 2023 scoping meeting recognized that the Project could cause potentially significant traffic impacts. Therefore, the Project’s NOP was re-circulated from July 25, 2023 through August 25, 2023 to disclose such impacts.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 6 During the two NOP public comment periods, the City received comments from two public agencies and two members of the public; those comments are presented in Appendix A and summarized here as follows:
• Native American Heritage Commission (June 16, 2023): Recommended consultation with California Native American tribes pursuant to AB 52 and SB 18. Refer to Sections

3.5 – Cultural Resources and 3.18 – Tribal Resources for further information. • CA Department of Fish & Wildlife (July 12, 2023): Identified potential species in the project area and provided recommendations on handling of such species. Refer to Section 3.4 – Biological Resources for more information. • Fennemore Dowling Aaron – Daniel C. Stein representing Gary Griger (August 21, 2023): Identified potential traffic impacts and expectations of the Project traffic study.

Identified expectations for air quality analysis along with potential impacts from loss of residential potential due to rezoning. Refer to Section 3.3 – Air Quality Resources, Section 3.11 – Land Use, and Section 3.17 - Transportation for more information. • Michael Camarena – Porterville Citizen (August 2, 2023): Identified areas of concern relating to traffic congestion in the Project vicinity. Refer to Section 3.17 – Transportation for more information.

Draft EIR
The Draft EIR was properly noticed and circulated for public review and comment for 45 days, from December 24, 2024 through February 9, 2025. The Notice of Availability was published in the Porterville Recorder newspaper. The Draft EIR and Appendices were sent to the State Clearinghouse for distribution and notices were mailed to adjacent landowners, local agencies and other interested individuals. The City received three comment letters on the Draft EIR. These letters and emails are reproduced in their entirety in Chapter Two of this Final EIR and responses are shown after each letter.

These comments and responses that make up the Final EIR, in combination with the Draft EIR and Appendices, constitute the EIR that will be considered for certification by the decision makers of the City of Porterville.

CEQA Requirements
Under CEQA, the Lead Agency must prepare and certify a Final EIR prior to a proposed project being approved. The contents of a Final EIR are specified in Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that a Final EIR must consist of the following:

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 7

1. The Draft EIR or a revision of the Draft EIR.

2. Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in summary.

3. A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR.

4. The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process.

5. Any other information added by the Lead Agency.

The Lead Agency must provide each public agency that commented on the Draft EIR with a copy of the Lead Agency’s response to such comments a minimum of 10 days before certifying the Final EIR.

Use of the Final EIR
The Final EIR allows the public and the City an opportunity to review revisions to the Draft EIR and the responses to comments received during the Draft EIR’s public review period. The Final EIR serves as the environmental document to inform the City of the environmental consequences of the proposed Project, either in whole or in part, or one of the alternatives to the Project discussed in the Draft EIR.

As required by Section 15090(a)(1)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency, in certifying a Final EIR, must make the following three determinations:

1. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA.

2. The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency, and the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the project.

3. The Final EIR reflects the Lead Agency’s independent judgement and analysis.

As required by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, a public agency cannot approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings (Findings of Fact) for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale to reach findings supported by substantial evidence in the record. The possible findings are as follows:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 8

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Additionally, pursuant to Section 15093(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, when a Lead Agency approves a project that would result in significant unavoidable impacts that are disclosed in the Final EIR, the agency must state in writing the reasons supporting the approval. The Statement of Overriding Considerations must be supported by substantial evidence in the Lead Agency’s administrative record. The Findings of Fact (Section 15091) and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Section 15093(b)) have been provided to the City for consideration.

If the City approves the proposed Project, and as part of that action adopts mitigation measures, the City will also adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (see Public Resources Code Section 21081.6).

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 9 CHAPTER TWO – Comments and Responses
Introduction
This chapter of the Final EIR contains a copy of each of the written comments received from the public and other agencies with jurisdiction over the proposed Project, followed by responses to each comment. Each letter is numbered (e.g. Letter 1, Letter 2, etc.).

A total of three comment letters were received from the following agencies:

Comment Letter 1
Dean Wallraff
Executive Director
Advocates for the Environment
10211 Sunland Blvd
Shadow Hills, CA 91040
February 7, 2025
Comment Letter 2
Daniel C. Stein
Attorney
Fennemore Dowling Aaron
8080 N. Palm Avenue, 3rd Floor
Fresno, CA 93711
February 7, 2025
Comment Letter 3
Julie A. Vance
Regional Manager
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Central Region
1234 East Shaw Avenue
Fresno, CA 93710
February 11, 2025
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 10 Comment Letters
Comment Letter 1
Dean Wallraff
Executive Director
Advocates for the Environment
10211 Sunland Blvd
Shadow Hills, CA 91040
February 11, 2025
Letter 1, page 1
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 11 Letter 1, page 2
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 12 Letter 1, page 3
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 13 Letter 1, page 4
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 14 Letter 1, page 5
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 15 Response to Comment Letter 1
Comment 1. Advocates for the Environment submits the comments in this letter regarding the proposed Henderson Commercial Project (Project), located near west Henderson Avenue and State Route 65 in the City of Porterville (City). This Project proposes to develop the 10.54-acre project site with a total of 91,335 square feet of retail and restaurant buildings.

We are a non-profit public-interest law firm that uses environmental law to fight to improve the environment in California. We have reviewed the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) released in December 2024 and submit comments regarding the sufficiency of the EIR’s Greenhouse-Gas (GHG) analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Response to Comment 1: The comment provides a brief description of the proposed Henderson Commercial Project, as well as a brief description of Advocates for the Environment. The comment notes that Advocates for the Environment reviewed the DEIR and provided comments.

The comment does not raise any specific project-related environmental issues under CEQA, and therefore no further response is required.

Comment 2. The City Should Require the Project to be Net-Zero.

Given the current regulatory context and technological advancements, a net-zero significance threshold is feasible and extensively supportable.

Climate damages will keep increasing until we reach net zero GHG emissions, and there is a California state policy requiring the state to be net-zero by 2045. It therefore is economically unsound to construct new buildings that are not net-zero.

We urge the City to adopt net-zero as the GHG significance threshold for this project. This threshold is well-supported by plans for the reduction of GHG emissions in California, and particularly the CARB Climate Change Scoping Plans. The CARB 2017 Scoping Plan states that “achieving no net additional increase in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, is an appropriate overall objective for new development.” (CARB 2017 Scoping Plan, p. 101.) Additionally, the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan reaffirms the necessity of a net zero target by expressing: “it is clear that California must transition away from fossil fuels to zero-emission technologies with all possible speed … in order to meet our GHG and air quality targets.” (CARB 2022 Scoping Plan, p. 184.) CARB further encourages a net-zero threshold in its strategies for local actions in Appendix D to the 2022 Scoping Plan. (CARB 2022 Scoping Plan, Appendix D p. 24-26.)
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 16 Moving this Project forward as a net-zero project would not only be the right thing for the City to do, but also would help protect the City and the Applicant from CEQA GHG litigation.

Response to Comment 2. The commenter asserts that given the current regulatory context and technological advancements, a net-zero significance threshold is feasible and “extensively supportable.” The commenter provides general information regarding the source of GHG emissions and claims that it is more affordable to construct new projects as net-zero than seek to obtain the same level of GHG reductions through retrofitting of existing buildings. The commenter states that climate damage will continue until net-zero emissions is required, references State law mandates addressing net-zero emissions in 2045 and concludes summarily that it is “economically unsound to construct new buildings that are not net-zero.” The commenter purports to provide examples of several large-scale projects that have moved forward as net-zero communities after losing CEQA lawsuits to environmental groups and notes that the project should do the same (i.e., move forward as a net-zero community).

This comment does not specifically question the GHG impact analysis or less than significant determination made in the Draft EIR, but rather urges the City to employ a different threshold of significance to evaluate the Project’s potential environmental effects. Public agencies may use their discretionary powers granted by laws other than CEQA to mitigate environmental impacts and/or to adopt thresholds of significance.

CEQA does also not expand the powers granted by other laws or otherwise confer an independent grant of authority to impose mitigation measures on a project. When imposing mitigation for a project’s significant environmental effects, a public agency may only exercise those powers provided by legal authority independent of CEQA (PRC § 21004). The CEQA Guidelines specify that CEQA does not grant new or independent powers to public agencies (CEQA Guidelines § 15040). Accordingly, an agency’s exercise of discretionary powers must be within the scope of the power granted by laws and be consistent with express or implied limitations (CEQA Guidelines § 15040(d),(e)). Mitigation measures that are beyond the powers conferred by law on lead agencies are legally infeasible.

Furthermore, regarding the commenter’s assertion that the City should have adopted a net-zero GHG emissions threshold of significance in its CEQA analysis, the selection of a threshold of significance is a discretionary policy decision that must be based on substantial evidence and legal authority. The City has established and applied a GHG significance threshold that is supported by substantial evidence, which is further detailed below.

The selection of the threshold used in the GHG emissions analysis is outlined on pages 3.0-143 to

3.0-145, under the “Thresholds of Significance” and “Approach to Analysis” subsections of the GHG impact analysis. As detailed in the DEIR, the Project’s GHG emissions would result in a Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 17 significant impact on the environment is determined by assessing consistency with relevant GHG reduction plans. This threshold applied in the analysis aligns with statewide guidance and reflects current regulatory requirements, technological feasibility, and economic considerations.

As noted in more detail in the DIER (page 3.0-144), Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a lead agency may take into account the following three considerations in assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions.
• Consideration #1: The extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting.
• Consideration #2: Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project.
• Consideration #3: The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.

The determination of whether the Project’s GHG emissions would cause a significant environmental impact is based on assessing consistency with applicable GHG reduction plans and thresholds. This approach aligns with Consideration #3 of Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s selected threshold appropriately reflects this consideration.

Furthermore, as described on pages 3.0-144 to 3.0-145 of the DEIR, this threshold also aligns with the SJVAPCD’s guidance for assessing impacts from GHG emissions. Specifically, the SJVAPCD’s Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects Under CEQA notes that projects that comply with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program meeting would have a less than significant impact on climate change. Therefore, by applying a threshold consistent with SJVAPCD’s guidance, the City ensures that its significance determination is grounded in established regulatory frameworks and best practices for addressing climate change impacts under CEQA.

A lead agency’s selection of a specific threshold of significance need only be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The City has met this standard by providing detailed analysis in the DEIR, including quantification of emissions, evaluation of applicable regulations, and consistency with statewide climate goals.

The City has determined that a net-zero significance threshold is infeasible and not appropriate.

A net-zero threshold, while aspirational, is not currently legally required as a threshold of significance for project-level CEQA review. As previously noted, the lead agency has discretion to formulate standards of significance for use in an EIR. The lead agency’s choice of an appropriate threshold need only be “based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15064(b)(1).) Accordingly, the City’s chosen threshold of significance is Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 18 proper, supported by evidence, and consistent with CEQA and applicable case law, including League to Save Lake Tahoe. The Project’s GHG emissions were analyzed accordingly, and the analysis presented in the DIER remains valid.

As detailed in Section 3.8 of the DEIR, the proposed project’s impacts related to GHGs were determined to be less than significant. Therefore, imposing an obligation on the project to be “netzero” would not be supported under the current analysis. As detailed in the paragraph above, the City is not legally authorized under CEQA to impose mitigation measures or require applicants to incorporate project design features for impacts that have been determined to be less than significant. As such, no mitigation measures for the project to achieve net-zero GHG emissions are recommended or required to address the comment. The GHG analysis contained in the DEIR uses a threshold that meets CEQA Guideline requirements and is supported by substantial evidence (see pages 3.0-143 to 3.0-163 of the DEIR).

Furthermore, the commenter’s statements as to whether it would be economically feasible to construct new projects using a net-zero standard are not supported by substantial evidence in the record and are not relevant to the City’s exercise of its discretion as to the appropriate threshold to utilize in evaluating GHG impacts. The economic feasibility of requiring industrial buildings, specifically, and industrial operations more generally to be “net-zero” is factually unsupported and highly questionable given that most of the operational GHG emissions are the result on-road vehicles making trips to and from the project site (see the Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report – included as an appendix to the DEIR – for a breakdown of estimated project GHG emissions by source). As noted in the DEIR, the proposed project would 11,453 average weekday trips after adjustments for internal capture and pass-by trips. These projected trips would generate the majority of the project’s long-term GHG emissions and are not fully controlled by the project. The vast majority vehicles driven by future customers, employees, and other visitors to access the project site will not be owned or controlled by the City, project applicant, project developer, future tenants. As such, building decarbonization alone would not allow the project to achieve net-zero GHG emissions and the commenter’s assertion that it is economically feasible for the project to be net-zero is not accurate or supported by substantial evidence in the record.

The comment has been noted for the record. The commenter does not otherwise raise a substantive issue on the content of the EIR. The Lead Agency is of the opinion that potential project impacts related to air quality and GHG have been fully disclosed, adequately analyzed and appropriately mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA, and that the threshold of significance chosen by the City is supported by substantial evidence. As a result, no further analysis is required. No further changes to the document have been made or are required in response to this comment.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 19 Comment 3. CEQA GHG Significance Analysis.

The EIR derived its GHG significance thresholds from the CEQA Appendix G Guidelines and concluded that the Project would have a less than significant impact because the EIR determined the Project would not generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment, or conflict with applicable plans, policies, and regulations for the reduction of GHG emissions.

The EIR erroneously claimed that the Project’s GHG impact would be less than significant, even without any mitigation. The Project would have a significant impact, and therefore the City should have adopted measures to mitigate the full extent of the Project’s cumulative GHG impact as required by CEQA.

Response to Comment 3: The commenter builds on what was presented in Comment AFTE-2 by citing the proposed project’s estimated GHG emission and suggesting that, as a result of the generation of GHG emissions, the proposed Project would have a significant impact. As noted in Response to Comment AFTE-2, a net-zero GHG emissions threshold was not applied in the analysis. There are not any requirements under CEQA that require lead agencies such as the City, to utilize a net-zero GHG emissions significance threshold. As described in the ARB 2017 Scoping Plan, "achieving net-zero increases in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, may not be feasible or appropriate for every project. . . and the inability of a project to mitigate its GHG emissions to net-zero does not imply the project results in a substantial contribution to the cumulatively significant environmental impact of climate change under CEQA” (page 102).

The GHG analysis contained in the DEIR uses a threshold that meets CEQA Guideline requirements and is supported by substantial evidence (see pages 3.0-143 to 3.0-163 of the DEIR).

These pages of the DEIR include a description of the significance criteria, assumptions and methodologies used by the City, in its discretion, to conduct this impact analysis; these issues are further detailed in Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report (included as an appendix to the DEIR). As detailed in pages 3.0-143 to 3.0-163 of the DEIR, the proposed project’s impacts related to GHGs were determined to be less than significant and would not require mitigation. As noted in the response to Comment AFTE-2 above, the City is not legally authorized under CEQA to impose mitigation measures or require applicants to incorporate project design features for impacts that have been determined to be less than significant.

The commenter also argues the DEIR should have analyzed, “in quantitative terms,” the Project’s approximately 10,332 MTCO2e annual operational emissions. This assessment was included in the DEIR. As discussed on Page 3.0-145, the City has not adopted a GHG reduction plan or completed the GHG inventory, benchmarking, or goalsetting process required to identify a Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 20 reduction target which could allow the project to take advantage of the streamlining provisions contained in the CEQA Guidelines amendments. As such, the City does not have a significance threshold for quantitative analysis. Therefore, the project was assessed for its consistency with ARB’s adopted Scoping Plans and that analysis is provided in Table 3.8-2 of the DEIR, which is a threshold regularly used by lead agencies to evaluate climate change impacts. While the projected GHG emissions were quantified and provided in the CalEEMod output files found in Appendix B, these emissions were found to not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to the projects consistency with ARB’s adopted Scoping Plans.

The commenter does not otherwise raise a substantive issue on the content of the EIR. The Lead Agency is of the opinion that potential project impacts related to air quality and GHG have been fully disclosed, adequately analyzed and appropriately mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA, therefore no further analysis is required. No further changes to the document have been made or are required in response to this comment.

Comment 4. Consistency with Identified Applicable Plans.

To support the City’s conclusion that the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation for GHG emissions reductions, the EIR included a discussion of Assembly Bill 32, as well as the CARB 2022 and 2017 Scoping Plans. This significance analysis violates CEQA by overlooking the Project’s conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan and the 2017 Scoping Plan, in addition to the EIR’s failure to acknowledge and analyze all applicable plans for the reduction of GHGs.

The 2022 Scoping Plan sets a goal for 50% of all industrial energy demand to be electrified by 2045 (2022 CARB Scoping Plan, p. 77). The EIR includes a table to demonstrate consistency but does not make an adequate showing that the Project is consistent with this goal. The EIR indicates that the Project would use Southern California Edison for its electricity, which only sources one-third of its energy from eligible renewable resources. Additionally, the Project has no measures to ensure that it would fully displace its fossil fuel use with low-carbon alternatives by 2045. Thus, the Project creates a conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan by its considerable reliance on diesel fuel and other non-renewable energy sources in its operations.

The 2017 Scoping Plan was developed to facilitate California’s compliance with SB 32, which requires statewide GHG emissions to be reduced to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. (Health & Safety Code § 38566.) In the chart analyzing consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan, the EIR did not discuss how the Project is consistent with some of the Scoping Plan’s goals, including the 2050 goal of 80% below 1990 levels. (EIR, Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 21 p. 3.0-146 – 3.0-148.) The 2017 Scoping Plan also sets out statewide goals for total GHG emissions targets of 6 MTCO2e/capita by 2030, and 2 MTCO2e/capita by 2050 (CARB Scoping Plan, p. 99). The Project’s per-service population GHG emissions would be over 340 MTCO2e per capita, greatly exceeding the 2050 target. This target would need to be achieved within the Project’s lifespan, which is likely going to continue through 2050, making the Project inconsistent with the goals set out by the CARB 2017 Scoping Plan. The EIR’s conclusion that the Project would be consistent with the CARB Scoping Plans is not supported by substantial evidence.

Response to Comment 4: Much of Comment AFTE-4 is general in nature and does not raise any specific project-related environmental issues under CEQA; not futher response is required to address the comment’s summary of CARB’s Scoping Plans.

The commenter asserts that the significance analysis violated CEQA by “overlooking the project’s conflict” with the 2022 Scoping Plan and the 2017 Scoping Plan, as well as failing to acknowledge and analyze all applicable plans for the reduction of GHGs.

While that comment makes the general assertion that the Draft EIR failed to acknowledge and analyze all applicable plans for the reduction of GHGs, the commenter does not explicitly indicate any additional plans that should have been included in this portion of the comment. Comment 6 clarifies what the commenter purports should have been analyzed, and specific recommendations are addressed under Response to Comment 6.

To the extent the comment is framing the concern as one that relates to the appropriate significance threshold, see Responses 2 and 3 above (CEQA does not require an evaluation of impacts against a threshold that requires net-zero GHG emissions). As such, there is no requirement for the project to include measures to ensure that it would fully displace its fossil fuel use with low-carbon alternatives by 2045. The comment’s conclusion that the project creates a conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan is primarily based on the commenter’s assertion that the Project would have a “considerable reliance on diesel fuel and other non-renewable energy sources in its operations.”
The commenter suggests that the DEIR did not evaluate the Project’s consistency with the goal in the 2022 Scoping Plan for 50% of all industrial energy demand to be electrified by 2045. The commenter also states that the DEIR makes a finding of consistency in a table, but without a showing that the Project is inconsistent with this goal. SB 350 (Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015) sets a target for 50% of California’s retail electricity sales to be supplied by renewable energy by 2030. SB 350 does not apply to the end-users, but rather it applies to all load-serving entities in California, including investor-owned utilities, publicly owned utilities, Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 22 electric service providers, and community choice aggregators. Similarly, SB 100 (The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018) builds on SB 350 and strengthens California’s commitment to clean energy by setting new targets for renewable and zero-carbon electricity. SB 100 sets a goal of 60% of retail electricity sales to be from renewable energy sources by 2030 and requires that all electricity retail sales come from renewable or zero-carbon sources (e.g., solar, wind, large hydro, possibly nuclear) by 2045. The project’s consistency with these measures is evaluated under the Consistency with SB 32 and the 2017 Scoping Plan discussion (DEIR pages 3.0-146 to 3.0-148). Within these discussions, it is noted that the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and renewable energy requirements established under SB 100 apply to all electricity providers serving end-use customers throughout California. The discussions also note that, as the proposed project would purchase electricity from a utility subject to the renewable energy requirements, the project would be consistent with this measure.

The commenter also suggests that the Project cannot achieve consistency with this goal because Southern California Edison (SCE) “only sources on-third of its energy from eligible renewable resources.” Because the Project would purchase electricity from a utility (SCE) that is subject to these statutory requirements, the electricity delivered to the Project will, by law, include an increasing share of renewable and zero-carbon energy over time. The Project’s reliance on grid electricity—regardless of the current composition of SCE’s energy portfolio—thus inherently supports progress toward these goals and reflects consistency with the trajectory of California’s statewide energy transition. As such, the commenter’s assertion that SCE currently supplies only one-third of its energy from eligible renewable resources is not determinative of the Project’s consistency with long-term statewide goals. These statutory goals are future-oriented, and compliance is measured at the level of utility providers based on their retail sales mix—not at the level of individual customers or projects. Moreover, the renewable content of grid electricity will continue to increase as utilities comply with SB 100 and implement new procurement strategies, meaning that any project relying on utility-supplied electricity will receive cleaner energy over time.

The commenter also states the DEIR does not discuss how the Project is consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan’s goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. This assertion is inaccurate. The DEIR evaluates the Project’s consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update by analyzing the Project’s alignment with the specific GHG reduction measures identified in the Plan. By demonstrating consistency with these measures, the DEIR provides substantial evidence that the Project supports the State’s broader climate goals, including the long-term target of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. The Plan’s goals are achieved through implementation of enforceable strategies and regulatory programs. Therefore, the Project’s Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 23 consistency with these strategies supports a conclusion that it is also consistent with the Plan’s overarching objectives.

The commenter also states that Project’s per-service population GHG emissions would be over 340 MTCO2e per capita, which would exceed the 2050 targets in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update.

The commenter asserts that the Project’s estimated GHG emissions, when evaluated on a perservice population basis, would exceed 340 MTCO₂e per capita and therefore conflict with the 2050 reduction target in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update. However, this comment relies on a single metric that is neither the exclusive nor the required method for evaluating consistency with the Scoping Plan. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update does not mandate the use of a per-capita GHG emissions threshold for project-level consistency. Instead, as detailed in in Chapter 3 of the DEIR, consistency is appropriately evaluated based on whether a project supports the implementation of specific GHG reduction measures identified in the Scoping Plan. As discussed in the DEIR (see pages 3.0-146 to 3.0-148), the Project has been assessed for consistency with applicable strategies in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update. The analysis concludes that the Project would implement or support applicable measures and would not obstruct those that are not relevant to the Project’s scope or operations. Furthermore, long-term GHG reduction goals (such as those targeting 2045 or 2050) are intended to be achieved through the cumulative effect of statewide policies and technological progress. Individual projects are neither required nor expected to meet these longterm targets independently. Rather, it is appropriate for a project to demonstrate consistency by aligning with the regulatory and policy framework designed to achieve these broader goals over time. Accordingly, the commenter’s reliance on a per-capita emissions figure does not demonstrate inconsistency with the Scoping Plan. The Project’s demonstrated consistency with applicable Scoping Plan measures provides the appropriate and CEQA-compliant basis for evaluating its contribution to statewide GHG reduction efforts.

The GHG analysis contained in the DEIR details the project’s consistency with CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan. As detailed in the DEIR, the project would not conflict with relevant 2022 Scoping Plan actions or strategies that aim to achieve the State’s climate target of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels and achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 (see DEIR pages 3.0-149 to 3.0-162). As such, the commenter’s assertion that the EIR’s conclusion that the project would be consistent with the CARB Scoping Plans is not supported by substantial evidence is inaccurate; specific assertions made by the commenter are addressed in detail above.

In addition, the comment’s assertions regarding the conclusions presented in the DEIR are not supported by substantial evidence in the record and are not relevant to the City’s exercise of its discretion as to the appropriate threshold to utilize in evaluating GHG impacts. The Lead Agency determined, as supported by the GHG analysis summarized in the DEIR (DEIR pages 3.0-149 to Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 24

3.0-162), that project impacts related to GHG have been fully disclosed, adequately analyzed and appropriately mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA, therefore no further analysis is required. Specifically, GHG impacts (including the project’s potential to conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs) were adequately analyzed and were found to be less than significant with no mitigation required.

As such, no further changes to the document have been made or are required in response to this comment.

Comment 5. Assembly Bill 32 is Not Applicable Because It Is Outdated.

Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) set a goal for 1990-level GHG emissions by 2020, a goal already achieved. It does not reflect the requirements of more stringent GHG reduction mandates that have superseded it. Given the evolving climate policy landscape, consistency with AB 32 cannot adequately demonstrate that the Project would have a less than significant GHG impact, as it is an outdated and inapplicable policy.

Response to Comment 5: The DEIR did not purport to perform a consistency analysis with AB

32. Rather, the DEIR specifies that AB 32 set a goal for 1990-level GHG emissions by 2020. As noted on page 3.0-145 of the DEIR, first occupancy at the project site is expected to occur in 2025 which is after the AB 32 target year. In addition, the DEIR notes that the State’s regulatory program implementing the 2008 Scoping Plan is now fully mature and all regulations envisioned in the Scoping Plan have been adopted (DEIR page 3.0-146). While AB 32 provided the foundation for California’s climate strategy, the DEIR acknowledges that State climate policy has evolved significantly since 2008. The analysis therefore focuses on the Project’s consistency with the more recent and forward-looking strategies outlined in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update and the 2022 Scoping Plan, which reflect California’s current climate mandates—including the carbon neutrality goal by 2045 established under AB 1279. The DEIR evaluates consistency with the specific strategies and measures in these more recent Scoping Plans (both that have future GHG reduction goals) and concludes that the Project would not conflict with these plan. These analyses support the conclusion that the Project would not conflict with the State’s long-term climate objectives, including: the 2030 target (40 percent below 1990 levels), the 2045 net-zero emissions mandate, and the 2050 target (80 percent below 1990 levels). Therefore, the DEIR does not rely solely on AB 32 for its impact determination. Instead, it evaluates the Project in light of the most current and applicable State policies. This approach reflects both CEQA requirements and the current regulatory landscape.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 25 Comment 6. The EIR Should Have Analyzed All Applicable Plans.

The City chose, as its second GHG threshold, whether the Project would “conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.” (EIR, p. 3.0-143.) This language requires that the EIR analyze the Project’s consistency with all other applicable plans, not just the plans that the City prefers to analyze.

The Project is inconsistent with EO B-55-18 because it does not prohibit the use of gasoline, diesel, and natural gas.

Burning non-renewable fuels results in substantial GHG emissions, preventing the Project from ever achieving carbon neutrality, unless it enters into agreements with the applicant or future tenant to ensure that fossil fuel use is on track to be eliminated or offset by 2045. Thus, the Project would conflict with EO B-55-18.

Further, the City asserts that the SJVAPCD’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) does not apply to the Project, but fails to acknowledge that Tulare County, where the City is located, also has its own CAP with applicable measures for reducing GHG impacts from development projects such as this one. Thus, EIR should have analyzed consistency with the Tulare County CAP as an applicable plan for the reduction of GHGs.

Lastly, even though the EIR included a discussion of the (SJVAPCD) Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District recommended threshold of 29% below business as usual (BAU), and the reduced goal of 21.7% below BAU in the 2014 First Update to the Scoping Plan, the analysis did not discuss how this Project would conform to those applicable goals for the reduction of GHGs.

As stated by the City’s chosen threshold, conflict with any applicable policy would be a significant GHG impact. Consequently, because the Project is inconsistent with applicable plans for the reduction of GHGs, it is significant under the City’s chosen threshold.

Response 6. As noted in Response to Comment 3, project impacts related to GHG have been fully disclosed, adequately analyzed and appropriately mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA, therefore no further analysis is required (DEIR pages 3.0-149 to 3.0-162). Specififcally, GHG impacts (including the project’s potenital to conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs) were adequately analyzed and were found to be less than significant with no mitigation required.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 26 As explained in Responses to Comment AFTE-2, AFTE-3, and AFTE-4, the project is not required to achieve carbon neutrality in order to be found to be less than significant in regard to GHG impacts. EO B-55-18 is an order that establishes a statewide goal for California to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and to maintain net negative emissions thereafter. EO B-55-18 does not impose a direct requirement on new development projects to demonstrate carbon neutrality; rather, EO B-55-18 provides a directive for certain state agencies such as the California Air Resources Board to develop and implement strategies, policies, and programs to help California reach this goal.

Those strategies, policies, and programs have not yet been enacted. As noted in the DEIR, the Project would be subject to whatever applicable measures are enacted that State lawmakers decide would lead to an 80 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2050 (DEIR page 3.0-149).

Further, the GHG analysis demonstrates that the Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted to reduce the emissions of GHGs. Notably, the GHG analysis includes an assessment of the proposed project’s consistency with ARB’s adopted Scoping Plans. The 2022 Scoping Plan outlines objectives, regulations, planning efforts, and investments in clean technologies and infrastructure that outlines how the State can achieve carbon-neutrality by 2045. As documented in the GHG analysis, the proposed project would not conflict with relevant 2022 Scoping Plan actions or strategies that aim to achieve the State’s climate target of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels and achieving carbon neutrality by 2045. Thus, consistent with the analysis presented in the DIER, the project would not conflict with EO B-55-18.

The commenter notes that the Tulare County, where the City is located, has its own CAP with measures for reducing GHG impacts from development project. The commenter asserts that the DEIR should have analyzed consistency with the Tulare County CAP as an applicable plan for the reduction of GHGs. The Tulare County CAP has not been adopted by the City of Porterville and is only applicable to development projects within incorporated areas of Tulare County.

Because the project is under the jurisdiction of the City of Porterville and is not in unincorporated Tulare County, the Tulare County CAP does not apply to the project and no further analysis is appropriate or required.

The commenter also asserts that the DEIR should have evaluated consistency with the SJVAPCD Climate Action Plan (CAP). Although the SVAPCD’s CAP provides specific measures for stationary sources, for development projects like the instant Project, the CAP only provides guidance for the evaluation of the significance of climate change impacts, which are based on reducing GHG emissions to 29% below business as usual (BAU).

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 27 Notably, the DEIR performs such an analysis. In fact, the comment itself notes that the DEIR included a discussion of the SJVAPCD recommended threshold of 29% below business as usual (BAU), and the reduced goal of 21.7% below BAU in the 2014 First Update to the Scoping Plan.

The comment asserts that the analysis did not discuss how the project would conform to those applicable goals for the reduction of GHGs. The GHG analysis addresses consistency with the SB 32 targets and the 2017 Scoping Plan Update, which address the project’s conformance to those applicable goals for the reduction of GHGs (DEIR pages 3.0-149 to 3.0-162). In addition, as noted on page 3.0-145 of the DEIR, the SJVAPCD’s 29 percent GHG reduction level is based on the target established by ARB’s AB 32 Scoping Plan, approved in 2008. The GHG reduction level for the State to reach 1990 emission levels by 2020 was reduced to 21.7 percent from BAU in 2020 in the 2014 First Update to the Scoping Plan to account for slower than projected growth after the 2008 recession. First occupancy at the project site is expected to occur in 2025 which is after the AB 32 target year. The SJVAPCD has not updated its guidance to address SB 32 2030 targets or AB 1279 2045 targets. As such, 2020 has passed, the GHG reduction goals for the 2020 operational year are not relevant to the project. As such, no further response is required and no changes to the document have been made or are required in response to this comment.

Comment 7. Conclusion.

In conclusion, the determination of less-than-significant GHG impact after mitigation violates CEQA because it is not supported by substantial evidence. The proposed Project would conflict with applicable plans for the reduction of GHGs and would contribute to a cumulatively significant GHG impact. The City should have concluded that the Project’s GHG impact is significant and included mitigation to the extent required by CEQA.

Response to Comment 7. This is a conclusionary statement that references back to the comment’s assertions in Comments 2 through 6. See Responses to Comments 2 to 6. As detailed in Responses to Comments 2 to 6, the commenter does not provide evidence to contradict the conclusions of the Draft EIR; as such, the document has adequately addressed this issue under CEQA. No changes are warranted in response to the AFTE Comment Letter and no further response is necessary.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 28 Comment Letter 2
Daniel C. Stein
Attorney
Fennemore Dowling Aaron
8080 N. Palm Avenue, 3rd Floor
Fresno, CA 93711
February 7, 2025
Letter 2, page 1
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 29 Letter 2, page 2
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 30 Letter 2, page 3
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 31 Letter 2, page 4
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 32 Letter 2, page 5
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 33 Letter 2, page 6
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 34 Letter 2, page 7
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 35 Letter 2, page 8
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 36 Letter 2, page 9
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 37 Letter 2, page 10
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 38 Letter 2, page 11
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 39 Letter 2, page 12
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 40 Responses to Comment Letter 2
Comment i. Current Design of Ingress and Egress Directs Traffic into Opposite Lanes.

The prior proposed design of ingress and egress from Henderson Avenue into the Project was not consistent with City Standards and noted that if the T-7 standard was applied to the proposed layout, left turning traffic would be directed into the exit lane of the approach. To remedy this, it appears that the current design now creates an uncontrolled left turn pocket further east of the main entrance directing left turn traffic from the westbound traffic across the two lanes of eastbound traffic and right into the primary point of egress from the Burger King which provides no left turn option from vehicles exiting from the Burger King drive-thru. The current design also appears to require relocation of the primary points of ingress and egress to the Burger King given that the central/main entrance to the shopping center has been pushed further west. Notably, however, the traffic entering into the proposed shopping center will drop individuals into what can only be described as a spiders web of parking and three additional quick serve drive-thru restaurants. One of those drive-thru pads appears to have a double lane drive-thru design. Given the anticipate queuing from the drive-thru restaurants, it should be anticipated that queuing will be all the way to Henderson. There is no discussion about how traffic flow or congestion from the queuing of the drivethru pads might affect ingress from Henderson or how that will be addressed. Ultimately, there appears to be too many drive-thru pads for a commercial development of this size and that access to the retail spaces will be largely blocked or otherwise impeded. This would likely create additional hazards for potential fire or emergency responses to the site.

Response to Comment ii: Engineering layouts are not included in the traffic study and the geometric layout of the site access is not pertinent to level of service and operational analysis of the site. Proper engineering and design is be a part of off and on-site plan preparation and permitting. The access layout and design will be prepared using City of Porterville standards and will be reviewed and approved by the City.

The layout of the drive-thru pads mentioned in the comments will be adequate, and will not spill onto Henderson. Drive-thru queues will typically have a maximum of 10 to 12 vehicles, which as shown on the site plan, will be contained within the drive through lanes. The drive-thru lanes were designed to provide adequate queue storage. It would be unreasonable to assume that the queue from the drive-thru would back up further than the queue provided.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 41 Comment ii. The Traffic Study is Insufficient.

It appears that based upon prior criticisms, an additional traffic study was conducted in May 2023 (“2023 Traffic Study”) to correct for errors in the August 2020 Traffic Study (“2020 Traffic Study”) that was wholly inadequate and insufficient. However, the 2023 Traffic Study’s insufficiencies include: (1) failure to include the required CEQA-level VMT analysis; (2) failure to address the impacts of the lack of Prospect Street access to the Project; (3) failure to consider the traffic impacts to surrounding businesses, including my client’s Burger King; and (4) failure to evaluate any traffic signal mitigation measures.

Response to Comment ii: Please see response to comments 1 through 4, below.

Comment 1. CEQA-Level VMT Analysis
Response to Comment 1: The comment summarized the VMT traffic section of the EIR and then states the following:

However, the statement that the retail shops are not over 25,000 square feet is not correct, as at least one of the proposed sites, Major 4, is almost 26,000 square feet with another at 25,000 and the total of approximately 73,500 square feet for the retail portion of the Project. With a total proposed Project consisting of the development of retail and restaurant buildings on approximately 10.54 acres of land, up to a total of 92,060 square feet of building area, this Project does not qualify for local-serving and is instead regionalserving. This is based not only on the size of the proposed Project, but also the close proximity of the proposed location to other regional-serving retail centers, and its inclusion of two large retail businesses.

Response: The commenter mentions a 50,000 sf threshold in the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA prepared by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, which are the guidelines that may be used when a jurisdiction has not adopted its own guidelines.

A local agency is not required to use these guidelines.

Regardless, the City has adopted the County of Tulare SB 743 Guidelines, which govern the analysis of VMTs. Those guidelines screen out certain projects that are presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT, including “local serving retail uses.” As explained in the DEIR, the Project has several hallmarks of local serving retail uses, including the fact that it would offer additional options for shopping locally in Porterville; the project is surrounded by existing uses, and is thus characterized as an infill project that reduces travel distances; and each of the shops will be relatively small in size—i.e., less than approximately 25,000 square feet.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 42 The commenter asserts that these guidelines do not apply because one of the buildings is approximately 26,000 square feet, and the total amount of square footage is approximately 73,500.

This does not change the City’s conclusion. First, the County guidelines do not include specific square footage thresholds. In other words, the 25,000 square foot figure was meant to be illustrative of the size and nature of the use; it was not intended to articulate a screening threshold.

Moreover, the fact that the total square footage will be 92,060 square feet does not suggest that the project would include regional as opposed to local-serving businesses. Rather, because the individual stores are relatively small in size (i.e., approximately 25,000 or less), the building size is not conducive to retail serving regional uses. In fact, the case studies in the County’s guidance document suggest that even a single retail store of 87,035 square feet could be considered localserving retail. In this case, there would be no big box stores approaching even half of that size.

In any event, several additional factors support the conclusion that the Project constitutes localserving retail—i.e., the infill nature of the Project, the location of the Project in the center of the City, and the need for local retail to displace trips to larger communities such as Bakersfield and Visalia. This conclusion is supported by substantial evidence.

In this case where the County of Tulare guidelines do not list a building size for screening, it is appropriate to use the 50,000 sf threshold. None of the buildings or individual shops are over 50,000 sf, in fact, the largest of the buildings is approximately half of the 50,000 threshold. The comment lists the total square footage of buildings on the site, but that is not the correct method to screen retail, the buildings should be analyzed separately. The statement that the project is regional-serving is not backed up by relevant evidence.

Comment:

As the City and the Project proponent are aware, Regional-serving Projects, “can lead to substitution of longer trips for shorter ones, may tend to have a significant impact.” (Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, December 2018, page 16.) State guidance on this topic shows that in general, “…retail Project including stores larger than 50,000 square feet might be considered regional-serving, and so lead agencies should undertake an analysis to determine whether the project might increase or decrease VMT.” (Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, page 17 (2018), (emphasis added).) Even the Tulare County SB 743 Guidelines state that “[i]n cases where there is reasonable doubt on whether a project is local serving or regional, County staff can exercise an option of requesting, or requiring, a market study to assist in the evaluation/determination of localness or regionality.” (Tulare County SB 743 Guidelines, June 8, 2020, at § 3.2.2 (Emphasis added).)
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 43 Response: As an initial matter, the OPR’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA is inapplicable because the City has adopted the County of Tulare’s guidance.

Moreover, the OPR guidance specifically recognizes that “because lead agencies will best understand their own communities and the likely travel behaviors of future project users, they are likely in the best position to decide when a project will likely be local-serving.” Further, the OPR’s guidance specifically contemplates that individual stores less than 50,000 square feet are generally local serving, while stores of over 50,000 square feet “might be considered regional serving.” Here, none of the stores are over 26,000 square feet. Therefore, even if applicable, the OPR guidelines provide further support to screen the Project out from further VMT analysis and likewise support the conclusion that the Project would have less than significant traffic impacts with respect to VMT.

Further, the Tulare County guidelines do say when there is a reasonable doubt, the jurisdiction has the option of requiring further studies, however, in this case that finding is supported by substantial evidence, and the fact that the project is locally serving is not in the City’s view subject to reasonable doubt.

Comment: Further, the Project is located adjacent to other existing regionally-serving retail shopping centers, such as the Walmart retail center at the northwest corner of the Henderson Avenue/Prospect Avenue intersection, and the Target/Kohl’s retail center at the southwest corner of the Henderson Avenue/Prospect Avenue intersection. This further supports the conclusion that the project is regional-serving along with the fact that the Project will provide retail space for a DD’s Discount, Ross Dress for Less, Five Below, and Burlington Coat Factory. (See, Project Map, NWC Henderson Avenue & State HW 65, Retail California). Ross Dress for Less and Burlington Coat Factory are both regional-serving retail. Thus, the proposed retail center is regional-serving. and will likely lead to an a net increase in total VMT and a likelihood of significant transportation impacts that must be fairly evaluated. (See, Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, page 26.)
Response: As stated above, whether the project is located adjacent to larger stores has no bearing on whether this project and how it is categorized. The comment states that the stores listed are regional-serving, but does not give evidence to support this assertion. The retail stores listed in the comment will offer additional shopping options for the residents of Porterville, instead of leaving town to go to these stores, they will be able to stay in town and therefore will reduce driving distances for those trips which will not leave Porterville. The additional shopping options is further evidence that the project is locally serving and not regional. Screening evaluation is part of the VMT analysis methodology and if the project screen out, as it does with this project, there is no need for further evaluation. This is a fair evaluation as defined in the State and Tulare County (adopted by Porterville) guidelines.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 44 Comment: The Project proponent and the City cannot end run around CEQA’s VMT analysis requirement by simply concluding under these circumstances that the Project is “local-serving”.

To do so would make the final EIR completely inadequate and defective. Therefore, the EIR must appropriately consider the proposed retail Project as regional-serving and undertake a CEQAlevel VMT analysis.

Response: Screening criteria is listed in the guidelines and is part of the VMT analysis. The screening analysis is adequate in and of itself as stated in the guidelines. Substantial evidence supports the City’s conclusion that the Project is local serving, and no further analysis is warranted.

The fact that the project is in close proximity to two large retail buildings does not make this project regional-serving. Regional-serving criteria is based on the size and use of the building under consideration. For instance, if a fast food restaurant is adjacent to a regional serving retail use, the fast food restaurant will still be considered locally serving based on it’s size and use. As a result, the City does not consider adjacent retail uses as a factor in determining whether a use is “regionalserving.” Comment 2. Prospect Street Access Issues
The City has previously stated in its September 4, 2020 letter to Project Development Team that, “[t]he Fire Department requires an alternative fire access that is readily accessible and separate from the primary point of access. Given the commercial nature of this area, and the residential use and zoning of the northerly properties, Prospect and Henderson have been consistently cited as points of connection.” (September 4, 2020 Letter from Community Development Department to Project Development Team.) Similarly, the City has stated that, “[b]uilding permits will not be issued without the recorded cross access agreements in place.

The Project Code references the importance of adequate circulation, but the requirement to provide access for all parcels to Henderson Avenue and to Prospect Street is generated by the Fire Department.” (September 4, 2020 Letter from Community Development Department to Project Development Team (Emphasis added).) Thus, it appears that the City was going to require access to the Project from Prospect Street for potential fire access, yet it does not appear that in the development plan that this separate access will be provided. Prospect Street access was also not considered as a mitigation measure to the Project’s apparent “significant and unavoidable environmental impacts”. There is no explanation for the failure to consider alternative access from Prospect as a mitigation measure in the Draft EIR.

Response to Comment 2: The City will require a secondary access for the Project, which will be accommodated via Prospect Street, Mulberry Avenue, or Bel Aire Circle. The Project entitlements Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 45 will conditionally approve the Project with the condition that the applicant will provide the required second access, which will be verified by City staff during the plan check review process.

Comment 3. Traffic Impacts to Existing Surrounding Businesses Must Be Studied and Fairly Considered.

As previously raised, the Draft EIR should have studied and fully analyzed the impacts of the Project on the surrounding businesses. Although the 2023 Traffic Study provided a level of service (LOS) analysis to the impact on surrounding intersections, it did not include the project trips at the two project driveways on Henderson Avenue on its project trip assignment exhibit and did not conduct the level of service (LOS) analyses for the two project driveways on Henderson Avenue. Additionally, neither the Draft EIR nor anywhere in the 2023 Traffic Study was there any disclosure or evaluation of the severe impact that the two-proposed driveways on Henderson Avenue would have on the existing driveways that currently serve the Burger King restaurant located at 1092 W. Henderson Avenue. There was likewise no effort to collect traffic counts at the existing driveways to determine the impact of the proposed retail project traffic on the existing Burger King driveway operations. This analysis was specifically requested previously to be included within the scope of the Draft EIR.

Response to Comment 3: The City of Porterville uses the Caltrans Guide to Traffic Impact Studies for traffic study requirements. The Caltrans guidelines do not require analysis of driveways, nor do they consider them as relevant. Driveway layout and design will be prepared in accordance with City standards and be reviewed and approved by the City of Porterville. Anytime a largescale development is planned, access points must be considered. If the existing access points can remain without having an impact on the overall circulation, then they can be left in place. For this development, existing driveways would end up being too close to the new proposed ones. Modified access points had to be consolidated in order to avoid safety concerns by minimizing the number of movements and conflicts in and out of the area. The existing Burger Kings accesses were incorporated into the proposed layout to allow it to integrate as much as possible into the new overall site. Therefore, driveway analysis is not required.

Comment 4. Traffic Signal Mitigation Measure Must Be Evaluated and Included.

It appears that there will be no traffic signal associated with the ingress/egress points to the Project site. Prior studies of the Project recommended either a left-in worm island median or a single-lane roundabout instead of the traffic signal. However, none of the studies to date have Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 46 provided any explanation as to why the installation of a traffic signal was not recommended at the intersection, despite the installation of the traffic signal being warranted under every analysis scenario, including existing conditions. Additionally, the 2023 Traffic Study did not analyze the impact of not including a traffic signal at the intersection, which would potentially contribute to excessive queueing and an increase of idling cars, potentially also affecting the off ramps of SR65. The Draft EIR should have included the alternative of installing a traffic signal to control the traffic surrounding the Project.

Response to Comment 4: It would not be in the purview of the study or the City of Porterville to recommend a signal at a driveway, which is not a City maintained facility. Signals at project driveways, if desired, are initiated by the owner and would need to go through a rigorous study and approval process through the City of Porterville.

The comment states that the signal is warranted, but does not offer any evidence. The study did not conclude that the intersection would meet warrants for a signal. Installing a signal that does not meet warrants may cause more harm than benefit by creating hazards and/or congestion. The potential for queueing for westbound traffic at a theoretical signal at the driveway may block traffic at the southbound offramp, which would create significant safety concerns. As a result, no signal is recommended at this location.

Comment iii. The EIR Fails to Provide Sufficient Information on Project and Traffic Impacts to Support a Statement of Overriding Considerations Even with the mitigation measures described in Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures, of this Draft EIR, impacts in this issue area would be significant and unavoidable.” (DEIR at ES-4.)
Chapter 3, section 3.17 provides information and analysis on transportation/traffic. Despite utilizing an improper LOS analysis and not a VMT analysis, the Draft EIR admits that “the intersections at North Prospect Street and West Henderson Avenue and at North Newcomb Street and West Henderson Avenue, at both AM and PM Peak Hours, will be at LOS E with Project implementation.” (DEIR at 3.0-236.) The Draft EIR then proposes the following mitigation measures: 1) Modifying the eastbound right turn lane to eastbound through/right lane traffic at North Prospect Street and West Henderson Avenue; 2) Modifying the westbound right turn lane to westbound through/right lane at North Prospect Street and West Henderson Avenue; 3) Adding one westbound through lane at North Newcomb Street and West Henderson Avenue; and 4) Modifying the northbound through/right lane to northbound right turn lane at North Newcomb Street and West Henderson Avenue. (Id.)
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 47 The Draft EIR then admits, without discussion, that despite these proposed mitigation measures, those same intersections will be at LOS E after mitigation. Thus, “[i]ntersection and roadway segment improvements will be needed in the years 2025 and 2043 to maintain or improve the operational level of service of the street system in the vicinity of the Project; however, the intersection at North Prospect Street and West Henderson Avenue will remain at a LOS E after mitigation implementation. Therefore, with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, the Project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts.” (DEIR at 3.0-238.) This same conclusion is repeated, without further discussion under the cumulative impacts portion of the Draft EIR. (See, DEIR at 3.0-240.) There is no explanation or discussion on any other mitigation measures that were or should have been considered that would mitigate the noted significant impacts or why any such mitigation measures would not be feasible under the circumstances. One notable missing discussion was alternative access from Prospect Ave as noted above.

Response: Senate Bill 743 took effect July 1, 2020, and changed how transportation impacts of land use projects are evaluated under CEQA. It replaces the previous focus on traffic congestion (Level of Service, or LOS) with the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) metric.

Automobile delay, as described solely by LOS or similar measure of traffic congestion, is no longer considered a significant impact under CEQA. A recent appellate court decision (Citizens for Positive Growth and Preservation v. City of Sacramento (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 609) confirmed that traffic congestion is no longer an environmental impact under CEQA.

Additionally, SB 743 “does not preclude the application of local general plan policies, zoning codes, conditions of approval, thresholds, or any other planning requirements pursuant to the police power or any other authority.” (see Pub. Resources Code, Section 21099(b)(4). However, OPR has provided guidance on why LOS standards should not be included within general plans.1 According to OPR, even if a general plan contains an LOS standard and a project is found to exceed that standard, that conflict should not be analyzed under CEQA. CEQA is focused on planning conflicts that lead to environmental impacts. (The Highway 68 Coalition v. County of Monterey (2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 883; see, e.g., Appendix G, IX(b) [asking whether the project will “Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?”].) Auto delay, on its own, is no longer an environmental impact under CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21099(b)(2).)
1 California Office of Planning and Research. General Plan Guidelines. Appendix B – Transportation Safety. General Plan Guidelines - Appendix B. Accessed July 2025.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 48 Comment from introduction and conclusion:

Our prior letters and comments raised several flaws in the traffic analysis, air quality impact and impacts from loss of residential zoning that should have been adequately addressed in the Draft EIR. Overall, we do not believe that the Draft EIR satisfies its duty in evaluating the impacts caused by the proposed Project.

Instead, the Draft EIR attempts to end run around CEQA’s requirements that environmental impacts be properly studied, evaluated and significant impacts be mitigated by asking the City to simply issue a statement of overriding considerations.

The City has a responsibility to fully analyze and consider the potential impacts that the proposed Project will have on the surrounding environment and the community. As it stands, there are several environmental and traffic concerns regarding the proposed Project that have still not yet been adequately evaluated and feasible mitigation measures that have yet to be considered. The Draft EIR must address these concerns in its final EIR submitted to the City for the City to be able to comply with its statutory obligations under CEQA.

Response: The comment notes that the commenter issued prior letters and comments raising flaws in the traffic analysis, air quality impact, and impacts from loss of residential zoning that should have been adequately addressed in the Draft EIR.

The Draft EIR incorporated sufficient information to properly consider the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project, including, among others, those relating to air quality, transportation, and land use. In regard to the air quality impact, the commenter fails to identify any specific areas of environmental review that have not been evaluated and disclosed.

The Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report was included as an attachment to the DEIR, and the methodology and analysis presented in the Report are consistent with information disclosed in the DEIR. In addition, model inputs used to estimate air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions were selected to reflect the most accurate project information and values were selected to ensure a conservative estimate of project-generated emissions. As a result, the emission estimates included in the project-specific Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report and the DEIR do not underestimate the project’s generation of emissions for either construction or operations. Furthermore, the DEIR provides substantial evidence for the use of the thresholds used to make the significance determinations for the air quality impacts that relied upon emission estimates. The analysis in the DEIR and the associated significance conclusions related to the project’s potential impacts to air quality resources remain accurate. As detailed in the Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report and summarized in Section 3.3 and 3.8 of the DEIR, the project would result in less than significant impacts for air quality impacts with incorporation of MM AIR-1 and less than significant greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts. As such, a statement of overriding considerations is not needed due to air quality impacts.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 49 The City is of the opinion that potential project impacts related to air quality and GHG have been fully disclosed, adequately analyzed and appropriately mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA, therefore no further analysis is needed. The commenter does not otherwise raise a substantive issue on the content of the EIR.

Comment b. Air Quality Concerns and Green House Gas (GHG) Impacts Must Be Adequately Addressed.

We previously raised concerns about the Project will likely cause an increase in idling cars because of the (1) the design of the ingress and egress into the Project and (2) the inclusion of three double drive-thru pads in the Project. The scope of the Draft EIR must therefore include any environmental impacts from excessive idling from vehicles at the Project site. As discussed above, the current design of the ingress and egress will likely lead to excessive queueing on Henderson Avenue. The excessive queueing on Henderson Avenue will mean that there will be a large number of idling cars, which will likely have significant air impacts.

Additionally, the Project involves the addition of three quick serve drive-thru buildings. Two of the spaces are anticipated to be a Raising Canes and an In N Out, which have a notorious reputation for having long queues. The long queues will likely lead to a large line of vehicles that will be idling for significant periods of time. While the Draft EIR admits that “[m]ost motor vehicle emissions occur when employee and customer vehicles travel to and from the Project site and not during parking and idling on the site.” (DEIR at 3.0-41)
The idling cars from these queuing sources should have been evaluated for potential significant air impacts along with any excessive queueing on Henderson Avenue resulting from the Project. Instead, the Draft EIR used traffic volumes near the Project site, with Project trips, from the traffic impact analysis. (See, DEIR at 3.0-42)
Response: The project’s estimated air pollutant emissions and GHG emissions of concern are disclosed in the Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report, included as an appendix to the DEIR. The Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report includes a breakdown of estimated project emissions by source, explains the methodology and assumptions used to estimate emissions, and includes full modeling output files detailing the emission estimates. The emission estimates incorporated project-specific information, including the weekday, Saturday, and Sunday vehicle trips. As noted in the DEIR, the proposed project would 11,453 average weekday trips after adjustments for internal capture and pass-by trips. These projected trips would generate the majority of the project’s long-term air pollutant and GHG emissions.

Specifically, the City utilized models approved and recommended by the SJVAPCD, which is the authority for this air basin. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) is the expert agency with respect to air emissions and directed that CalEEMod (California Emissions Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 50 Estimator Model) be used to estimate project emissions. CalEEMod is a Statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform to calculate construction and operational emissions from land use development projects, such as the proposed project.

CalEEMod was developed for California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with the California Air Districts. The model is a comprehensive tool for quantifying air quality impacts from land use projects located throughout California, is used throughout California, and can properly be used for a variety of situations where an air quality analysis is necessary, such as preparing CEQA or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents, conducting pre-project planning, and verifying compliance with local air quality rules and regulations. CalEEMod includes the gas and electric utility emissions factors pursuant to the location of the proposed project, as well as building energy zones. CalEEMod also generates default electricity and natural gas consumption that consider Title 24 standards.

The Draft EIR and underlying technical studies correctly used CalEEMod to estimate project emissions, including emissions from vehicle trips and vehicle idling. These emission estimates were compared to the applicable quantitative thresholds in the air quality section and were utilized to inform the air quality analysis. The Lead Agency is of the opinion that potential project impacts related to air quality and GHG have been fully disclosed, adequately analyzed and appropriately mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA, therefore no further analysis is needed. The commenter does not otherwise raise a substantive issue on the content of the EIR.

The commenter also asserts that there would be potentially significant impacts associated with idling cares and CO hot spots. The DEIR, however, was accompanied by a health risk assessment that specifically analyzed health risk associated with such potential impacts. As explained in the EIR at 3.0-48, the Health Risk Assessment found the Project would not exceed the cancer risk or chronic threshold screening levels after mitigation.

Comment: In addition, the Draft EIR for the Project needed to have a sufficient greenhouse gas (GHG) evaluations and mitigation.

The CARB 2017 Scoping Plan states that “achieving no net additional increase in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, is an appropriate overall objective for new development.” (p. 101.)
Unfortunately, there is no GHG data in for this project, either on a short-term construction basis or a longterm analysis to indicate the amount of GHG that will be produced from this project. The failure to conduct a site-specific analysis on this issue renders the Draft EIR defective and subject to judicial challenge.

Instead, the Draft EIR contains several pages of discussions on state and regional guidelines and assessed the Project simply for its consistency with ARB’s adopted Scoping Plans. Those measures then detail other non-project specific measures that are being relied upon to reduce GHG emissions.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 51 Response: The comment’s assertion that “there is no GHG data in for this project, either on a short-term construction basis or a long-term analysis to indicate the amount of GHG that will be produced from this project” is inaccurate, as the project’s estimated GHG emissions are disclosed in the Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report, included as an appendix to the DEIR. The Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis Report includes a breakdown of estimated project GHG emissions by source, explains the methodology and assumptions used to estimate GHG emissions, and includes full modeling output files detailing the emission estimates.

In addition, the DEIR fully analyzes the project’s impacts from GHG emissions. The DEIR derived its GHG significance thresholds from the CEQA Appendix G Guidelines and concluded that the Project would have a less than significant impact (see DEIR pages 3.0-143 to 3.0-163). The comment’s assertions regarding the conclusions presented in the DEIR are not supported by substantial evidence in the record and are not relevant to the City’s exercise of its discretion as to the appropriate threshold to utilize in evaluating GHG impacts. The City of Porterville determined, as supported by the GHG analysis summarized in the DEIR (DEIR pages 3.0-149 to

3.0-162), that project impacts related to GHG have been fully disclosed, adequately analyzed and appropriately mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA, therefore no further analysis is required. No changes to the document have been made or are required in response to this comment.

The commenters also asserts that “California state policy” “requires the state to be net-zero by 2045,” and that the state reduce GHG emission by 85% compared to 1990 level [sic].” Please see Response to Comment 2, where this is fully addressed.

Comment: Significantly, there is a VMT measure in ARB’s adopted Scoping Plans, which the Draft EIR concludes, without having actually done a VMT analysis for this Project, that there is no conflict. Instead, the Draft EIR states that “VMT reductions will play a crucial role in reducing overall transportation energy demand and achieving California’s climate, air quality, and equity goals. ARB did not set regulatory limits on VMT in the 2022 Scoping Plan because the authority to reduce VMT largely lies with state, regional, and local transportation, land use, and housing agencies, along with the Legislature and its budgeting choices. The project-specific traffic report includes a VMT analysis for the project. The traffic report found less than significant VMT impact. As such, the project would not conflict with actions in the vehicle miles traveled sector.” The claim that a VMT analysis was done for this project is simply not a true statement, as discussed above.

Ultimately conclude, the Draft EIR concludes, without much more than blanket conclusions, that full mitigation is not being required and in fact, no mitigation measures to reduce GHG emissions is even proposed. The Draft EIR should have included site specific GHG emissions evaluation and estimates for the construction and operation phases of the project and then require the Project proponents to mitigate those impacts to zero using alternative, reasonably available mitigation measures, like purchasing carbon credits.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 52 Response: An evaluation of VMT for project traffic was conducted in accordance with CEQA requirements and is summarized on pages 3.0-239 to 3.0-240 of the DEIR. As detailed on pages

3.0-239 to 3.0-240 of the DEIR, the project was determined to result in a less than significant VMT impact and transportation impact under CEQA. As such, the statements made in the comment regarding the project’s potential to result in a VMT impact and, thus invalidating the GHG impact analysis, is not accurate and is not supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Regarding the issue that “[t]he Draft EIR should have included site specific GHG emissions evaluation and estimates for the construction and operation phases of the project”, see earlier Response to Comment).

Regarding the issue that the City should require the project to be net-zero (i.e. mitigate “impacts to zero using alternative, reasonably available mitigation measures, like purchasing carbon credits.”), see response to Comment Letter 1, Comment 2).

Regarding the adequacy of the GHG analysis, see response to Comment Letter 1, Comments 2, 3, and 4.

The commenter does not otherwise raise a substantive issue on the content of the EIR. The Lead Agency is of the opinion that potential project impacts related to air quality and GHG have been fully disclosed, adequately analyzed and appropriately mitigated to the extent feasible under CEQA, therefore no further analysis is required. No further changes to the document have been made or are required in response to this comment.

Comment c. Impacts from Loss of Residential Dues to Rezoning. The comment notes information previously presented to the City. It then states that “the loss of residential zoning will increase the traffic in the area. This is especially true since the previous zone was Low-Density Residential, which would have provided less traffic to the area than the Retail Center zone.” Response: The City assumes this comment to assert that the increased traffic refers to number of vehicles and therefore to increased congestion or reduced level-of-service (LOS). Setting aside that CEQA no longer contemplates congestion or LOS impacts, the City contends that it has used the correct environmental baseline in its analysis, i.e., vacant land as opposed to any particular planned land use. Although the City could utilize multiple baselines for its assessment provided sufficient evidence existed to do so, the EIR consistently uses the existing setting—vacant land— as the baseline throughout (see Woodward Park Homeowners Association, Inc. v. City of Fresno (Zinkin) (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 683, 58 Cal.Rptr.3d 102).

The comment discusses the proposed amendment to the General Plan that would change the planned land use of APN 246-240-020 from Low Density Residential to Retail Centers and states Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 53 that, in order to approve the land use change, the City must show a net increase in residential capacity would result from the concurrent zoning text amendment applicable to the RM-3 zone.

The DEIR provides this information at Page 3.0-197 as cited in the comment. However, the EIR mistakenly states that the proposed density increase from 30.0 units per acre to 30.5 units per acre would result in a net increase of 167 potential residential units, with a net gain of approximately 139 units after Project buildout. The density increase will actually result in a net increase of 90 residential units for a net gain of approximately 55 potential residential units. The EIR text has been revised as demonstrated in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR. It should be noted that the City is not under any obligation to ensure that future development occurs at this maximum density, only to ensure that a decrease in potential units at one location is accommodated by an increase in development potentially elsewhere.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page |1 Comment Letter 3
Julie A. Vance
Regional Manager
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Central Region
1234 East Shaw Avenue
Fresno, CA 93710
February 11, 2025
Letter 3, page 1
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 55 Letter 3, page 2
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 56 Letter 3, page 3
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 57 Letter 3, page 4
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 58 Letter 3, page 5
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 59 Letter 3, page 6
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 60 Letter 3, page 7
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 61 Letter 3, page 8
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 62 Letter 3, page 9
Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 63 Responses to Comment Letter 3:

Comment 1: CDFW concurs with pre-construction surveys, nest monitoring and compensation for loss of Swainson’s hawk, and concurs with utilization of the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee survey protocols. CDFW also recommends including an Avoidance Buffer and SWHA Take Authorization mitigation measure.

Response to Comment 1: Swainson’s hawk mitigation is included as BIO-1 and BIO-2 and can be found on Page 3.0-63 of the draft EIR. BIO-1 states that no-work buffers shall be implemented if nests are occupied and if an occupied Swainson’s hawk nest tree is to be removed, an incidental take permit under CESA is to be obtained. As such, the City has addressed and included an avoidance buffer and SWHA Take Authorization. No further response is necessary.

Comment 2: CDFW is concerned that the mitigation included to protect Crotch’s bumble bee is not sufficient to minimize potentially significant impacts. CDFW recommends including mitigation to require a CBB Habitat Assessment and CBB Survey prior to construction.

Response to Comment 2: Mitigation for Crotch’s bumble bee has been included as Mitigation Measure BIO-6 in the Draft EIR, as provided in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR.

Comment 3: CDFW concurs with avoidance measures to protect American badger but would like to reiterate the recommendation noted in the NOP comment letter to conduct pre-construction surveys for AMBA for each phase of the Project development at least ten days prior to the beginning of Project activities.

Response to Comment 3: Mitigation Measure BIO-4 has been included in the EIR which details pre-construction surveys for AMBA. See Chapter 3 of this Final EIR for the text changes to the EIR.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page |1 CHAPTER THREE – Errata / Text Changes to the
DEIR
Revisions and clarifications to the Draft EIR made in response to comments and information received on the Draft EIR are indicated by strikethrough text (e.g., strikethrough), indicating deletions, and underline text (e.g., underline), indicating additions.

These updates and revisions do not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation of the Draft EIR because they do not disclose that a new significant environmental impact would result from the Project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented; that a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance; that a feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the Project proponent decline to adopt it; or that the Draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded (Guidelines Section 15088.5, subdivision (a)). Instead, the information merely clarifies or amplifies the information in the Draft EIR and does not result in any change in impact conclusion.

Text Changes to the Draft EIR:

Chapter 3 – Environmental Setting, Impacts & Mitigation Measures

BIO-4 Prior to any ground disturbing activity, a qualified Biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys for American Badger den sites within suitable habitat located within the Project site. These surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 10 days and no more than 30 days prior to the start of ground disturbing activities in the Project area. A qualified biologist shall establish a 100-foot no-work buffer around occupied maternity dens throughout the pup-rearing season (February 15 through July 1) and a 50- foot no-work buffer around occupied dens during other times of the year. If non-maternity dens are found and cannot be avoided during construction activities, they shall be monitored for badger activity. If the qualified biologist determines that dens may be occupied, passive den exclusion measures Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 65 shall be implemented for three to five days to discourage the use of these dens prior to project disturbance activities.

Chapter 3 – Environmental Setting, Impacts & Mitigation Measures

Suitable CBB habitat includes areas of grasslands and upland scrub that contain requisite habitat elements, such as small mammal burrows, which may be present within Project limits. CBB primarily nest in late February through late October underground in abandoned small mammal burrows but may also nest under perennial bunch grasses or thatched annual grasses, under brush piles, in old bird nests, and in dead trees or hollow logs. Therefore, ground disturbance and vegetation removal associated with project activities have the potential to significantly impact local CBB populations. BIO-3 and BIO-6 is are required to reduce potential impacts to less than significant.

Chapter 3 – Environmental Setting, Impacts & Mitigation Measures

BIO-6 A qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment to determine if the Project site and immediate surrounding vicinity contain habitat suitable to support the Crotch Bumble Bee (CBB). Potential nesting sites, which include all small mammal burrows, perennial bunch grasses, thatched annual grasses, brush piles, old bird nests, dead trees, and hollow logs shall be documented as part of the assessment.

If potentially suitable habitat is identified, a qualified biologist shall conduct focused surveys for CB and their requisite habitat features following the methodology outlined in the Survey Considerations for California Endangered Species Act Candidate Bumble Bee Species.2
Chapter 3 – Environmental Setting, Impacts & Mitigation Measures 2 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2023. Survey considerations for California Endangered Species Act candidate bumble bee species. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, California, USA.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 66

In a process that precedes the development of this EIR, the City has initiated an amendment to the text of the Porterville Development Ordinance such that the maximum density in the RM-3 (High Density Residential) zone would increase from 30.0 to 30.5 units per acre. Taken across the city limits, that modest increase would increase the RM-3 capacity by 167 90 units, for a net gain of approximately 139 55 potential units. The City Council would consider the proposed text amendment at the same meeting at which it considers the proposed Project. Therefore, the City is complying with a statutory mandate and there is no violation of SB 330.

Henderson Commercial Project | Final EIR
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. Page | 67 CHAPTER FOUR – Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program
State law requires that a public agency adopt a monitoring program for mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the approved project to reduce or avoid significant effects on the environment. The purpose of the monitoring program is to ensure compliance with environmental mitigation during project implementation and operation. Since there are potentially significant impacts requiring mitigation associated with the project, a Mitigation Monitoring Program is included herein on the following pages.

Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-1 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
Air Quality
AIR-1:

Before a construction permit is issued for the proposed Project, the Project applicant, Project sponsor, or
construction contractor shall submit provide reasonably detailed compliance with one of the following
requirements to the City of Porterville:

Option 1) Where portable diesel engines are used during construction, all off-road equipment with engines
greater than 75 horsepower shall have engines that
meet either EPA or ARB Tier 4 Interim off-road emission standards.

Option 2) Prior to the issuance of any demolition,
grading, or building permits (whichever occurs earliest), the Project applicant and/or construction contractor
shall prepare a construction operations plan that, during construction activities, requires all off-road equipment with engines greater than 75 horsepower to meet either
the particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 4
Interim engines or be equipped with Level 3 diesel
particulate filters. Tier 4 Interim engines shall, at a minimum, meet EPA or ARB particulate matter emissions
standards for Tier 4 Interim engines. Alternatively, use of ARB-certified Level 3 diesel particulate filters on offroad equipment with engines greater than 75 horsepower
can be used in lieu of Tier 4 Interim engines or in
combination with Tier 4 Interim engines. The construction Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
grading or
building
permits
City of
Porterville
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-2 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
contractor shall maintain records documenting its efforts to comply with this requirement, including equipment
lists. Off-road equipment descriptions and information
shall include, but are not limited to, equipment type,
equipment manufacturer, equipment identification
number, engine model year, engine certification (tier
rating), horsepower, and engine serial number. The
Project applicant, Project sponsor, or construction
contractor shall submit the records of compliance to the City of Porterville.

Biological Resources
BIO-1: Protect nesting Swainson’s hawk
No sooner than 30 days prior to any ground disturbing
activity, a qualified biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys of nests in the Project area and determine if any are occupied. The pre-construction
nest surveys shall follow the protocols set out in the
Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s
Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley
(Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee
[SHTAC] 2000). Any active Swainson’s hawk nests
(defined as a nest used one or more times in the last five years) found within 0.5-mile of the boundary of the
Project site during the nesting season (February 1 to
September 1) will be monitored daily by a qualified
biologist to assess whether the nest is occupied. If the nest is occupied, the qualified biologist will establish nowork buffers following CDFW’s Staff Report Regarding Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
grading or
building
permits
City of
Porterville
and CDFW
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-3 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo
swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California (CDFG
1994), and the status of the nest will be monitored until the young fledge or for the length of construction
activities, whichever occurs first. Adjustments to the
buffer(s) may be made in consultation with CDFW. If an
occupied Swainson’s hawk nest tree is to be removed,
an incidental take permit under CESA will be obtained
and impacts will be minimized and fully mitigated.

BIO-2: Protect Swainson’s hawk foraging ground
Compensate for loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging
habitat (i.e., grasslands on the Project site). in
accordance with the CDFW Staff Report Regarding
Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo
swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California. The CDFW requires that projects adversely affecting Swainson’s
hawk foraging habitat provide Habitat Management
(HM) lands to the department. Projects within 1 mile of an active nest shall provide one acre of HM lands for
each acre of development authorized (1:1 ratio).

Projects within 5 miles of an active nest but greater than 1 mile from the nest shall provide 0.75 acres of HM lands for each acre of urban development authorized (0.75:1
ratio). And projects within 10 miles of an active nest but greater than 5 miles from an active nest shall provide 0.5 acres of HM lands for each acre of urban development
authorized (0.5:1 ratio). No compensation is required if an active nest is not found within 10 miles of the Project Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
grading or
building
permits
City of
Porterville
and CDFW
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-4 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
site.

BIO-3: Protect Crotch Bumble Bee
A qualified biologist shall conduct focused surveys for Crotch Bumble Bee (CBB), and their requisite habitat
features prior to Project implementation to evaluate
impacts resulting from potential ground- and
vegetation-disturbing activities. If surveys cannot be
completed, all small mammal burrows and
thatched/bunch grasses shall avoided by a minimum of
50 feet to avoid take. If ground-disturbing activities will occur during the overwintering period (October through
February), consultation with CDFW is required to discuss how to implement Project activities. Any detection of
CBB prior to or during Project implementation requires
consultation with CDFW to discuss how to avoid take. If CBB is identified during surveys, consultation with CDFW is required to determine if the Project can avoid take. If take cannot be avoided, take authorization prior to any ground-disturbing activities may be warranted. Take
authorization would occur through issuance of an
Incidental Take Permit (ITP) by CDFW, pursuant to Fish
and Game Code Section 2081 subdivision (b).

Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
grading or
building
permits
City of
Porterville
and CDFW
BIO-4: Protect American Badger
Prior to any ground disturbing activity, a qualified
Biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for
American Badger den sites within suitable habitat
Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
grading or
building
permits
City of
Porterville
and CDFW
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-5 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
located within the Project site. These surveys shall be conducted no less than 10 days and no more than 30
days prior to the start of ground disturbing activities in the Project area. A qualified biologist shall establish a 100-foot no-work buffer around occupied maternity
dens throughout the pup-rearing season (February 15
through July 1) and a 50- foot no-work buffer around
occupied dens during other times of the year. If nonmaternity dens are found and cannot be avoided during construction activities, they shall be monitored for badger activity. If the qualified biologist determines that dens may be occupied, passive den exclusion measures
shall be implemented for three to five days to
discourage the use of these dens prior to project
disturbance activities.

BIO-5: Protect nesting birds
Within 30 days prior to ground disturbance activities
associated with construction or grading that would
occur during the nesting/breeding season of native bird species potentially nesting on the site (typically March through August in the project region, or as determined
by a qualified biologist), the applicant shall have weekly surveys conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active nests of bird species protected by the MBTA
and/or the California Fish and Game Code are present
in the disturbance zone or within 300 feet (500 feet for raptors and special-status species) of the disturbance
Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
grading or
building
permits
City of
Porterville
and CDFW
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-6 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
zone. The surveys shall continue on a weekly basis with the last survey being conducted no more than seven
days prior to initiation of disturbance work. If ground disturbance activities are delayed, then additional predisturbance surveys shall be conducted such that no more than seven days will have elapsed between the
survey and ground disturbance activities. If active nests are found, clearing and construction within 300 feet of the nest (500 feet for raptors and special-status species) shall be postponed or halted, at the discretion of the
qualified biologist, until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged, as determined by the qualified biologist, and there is no evidence of a second attempt at
nesting. Limits of construction to avoid an active nest shall be established in the field with flagging, fencing, or other appropriate barriers and construction personnel
shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. The qualified biologist shall serve as a construction monitor during those periods when construction activities will
occur near active nest areas to ensure that no
inadvertent impacts on these nests occur. Results of the surveys shall be provided to CDFW in the Annual
Mitigation Status Report.

BIO-6: Protect Crotch Bumble Bee
A qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment to determine if the Project site and immediate
surrounding vicinity contain habitat suitable to support Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
grading or
building
permits
City of
Porterville
and CDFW
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-7 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
the Crotch Bumble Bee (CBB). Potential nesting sites,
which include all small mammal burrows, perennial
bunch grasses, thatched annual grasses, brush piles, old bird nests, dead trees, and hollow logs shall be
documented as part of the assessment. If potentially
suitable habitat is identified, a qualified biologist shall conduct focused surveys for CB and their requisite
habitat features following the methodology outlined in
the Survey Considerations for California Endangered
Species Act Candidate Bumble Bee Species.

Cultural Resources
CUL – 1:
• Before initiation of construction or ground-disturbing activities associated with the Project, the City shall
require all construction personnel to be alerted to the possibility of buried cultural resources, including historic, archeological and paleontological resources;
• The general contractor and its supervisory staff shall be responsible for monitoring the construction Project for disturbance of cultural resources; and
• If a potentially significant historical, archaeological, or paleontological resource, such as structural features,
unusual amounts of bone or shell, artifacts, human
remains, or architectural remains or trash deposits are encountered during subsurface construction activities
(i.e., trenching, grading), all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the identified potential resource shall Project
Applicant
During
construction
City of
Porterville
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-8 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
cease until a qualified archaeologist evaluates the item for its significance and records the item on the
appropriate State Department of Parks and Recreation
(DPR) forms. The archaeologist shall determine whether
the item requires further study. If, after the qualified archaeologist conducts appropriate technical
analyses, the item is determined to be significant under California Environmental Quality Act, the archaeologist shall recommend feasible mitigation measures, which
may include avoidance, preservation in place or other
appropriate measure, as outlined in Public Resources
Code Section 21083.2. The City of Porterville shall
implement said measures.

CUL – 2:

In order to ensure that the proposed Project does not
impact buried human remains during Project
construction, the Project proponent shall be responsible for on-going monitoring of Project construction. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the Project
proponent shall provide the City with documentation
identifying construction personnel that will be
responsible for on-site monitoring. If buried human
remains are encountered during construction, further
excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall
be halted until the Tulare County coroner is contacted
and the coroner has made the determinations and
Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
any grading
permit and
ongoing
during
construction
City of
Porterville
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-9 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
notifications required pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5. If the coroner determines that
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c) require that
he give notice to the Native American Heritage
Commission, then such notice shall be given within 24
hours, as required by Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5(c). In that event, the NAHC will conduct the
notifications required by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Until the consultations described below have
been completed, the landowner shall further ensure
that the immediate vicinity, according to generally
accepted cultural or archaeological standards or
practices where Native American human remains are
located, is not disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with
the Most Likely Descendants on all reasonable options
regarding the descendants' preferences and
treatments, as prescribed by Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(b). The NAHC will mediate any disputes
regarding treatment of remains in accordance with
Public Resources Code Section 5097.94(k). The
landowner shall be entitled to exercise rights established by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(e) if any of
the circumstances established by that provision
become applicable.

Geology & Soils
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-10 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
GEO – 1
In order to reduce on-site erosion due to project
construction and operation, an erosion control plan and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be
prepared for the site preparation, construction, and
post-construction periods by a registered civil engineer or certified professional. The erosion control plan shall incorporate best management practices consistent
with the requirements of the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The erosion
component of the plan must at least meet the
requirements of the SWPPP required by the Central
Valley RWQCB. If earth disturbing activities are proposed between October 15 and April 15, these activities shall be limited to the extent feasible to minimize potential erosion related impacts. Additional erosion control
measures may be implemented in consultation with the
City of Porterville. Prior to the issuance of any permit, the Project proponent shall submit detailed plans to the
satisfaction of the City of Porterville. The components of the erosion control plan and SWPPP shall be monitored
for effectiveness by the City of Porterville. Erosion control measures may include, but not be limited to, the
following:
i. Limit disturbance of soils and vegetation
disturbance removal to the minimum area
necessary for access and construction;
Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
grading
permits
City of
Porterville
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-11 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
ii. Confine all vehicular traffic associated with
construction to the right-of-way of
designated access roads;
iii. Adhere to construction schedules designed
to avoid periods of heavy precipitation or
high winds;
iv. Ensure that all exposed soil is provided with
temporary drainage and soil protection
when construction activity is shut down
during the winter periods; and
v. Inform construction personnel prior to
construction and periodically during
construction activities of environmental
concerns, pertinent laws and regulations,
and elements of the proposed erosion
control measures.

Transportation
TRA-1:

The Applicant shall pay the City of Porterville for their Fair Share Portion of intersection improvements described in Table 3.17-9 and as summarized below to maintain or
improve the operational level of service of the street
system in the vicinity of the Project.
• 12.5% of adding one westbound through lane,
modify northbound through/right lane to
Project
Applicant
Prior to
issuance of
building
permits
City of
Porterville
Henderson Commercial Project EIR | MMRP
CITY OF PORTERVILLE | Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. MMRP-12 Mitigation Measure
Party
responsible for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing
Party
responsible
for
Monitoring
Verification
(name/
date)
northbound right turn lane at the N Newcomb St &
W Henderson Ave intersection by 2043.
• 41.96% of modifying eastbound right turn lane to
eastbound through/right lane, and modifying
westbound right turn lane to westbound through/right
lane at the N Prospect St & W Henderson Ave
intersection by opening day.

September XX, 2025
California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
Fresno District Office
3640 East Ashlan Ave
Fresno, CA 93726
RE: PRC 2018-024-C
To Whom It May Concern,
The City Council of the City of Porterville has elected to approve the submittal of this letter regarding the public convenience or necessity, to be served through issuance of a Type 21 General Off-sale located at the northwest corner of Henderson Ave and State Route 65, Porterville, CA.

Approval of this letter was based on the following:

1. On September 16, 2025, the City Council approved Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C), to allow the type 21 General Off- sale alcohol license, Porterville, CA.

2. Per Section 23958.4 of the “Business and Professions Code,” the subject site is located within Census Tract 35.04, which allows five (5) off-sale licenses. At the present time, five (5) off-sale licenses exist in this tract. Due to the undue concentration of off-sale licenses a Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity is required.

3. In consideration of the above, the City Council determined that public convenience or necessity will be served by the issuance of a Type 21 – General Off-sale alcohol license.

Further issuance of an off-sale license allowing the brewing and sale of beer, represents a viable economic asset to the community, which will contribute tax revenue to the local economy. The site is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of Retail Centers. It also meets general plan policies that promote accessibility of services and goods within a convenient distance as well as meeting the economic development guiding policy needed to retain, improve, and promote existing businesses in Porterville. The proposed Type 21 -General Off-sale alcohol license suit the purpose of the zone district as well.

For these reasons, the City Council of the City of Porterville supports the issuance of a Type 21 - General Off-sale alcohol license.

Sincerely,
Greg Meister, Mayor
Attachment: Resolution
1 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. ____- 2025
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE TO 1) ADOPT FINDINGS

AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) ; 2) CERTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH # 2023060320) FOR THE PROPOSED HENDERSON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PRC 2018-024); 3) ADOPT THE PROPOSED MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM
WHEREAS: the City of Porterville has received the project known as the Henderson Commercial Development Project, proposing located on six parcels (APNs 246-111-065, -026, - 06, 043 and -045 and 246-240-020) comprising approximately 10.54 acres; and WHEREAS: approval of the Henderson Commercial Development project would require approval of General Plan Amendment (PRC 2018-024-GPA) and a Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C); and
WHEREAS: pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (“CEQA”), the City, as the Lead Agency, has analyzed the proposed Project, including the General Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit and has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2024030738) (as further defined below, the “EIR”) in order to evaluate the proposed Project; and
WHEREAS: in compliance with CEQA Section 21080.4, a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) was prepared by the City and distributed for public comment to the State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research, responsible agencies, and other interested parties for a 30-day public review and comment period from June 13, 2023 through July 13, 2023 and following a scoping meeting during which comments were received, recirculated from July 25, 2023 through August 25, 2023; and
WHEREAS: the Draft EIR (“DEIR”) was circulated for a 45-day public review and comment period from December 24, 2024 through February 9, a copy of the Draft EIR (DEIR) was circulated through the State Clearinghouse (SCH # 2023060320), posted on the City’s website, and was available at the Porterville City Hall; and
WHEREAS: the public review period for the DEIR ended on February 9, 2025; and WHEREAS: a Final EIR (FEIR) was prepared on the proposed Project consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088(b), which addressed comments received on the DEIR, responses to those comments, as well as any appropriate revisions and clarifications to the DEIR; and WHEREAS: the City of Porterville published a legal notice in compliance with State law concerning City Council consideration of the EIR in the local newspaper of general circulation, which included the date and time of the City Council consideration of certification of the EIR. In addition, a public hearing notice was mailed to each property owner within at least 500 feet of Resolution No. ____-2025
2 of 4
the Plan Area, as well as to all property owners within the Plan Area, indicating the date and time of the public hearing regarding the proposed Project (including the EIR) in accordance with State law; and
WHEREAS: on September 2, 2025 the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the EIR as defined below; and
WHEREAS: due to a concern about notification of the availability of the FEIR, the City Council opened the public hearing and continued its consideration to the September 16, 2025, regular meeting at which time it received input from City Staff; public comment portion was opened, and public testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was considered by the City Council, after which public testimony was closed; and.

WHEREAS: the City Council has reviewed the EIR and all associated documents prepared for the project, the staff reports pertaining to the EIR, and all of the evidence received by the City Council; and
WHEREAS: Section 21000 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15000 et. seq. of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (“CEQA Guidelines”) which govern the preparation, content, and processing of EIRs, have been fully implemented in the preparation of the EIR; and WHEREAS: the EIR identified certain significant and potentially significant adverse effects on the environment caused by the Master Plan; and
WHEREAS: the City Council declares that, despite the occurrence of significant environmental effects that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided through adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible alternatives, there exist certain overriding economic, social, technical, and other considerations for approving the project that the Council believes justify the occurrence of those impacts; and
WHEREAS: CEQA Guidelines Section 15043 affirms the City Council’s authority to approve a project even though it may cause significant effects on the environment so long as the Council makes a fully informed and publicly disclosed decision that there is no feasible way to lessen or avoid the significant effects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091) and that there are specifically identified expected benefits from the project that outweigh the policy of reducing or avoiding significant environmental impacts of the project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093); and WHEREAS: after deliberation and consideration of all relevant items, the City Council desires to (1) adopt the findings and statement of overriding considerations required by CEQA Guidelines; (2) certify the EIR; (3) adopt the proposed mitigation monitoring and reporting program (“MMRP); and
WHEREAS: all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Porterville resolves as follows:

Resolution No. ____-2025
3 of 4

1. Recitals. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all the facts set forth in the recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.

2. EIR Contents. The EIR consists of the Final EIR including any attached appendices, the Draft EIR including attached appendices, the Notice of Preparation and comments received in response to the Notice of Preparation, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, additions and corrections in the remaining portions of the Draft EIR that have been made pursuant to public comments and Draft EIR review including all appendices attached thereto, comments received on the Draft EIR with responses to each of the comments made, the Notice of Completion and Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR for public review, and any other information added by the Lead Agency, all hereafter collectively referred to as the “EIR” and attached hereto as Exhibit A of this Resolution.

3. Accompanying Documents to the EIR. Documents that shall accompany and be part of the EIR are the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Chapter 4 of the FIER) and Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit B).

4. Certification of Compliance with CEQA. The City Council does hereby find that the EIR (Exhibit A), the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Chapter 4 of the FIER), and Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit B) have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.

5. CEQA Findings of Fact, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
a. Adopt Findings of Fact. The City Council approves, accepts as its own, incorporates as if set forth in full herein, and makes each and every one of the findings contained in the Findings of Fact (Exhibit B).
b. Certify Environmental Impact Report. The City Council certifies that 1) the EIR has been completed in accordance with CEQA, 2) the City Council reviewed and considered information contained in the EIR prior to approving the project, and 3) the EIR reflects the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis. c. Feasible and Binding Effect of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The City Council finds that the mitigation measures described and specifically identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are feasible and shall become binding upon the entity (such as the project proponent or the City) assigned thereby Resolution No. ____-2025
4 of 4
to implement the particular mitigation measures as identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
d. Adopt Statement of Overriding Considerations. Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects caused by the proposed modified Project directly, or cumulatively, will remain.

The proposed Project has been carefully reviewed and the policies included in the proposed Project along with the mitigation measures identified in the EIR have avoided or substantially lessened several environmental impacts, to the extent feasible. Nonetheless, the proposed Project may have certain environmental effects which cannot be avoided or substantially lessened. The City has carefully considered all the environmental impacts that have not been mitigated to an insignificant level.

Therefore, the City Council issues and approves the attached Statement of Overriding Considerations which identifies the specific economic, legal, social, technological and other considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable.
e. Adopt Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The City Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The City Council finds that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is designed to ensure that during Project implementation, the City and any other responsible parties implement the Project components and comply with the mitigation measures identified in the Findings of Fact and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Porterville does hereby approve the Environmental Impact in a manner consistent with City codes and plans, and that the mitigation measures defined in Chapter 4 of Exhibit A shall be implemented by the developer/applicant or their partners and successors with project implementation.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 2025. ____________________________
Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:

Richard Tree, Acting City Clerk
By _________________________________
Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk
1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. ___-2025

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING THE LAND USE DIAGRAM OF THE 2030 GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE PLANNED LAND USE OF APN 246-240-020 FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO RETAIL CENTERS AS PART OF THE

HENDERSON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville at its regularly scheduled meeting of September 2, 2025, held a public hearing to consider the Henderson Commercial Development Project (Project) at the northwest corner of Henderson and State Route 65 (APNs 246-111-065, - 026, -06, 043 and -045 and 246-240-020) and comprising approximately 10.54 acres; and WHEREAS: Due to a concern about notification of the availability of the Final EIR associated with the project, the City Council opened the public hearing and continued its consideration of the item to September 16, 2025; and
WHEREAS: The Project proposes to construct approximately 92,000 square feet of mixed commercial uses; and
WHEREAS: APN 246-240-002 is shown on the Land Use Diagram of the Land Use Element of the 2030 General Plan as Low Density Residential.

WHEREAS: General Plan Amendment (PRC 2018-024-GPA) proposes to change the planned land use of APN 246-240-020 from Low Density Residential to Retail Centers; and WHEREAS: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66300(b)(1)(A), the City may not take action that has the effect of reducing the developable density with respect to land where housing is an allowable use unless pursuant to Government Code Section 66300(h)(1) it takes concurrent action to change policies or regulations applicable to other property to ensure there is no net loss of residential capacity; and
WHEREAS: As it pertains to the subject situation, “concurrently” is defined in Government Code Section 66300(h)(2)(A) as “at the same meeting of the legislative body;” and WHEREAS: under a concurrent separate action on September 16, 2025, the City Council will consider amendments to the Land Use Element of the 2030 General Plan and the Porterville Development Ordinance to increase the allowable density in the High-Density Land Use Designation and the RM-3 zone district, respectively, with the record reflecting that said increase in density will result in an overall increase to residential capacity; and WHEREAS: On September 16, 2025, the City Council certified an environmental impact report (SCH# 2023060320) prepared for the Project; and
Resolution No.____-2025
2 of 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Porterville that the Land Use Diagram of the Land Use Element of the 2030 General Plan is hereby amended to reflect Assessor’s Parcel No. 246-240-020 as Retail Centers as shown in Exhibit A for the proposed Commercial Development Project (PRC-2018-024).

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 2025. ____________________________
Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:

Richard Tree, Interim City Clerk
By _________________________________
Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk

RESOLUTION NO. ___-2025

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE CONTAINING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS IN SUPPORT OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PRC 2018-024-C),

AUTHORIZING THE HENDERSON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND THE SALE OF ALCOHOL UNDER A TYPE 21 GENERAL OFF-SALE LICENSE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HENDERSON AND STATE ROUTE 65
WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville, at its regular scheduled meeting of September 2, 2025, opened and continued a public hearing to September 16, 2025, to consider the Henderson Commercial Development Project (Project) at the northwest corner of Henderson and State Route 65 (APNs 246-111-065, -026, -06, 043 and -045 and 246-240-020) and comprising approximately 10.54 acres; and
WHEREAS: On August 8, 2025, a notice was published in The Porterville Recorder setting the date, and place of a public hearing for Tuesday, September 2, 2025, and similar notices were sent to owners of property within 500 feet radius of the site and posted at City Hall and the City’s website announcing the same; and
WHEREAS: On September 3, 2025, Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was provided to the three commenters; and WHEREAS: On September 5, a NOA of the FEIR was published to the Porterville Recorder, City Website and posted at City Hall and the Temporary Porterville Library; and WHEREAS: Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C) is proposed to facilitate development and operation of a mixed commercial center of approximately 92,000 square feet, including the sale of alcohol under a Type 21 off-sale general; and WHEREAS: PDO Section 604.04. provides an avenue by which the City Council, upon making necessary findings for approval of a Conditional Use Permit; and WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville received testimony from all interested parties related to the Project; and
WHEREAS: The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) allows for a specific number of licenses per census tract, based on population. The subject site is located within Census Tract 35.04 and allows for four (4) On-Sale and five (5) Off-Sale alcohol licenses, without being deemed over-concentrated. Census Tract 35.04 currently contains three (3) OnSale licenses for alcohol sales and five (5) Off-Sale licenses for alcohol sales.

WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville authorized Mayor Meister to sign the Letter of Public Convenience or Necessity due to the undue concentration of alcohol licenses within Census Tract 35.04; and
Resolution No. ____-2025

WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville adopted Resolution No. ____-2025, thereby certifying an environmental impact report (SCH# 2023060320) for the Henderson Commercial Development Project, of which Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C) is a component; and
WHEREAS: The City Council of the City of Porterville received testimony from all interested parties related to said Conditional Use Permit (PRC 2018-024-C); and WHEREAS: The City Council made the following findings pursuant to PDO Section 604.04, the evidence for said findings substantiated in the record:

1. That the proposed project will advance the goals and objectives of, and is consistent with, the policies of the General Plan and any other applicable plan that the City has adopted.
• LU-G-1: Promote a sustainable balanced land use pattern that responds to existing needs and future needs of the city.
• ED-G-2: Retain, improve, and promote existing businesses in Porterville. • ED-G-5: Retain existing local businesses and foster local start-ups. • ED-G-7: Create an image for Porterville that will attract and retain economic activity.

2. The subject site is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning Standards for CR (Retail Centers). The CR designation is intended to maintain a full range of retail uses. The proposed convenience store with alcohol sales would suit the purpose of the zone designation. The convenience store is a permitted use in the CR Zone, and alcohol sales may be permitted in that zone with the requested Conditional Use Permit.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Porterville that the Henderson Commercial Development Project is hereby approved subject to compliance with all comments outlined in the PRC Comments provided for PRC 2018-024. / / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
Resolution No. ____-2025

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 2025. ____________________________
Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:

Richard Tree, Interim City Clerk
By _________________________________
Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the Henderson Commercial Project
City of Porterville
August 2025
Introduction
Section 15091 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (and Section 21081 of the California Public Resources Code) require a public agency, prior to approving a project, to identify significant impacts of the project and make one or more written findings for each such impact. According to Section 21081, “no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur:
(a) The public agency makes one or more of the possible findings with respect to each significant effect:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.

2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identifies in the environmental impact report.
(b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.”
Section 21081.6 of CEQA also requires public agencies to adopt a monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring the implementation of proposed mitigation measures. The mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) for the Henderson Commercial Project, which is provided under a separate cover, are those identified within this Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.

The Statement of Overriding Considerations is a written statement explaining the specific reasons why the social, economic, legal, technical, or other beneficial aspects of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts and why the Lead Agency is willing to accept such impacts. This statement shall be based on the final EIR and/or other substantial evidence in the record.

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Statement of Environmental Effects and Required Findings This section discusses the impacts and mitigation measures identified for the Proposed Project and makes findings for all areas of potential impact. The EIR focused on those potential effects of the Proposed Project on the environment that the Lead Agency, i.e., City of Porterville (City), has determined may be significant. Chapter 3 of the EIR determined that the Proposed Project would have either no impact or less than significant impacts regarding the following issue areas:
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture & Forestry Resources
• Energy
• Greenhouse Gases / Climate Change
• Hazards & Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology & Water Quality
• Land Use & Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Tribal Cultural Resources
• Utilities & Service Systems
• Wildfire
As described in Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines, and detailed in the EIR, these issues have no potential for significant impacts and required no further environmental review or analysis beyond the discussion in Chapter 3 of the Draft EIR.

Significant or potentially significant impacts prior to the application of mitigation measures have been identified for the Proposed Project in the following areas:
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Geology & Soils
• Transportation/Traffic
These resources are discussed in further detail below.

Air Quality
Description of Potential Effects
The Proposed Project would the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s significance criteria for exposure to toxic air contaminants, specifically diesel particulate matter, a known cancer-causing pollutant. Therefore, the Proposed Project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. However, with mitigation impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts related to construction and operation of the Proposed Project related to air quality:

Mitigation Measure AIR-1
Before a construction permit is issued for the proposed Project, the Project applicant, Project sponsor, or construction contractor shall submit provide reasonably detailed compliance with one of the following requirements to the City of Porterville:

Option 1 Where portable diesel engines are used during construction, all off-road equipment with engines greater than 75 horsepower shall have engines that meet either EPA or ARB Tier 4 Interim off-road emission standards.

Option 2 Prior to the issuance of any demolition, grading, or building permits (whichever occurs earliest), the Project applicant and/or construction contractor shall prepare a construction operations plan that, during construction activities, requires all off-road equipment with engines greater than 75 horsepower to meet either the particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 4 Interim engines or be equipped with Level 3 diesel particulate filters. Tier 4 Interim engines shall, at a minimum, meet EPA or ARB particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 4 Interim engines. Alternatively, use of ARB-certified Level 3 diesel particulate filters on offroad equipment with engines greater than 75 horsepower can be used in lieu of Tier 4 Interim engines or in combination with Tier 4 Interim engines. The construction contractor shall maintain records documenting its efforts to comply with this requirement, including equipment lists. Off-road equipment descriptions and information shall include, but are not limited to, equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment identification number, engine model year, engine certification (tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number. The Project applicant, Project sponsor, or construction contractor shall submit the records of compliance to the City of Porterville.

Findings
For the above impacts to air quality, the following finding is made. ☒ Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. ☐ Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
☐ Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

The potential impacts to air quality from implementation of the Proposed Project are found to be less than significant with mitigation.

References
Section 3.3 of the EIR addresses the Project’s air quality impacts.

Biological Resources
Description of Potential Effects
The site of the Proposed Project has the potential to support special status species, and therefore the Proposed Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on Swainson’s hawk, Crotch bumble bee, the American badger, and nesting birds, all of which are species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. However, with mitigation impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts related to construction and operation of the Proposed Project related to biological resources:

Mitigation Measure BIO-1
No sooner than 30 days prior to any ground disturbing activity, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys of nests in the Project area and determine if any are occupied. The preconstruction nest surveys shall follow the protocols set out in the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee [SHTAC] 2000). Any active Swainson’s hawk nests (defined as a nest used one or more times in the last five years) found within 0.5-mile of the boundary of the Project site during the nesting season (February 1 to September 1) will be monitored daily by a qualified biologist to assess whether the nest is occupied. If the nest is occupied, the qualified biologist will establish no-work buffers following CDFW’s Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California (CDFG 1994), and the status of the nest will be monitored until the young fledge or for the length of construction activities, whichever occurs first. Adjustments to the buffer(s) may be made in consultation with CDFW. If an occupied Swainson’s hawk nest tree is to be removed, an incidental take permit under CESA will be obtained and impacts will be minimized and fully mitigated.

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Mitigation Measure BIO-2
Compensate for loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat (i.e., grasslands on the Project site). in accordance with the CDFW Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California. The CDFW requires that projects adversely affecting Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat provide Habitat Management (HM) lands to the department. Projects within 1 mile of an active nest shall provide one acre of HM lands for each acre of development authorized (1:1 ratio). Projects within 5 miles of an active nest but greater than 1 mile from the nest shall provide 0.75 acres of HM lands for each acre of urban development authorized (0.75:1 ratio). And projects within 10 miles of an active nest but greater than 5 miles from an active nest shall provide 0.5 acres of HM lands for each acre of urban development authorized (0.5:1 ratio). No compensation is required if an active nest is not found within 10 miles of the Project site.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3
A qualified biologist shall conduct focused surveys for Crotch Bumble Bee (CBB), and their requisite habitat features prior to Project implementation to evaluate impacts resulting from potential ground- and vegetation-disturbing activities. If surveys cannot be completed, all small mammal burrows and thatched/bunch grasses shall avoided by a minimum of 50 feet to avoid take. If ground-disturbing activities will occur during the overwintering period (October through February), consultation with CDFW is required to discuss how to implement Project activities. Any detection of CBB prior to or during Project implementation requires consultation with CDFW to discuss how to avoid take. If CBB is identified during surveys, consultation with CDFW is required to determine if the Project can avoid take. If take cannot be avoided, take authorization prior to any ground-disturbing activities may be warranted. Take authorization would occur through issuance of an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) by CDFW, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 2081 subdivision (b).

Mitigation Measure BIO-4
Prior to any ground disturbing activity, a qualified Biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for American Badger den sites within suitable habitat located within the Project site. These surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to the start of ground disturbing activities in the Project area. A qualified biologist shall establish a 100-foot nowork buffer around occupied maternity dens throughout the pup-rearing season (February 15 through July 1) and a 50- foot no-work buffer around occupied dens during other times of the year. If non-maternity dens are found and cannot be avoided during construction activities, they shall be monitored for badger activity. If the qualified biologist determines that dens may be occupied, passive den exclusion measures shall be implemented for three to five days to discourage the use of these dens prior to project disturbance activities.

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Mitigation Measure BIO-5
Within 30 days prior to ground disturbance activities associated with construction or grading that would occur during the nesting/breeding season of native bird species potentially nesting on the site (typically March through August in the project region, or as determined by a qualified biologist), the applicant shall have weekly surveys conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active nests of bird species protected by the MBTA and/or the California Fish and Game Code are present in the disturbance zone or within 300 feet (500 feet for raptors and special-status species) of the disturbance zone. The surveys shall continue on a weekly basis with the last survey being conducted no more than seven days prior to initiation of disturbance work. If ground disturbance activities are delayed, then additional pre-disturbance surveys shall be conducted such that no more than seven days will have elapsed between the survey and ground disturbance activities. If active nests are found, clearing and construction within 300 feet of the nest (500 feet for raptors and special-status species) shall be postponed or halted, at the discretion of the qualified biologist, until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged, as determined by the qualified biologist, and there is no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. Limits of construction to avoid an active nest shall be established in the field with flagging, fencing, or other appropriate barriers and construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. The qualified biologist shall serve as a construction monitor during those periods when construction activities will occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur. Results of the surveys shall be provided to CDFW in the Annual Mitigation Status Report.

Findings
For the above impacts to biological resources, the following finding is made. ☒ Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. ☐ Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. ☐ Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

The potential impacts to biological resources from implementation of the Proposed Project are found to be less than significant with mitigation.

References
Section 3.4 of the EIR addresses the Project’s biological resource impacts.

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Cultural Resources
Description of Potential Effects
Subsurface construction activities of the Proposed Project could potentially damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic or archaeological resources, or potentially uncover human remains. However, with mitigation impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts related to construction and operation of the Proposed Project related to cultural resources:

Mitigation Measure CUL-1
The following measures shall be implemented:
• Before initiation of construction or ground-disturbing activities associated with the Project, the City shall require all construction personnel to be alerted to the possibility of buried cultural resources, including historic, archeological and paleontological resources; • The general contractor and its supervisory staff shall be responsible for monitoring the construction Project for disturbance of cultural resources; and • If a potentially significant historical, archaeological, or paleontological resource, such as structural features, unusual amounts of bone or shell, artifacts, human remains, or architectural remains or trash deposits are encountered during subsurface construction activities (i.e., trenching, grading), all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the identified potential resource shall cease until a qualified archaeologist evaluates the item for its significance and records the item on the appropriate State Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms. The archaeologist shall determine whether the item requires further study. If, after the qualified archaeologist conducts appropriate technical analyses, the item is determined to be significant under California Environmental Quality Act, the archaeologist shall recommend feasible mitigation measures, which may include avoidance, preservation in place or other appropriate measure, as outlined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. The City of Porterville shall implement said measures.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2
In order to ensure that the proposed Project does not impact buried human remains during Project construction, the Project proponent shall be responsible for on-going monitoring of Project construction. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the Project proponent shall provide the City with documentation identifying construction personnel that will be responsible for on-site monitoring. If buried human remains are encountered during construction, further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall be halted until the Tulare County coroner is contacted and the coroner has made the determinations and notifications required pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5.

If the coroner determines that Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c) require that he give Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
notice to the Native American Heritage Commission, then such notice shall be given within 24 hours, as required by Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c). In that event, the NAHC will conduct the notifications required by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Until the consultations described below have been completed, the landowner shall further ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices where Native American human remains are located, is not disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the Most Likely Descendants on all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences and treatments, as prescribed by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b). The NAHC will mediate any disputes regarding treatment of remains in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 5097.94(k).

The landowner shall be entitled to exercise rights established by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(e) if any of the circumstances established by that provision become applicable.

Findings
For the above impacts to cultural resources, the following finding is made. ☒ Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. ☐ Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. ☐ Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

The potential impacts to cultural resources from implementation of the Proposed Project are found to be less than significant with mitigation.

References
Section 3.5 of the EIR addresses the Project’s biological resource impacts.

Geology & Soils
Description of Potential Effects
Subsurface construction of the Proposed Project could result in substantial soil erosion, the loss of topsoil, and potentially uncover unique paleontological resources. However, with mitigation these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts related to construction and operation of the Proposed Project related to geology and soils:

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Mitigation Measure GEO-1
In order to reduce on-site erosion due to project construction and operation, an erosion control plan and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared for the site preparation, construction, and post-construction periods by a registered civil engineer or certified professional. The erosion control plan shall incorporate best management practices consistent with the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The erosion component of the plan must at least meet the requirements of the SWPPP required by the Central Valley RWQCB. If earth disturbing activities are proposed between October 15 and April 15, these activities shall be limited to the extent feasible to minimize potential erosion related impacts. Additional erosion control measures may be implemented in consultation with the City of Porterville. Prior to the issuance of any permit, the Project proponent shall submit detailed plans to the satisfaction of the City of Porterville. The components of the erosion control plan and SWPPP shall be monitored for effectiveness by the City of Porterville. Erosion control measures may include, but not be limited to, the following:
i. Limit disturbance of soils and vegetation disturbance removal to the minimum area necessary for access and construction;
ii. Confine all vehicular traffic associated with construction to the right-of-way of designated access roads;
iii. Adhere to construction schedules designed to avoid periods of heavy precipitation or high winds;
iv. Ensure that all exposed soil is provided with temporary drainage and soil protection when construction activity is shut down during the winter periods; and v. Inform construction personnel prior to construction and periodically during construction activities of environmental concerns, pertinent laws and regulations, and elements of the proposed erosion control measures.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1
The following measures shall be implemented:
• Before initiation of construction or ground-disturbing activities associated with the Project, the City shall require all construction personnel to be alerted to the possibility of buried cultural resources, including historic, archeological and paleontological resources; • The general contractor and its supervisory staff shall be responsible for monitoring the construction Project for disturbance of cultural resources; and • If a potentially significant historical, archaeological, or paleontological resource, such as structural features, unusual amounts of bone or shell, artifacts, human remains, or architectural remains or trash deposits are encountered during subsurface construction activities (i.e., trenching, grading), all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the identified potential resource shall cease until a qualified archaeologist evaluates the item for its significance and records the item on the appropriate State Department of Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms. The archaeologist shall determine whether the item requires further study. If, after the qualified archaeologist conducts appropriate technical analyses, the item is determined to be significant under California Environmental Quality Act, the archaeologist shall recommend feasible mitigation measures, which may include avoidance, preservation in place or other appropriate measure, as outlined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. The City of Porterville shall implement said measures.

Findings
For the above impacts to geology and soils, the following finding is made. ☒ Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. ☐ Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. ☐ Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

The potential impacts to geology and soils from implementation of the Proposed Project are found to be less than significant with mitigation.

References
Section 3.7 of the EIR addresses the Project’s impacts to geology and soils.

Transportation/Traffic
Description of Potential Effects
The Proposed Project would conflict with the City’s General Plan and Tulare County Regional Transportation Plan policy of maintaining an acceptable level of service of “D” as the minimum acceptable intersection peak hour level of service (LOS) standard. The Proposed Project is anticipated to cause or contribute an exceedance of this standard at the intersections North Prospect Street and West Henderson Avenue in the morning and evening hours, despite modifications proposed to the intersection to mitigate the decrease in LOS, as depicted in Tables

3.17-5 and 3.17-6 in the Draft EIR. Impacts would occur in 2043 during morning hours, but at opening day during the evening hours.

However, with mitigation impacts would be reduced but not to a less than significant level.

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts related to construction and operation of the Proposed Project related to transportation/traffic:

Mitigation Measure TRA-1
The Applicant shall pay the City of Porterville for their Fair Share Portion of intersection improvements described in Table 3.17-9 to maintain or improve the operational level of service of the street system in the vicinity of the Project.

Findings
For the above impacts to transportation/traffic, the following finding is made. ☒ Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. ☐ Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. ☐ Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

The potential impacts to transportation/traffic from implementation of the Proposed Project are found to be significant and unavoidable.

References
Section 3.17 of the EIR addresses the Project’s transportation/traffic impacts.

Exhibit B to Resolution No. _______-25
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Sections 21001, 21001.1 and 21081, and Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Porterville finds that approval of the proposed Henderson Commercial Project, whose potential impacts have been evaluated in the Final EIR, and as indicated in the Statement of Environmental Effects and Required Findings, discussed above, would result in the occurrence of significant effects that are not avoided or substantially lessened. These significant and unavoidable effects are listed below. • Impact 3.17-1: The Project would conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Further, as required by CEQA Section 21081(b) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City finds that the unavoidable significant effects listed above are outweighed by specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits offered by the Proposed Project.

Specifically, the Project will provide the benefits described below.

Social Benefits
The location of the Proposed Project is sited near north-central Porterville on an urban infill parcel. The location of the Proposed Project would benefit existing residences by reducing the distance that customers would need to travel.

Economic Benefits
Following the above social benefits, a retail development near existing residences would reduce the amount of travel needed, which would reduce travel expenses both for customers who would patronize the businesses, and those who would be employed by those businesses.

Summary
Accordingly, the City hereby concludes that the Proposed Project’s benefits outweigh and override its unavoidable significant impacts for the reasons stated above. The City reached this decision after having done all of the following:
1) adopted all feasible mitigation measures;
2) rejected as infeasible alternatives to the Project;
3) rejected alternatives that do not fully meet the Project objectives; 4) recognized all significant, unavoidable impacts, and; 5) balanced the benefits of the Project against its significant and unavoidable impacts.

Item No. 18.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – SEPTEMBER 16, 2025
SUBJECT: Text Amendment to Porterville Municipal Code Chapter 21 Series 300, Article 305-Signs
SOURCE: Community Development
COMMENT: At its meeting on June 17, 2025, the City Council reviewed Article 305 – Signs of the Porterville Development Ordinance (PDO) and directed staff to prepare amendments that would reduce unnecessary regulation and improve clarity.

The Council further directed staff to form a staff-led working group to examine the ordinance in full, identify opportunities to modernize provisions, and conduct outreach to affected stakeholders.

In response, staff completed a comprehensive review of Article 305 and conducted outreach focused on community stakeholders, including business owners and developers. Feedback consistently emphasized that the current ordinance is overly complex, imposes unnecessary permit requirements, and relies too heavily on subjective design principles. Stakeholders requested more predictable and business-friendly standards while still maintaining safety and visibility requirements.

On August 18, 2025, Council received a presentation outlining proposed changes and directed staff to return with a draft ordinance and implementation plan. The attached Exhibit A reflects a streamlined and modernized version of Article 305. The revised chapter eliminates outdated language, consolidates overlapping provisions, and removes unnecessary aesthetic mandates while retaining standards that protect the community’s safety, property values, and economic vitality.

Key amendments include:
• Permits are required only when a sign triggers a Building Permit under the California Building Standards Code.
• Zone-specific sign standards have been removed in favor of consistent citywide requirements.
• Aesthetic design principles have been eliminated to reduce subjectivity and regulatory burden.
• Standards focused on health, safety, visibility, and traffic circulation Item No. 18.
remain in place to ensure community protection.

The Environmental Coordinator has determined, based on substantial evidence, that the proposed text amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).

Because the changes focus exclusively on administrative streamlining and eliminating outdated provisions, with no possibility of resulting in a physical change to the environment, the exemption is appropriate.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Open the public hearing and receive public testimony regarding the proposed text amendment;

2. Find that the proposed amendments are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and

3. Approve the first reading of the ordinance adopting the text amendment to Article 305 – Signs of the Porterville
Development Ordinance, read by title only, waive further reading, and order the ordinance to print.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exihibit A - PDO Chapter 305

2. Chapter 305 Signs_Redline

3. Draft Ordinance
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

Claudia Calderon, Community Development Director
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk

EXHIBIT A
121
Signs
Sections:
305.01 Purpose
305.02 Policies
305.03 Applicability
305.04 Design Principles
305.05 Exempt Signs
305.06 Prohibited Signs
305.07 General Standards
305.08 Sign Standards for Residential Districts
305.09 Sign Standards for Non-Residential Districts
305.10 Standards for Specific Types of Signs
305.11 Permits Required; Review Process
305.12 Master Sign Program
305.13 Nonconforming Signs
305.14 Abatement and Removal of Illegal Signs

Purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to establish clear and reasonable regulations to ensure the orderly display of signs as a city-wide information system, consistent with State and federal law. These regulations recognize the desire and right of each individual, business, firm or corporation to identify its residence, business, or service. At the same time, they acknowledge that the indiscriminate erection, placement, illumination, color, size, and lack of proper maintenance of signs and advertising structures may create conditions affect public safety or property values. Specifically, these regulations are intended to:

Ensure signs and advertising structures are designed, erected, and maintained in a manner that supports effective communication and avoids obstructing the visibility of nearby or adjacent signs;
Prohibit the installation and maintenance of signs or advertising structures that create unsafe distractions for motorists or interfere with visibility of traffic signs, signals, safe vehicle movement;
Prevent the installation and maintenance of signs or advertising structures, that individually or collectively, negatively impact the city’s economic health; Ensure that the size and location of signs and advertising structures do not interfere with fire protection or emergency response efforts, and do not create safety hazards for vehicle or pedestrian traffic, particularly in cases of structural failure during severe weather or earthquakes, or due to impaired visibility; and Protect public health and safety and promote general welfare.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
122
Policies
The policies and principles stated in this Section apply to all signs regulated under this Chapter and to all related procedures. These policies take precedence over any conflicting provisions, even if those provisions appear more specific.

Permit Requirement. Unless expressly exempted by this Chapter or by other applicable law a Building Permit is required only for Signs that are subject to review by the Building Department. All other signs regulated by this Chapter may be displayed without a permit unless otherwise specified. If the sign requires such permit, it may be displayed only with a valid permit issued by the City.

Message Neutrality. It is the City’s policy to regulate signs in a constitutional, manner that is content neutral for noncommercial messages and viewpoint neutral for commercial messages.

Regulatory Interpretations. All regulatory interpretations of this Chapter shall be made in accordance with the City’s message neutrality policy. If a proposed sign type is not expressly allowed or prohibited by this Chapter, or if a sign does not meet the definition of a “structure” under the Building Code, the Zoning Administrator shall review the application based on the most comparable regulated sign type and determine whether to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the request using reasonable and consistent judgement.

Substitution of Messages. Subject to the property owner’s consent, any noncommercial message may be substituted for another noncommercial message on a legally permitted or allowed sign, without requiring additional permits or approvals, provided that the sign structure or mounting device itself is lawful without regard to message content. This provision is intended to ensure treatment of noncommercial speech and to avoid any unintentional preference for commercial messages. This section does not permit an increase in the total number or area of signs on a parcel, authorize changes to the physical structure or location of a sign, or allow substitution of an off-site commercial message for an on-site commercial message. Changing one on-site commercial message to another may still require a permit if otherwise required by this Chapter.

Rules for Non-communicative Aspects of Signs. All regulations related to the physical characteristics of signs, including location, size, height, illumination, spacing, and orientation, remain fully enforceable regardless of message content and apply independently of the permitting or approval process.

Situs of Non-commercial Message Signs. The distinction between onsite and offsite signs applies only to commercial messages. Non-commercial messages are not subject to location-based restrictions under this Chapter.

Property Owner’s Consent. No sign may be displayed without the consent of the legal owner(s) of the property on which the sign is mounted or displayed. For purposes of this policy, “owner” means the person or entity holding legal title to the property, as well as anyone with a current right to possess, control, or use the property.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
123
Legal Nature of Signage Rights and Duties. For all signs attached to property, whether real or personal, the rights, responsibilities, and obligations under this Chapter apply to and remain with the land or property where the sign is mounted or displayed. This provision does not change or affect laws related to fixtures, private lease terms about signage (so long as they do not conflict with this Chapter), or ownership of sign structures.

Sign Programs. Sign programs for specific developments, including special sign districts or overlay zones, may allow modifications to the rules in this Chapter related to size, height, number, illumination, spacing, orientation or other noncommunication aspects of signs, subject to agreement between the private parties to comply with said program and if approved by the Approving Authority. However, no sign program may override or change the basic policies outlined in this Section. All provisions in this Section automatically apply to any sign program approved after the effective date of this ordinance.

Severability. If any section, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or provision of this Chapter is found to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect.

The City Council affirms that it would have adopted this Chapter even without any part that may later be found invalid or unenforceable.

Applicability
The requirements and development standards in this chapter apply to signs in every zoning district, unless a specific exception is stated.

Design Principles
The City Council may choose to adopt design principles via resolution or via amendment of this ordinance. Criteria may include but are not limited to architectural compatibility, consistency with area character, legibility, finish, and visibility. Any such criteria may be applied throughout the city or to specific, delineated areas.

Exempt Signs
The following signs are exempt from the permit requirements of this Chapter provided they meet the applicable standards and obtain a building permit if required by law.

Government-Recognized Historical or Memorial Markers. Signs installed by a civic organization recognized by the City Council, constructed of bronze, stone, or other durable, non-combustible materials, or permanently cut into a masonry surface, and used to identify historical or memorial buildings or sites.

Temporary Business Transition Signs. A temporary attachment or covering made of wood, plastic, canvas, or similar material may be placed over an existing permanent sign during a business transition, such as a change in ownership or remodeling. The temporary sign must not exceed the size of the previous sign and may be displayed for up to one (1) year after a change in ownership. For maintenance, see Section 306.08, Maintenance.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
124
Construction or Development Signs. One (1) sign per street frontage is allowed on a property where construction, structural alteration, or repair is planned or underway.

Each sign may not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet in area. Construction signs must be removed after final building inspection.

Incorporated Product or Equipment Signs. Signs not exceeding four (4) square feet in area that are built into equipment or displays by a manufacturer, distributor, or vendor are allowed. This includes signs on ATMs, gasoline pumps, vending machines, menu boards, and branded umbrellas, as illustrated in Figure 305.05(D).

FIGURE 305.05(D)
Flags. Noncommercial flags (e.g., national, State, civic, or organizational).

Handbills. Handbills, advertising circulars, etc., must comply with the standards and licensing contained in Chapter 3, Article II, of the Porterville Municipal Code Real Estate Sign. One (1) on-site real estate sign per street frontage is allowed when a property is for sale, rent, or lease. Signs. Signs must be removed within five (5) days of the property being no longer listed or advertised for sale, lease, or rent.

Window and Entry Signs. Signs may be placed within six (6) feet of the building entrances for commercial, industrial, and office uses. In addition, government buildings may display shadowboxes.

On-Site Directional or Informational Signs. On-site signs are allowed for public or private developments provided they are not be otherwise prohibited or further regulated by this Chapter or any other provision of the Porterville Municipal Code.

Uses with a drive-through service window may install one (1) additional sign under this exemption.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
125
Reader Panels. Permanent reader panels are allowed for public, charitable, or religious institutions, provided they are located on the same property to which they pertain. These panels must be positioned so they do not create a hazard to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Electronic reader boards are also allowed under this exemption if they comply with applicable zone requirements, do not include animation, flashing, or rapid movements, and display messages that change no more than once every three (3) seconds.

Civic Event Sponsorship. One sign per business that sponsors and contributes to sports activities held on public property may be placed at said property. The sign may be displayed for up to ninety (90) days before the event or season and must be removed within fifteen (15) days after the event or season concludes.

Transit Advertising. Bus stop shelter and bench advertisements authorized under the City’s Transit Advertising Policy are exempt.

City Welcome Signs. Signs placed, owned, or funded by the City of Porterville may be installed around the periphery of the city limits at major transportation routes, either within public rights-of-way or on private property with the property owner’s consent.

Prohibited Signs
The following types of signs and devices are prohibited due to safety concerns, regulatory conflicts, or negative community impacts:

Billboards. Any sign that advertises a business, service, or product not offered on the same property is prohibited, unless specifically allowed by the California Outdoor Advertising Act (Business and Professions Code Sections 5200-5486). A sign that promotes a brand name not considered a principal item for sale on the premises is also considered a prohibited billboard.

Noise, Odor, and Emissions. Signs that produce noise in violation of the City’s Noise Ordinance contained in Article IX of this code, and signs that emit odor, visible smoke, vapor, or particles.

Obscenities. Signs that depict, describe or relate to “specified sexual activities” or “specified anatomical areas” as defined in Porterville Municipal Code Chapter 15, Article V, Section 15-43, Definitions.

Obstructions to Exits. Signs erected, constructed, or maintained in a way that obstruct firefighting equipment, fire escapes, required exits, or door openings intended for emergency ingress and/or egress.

Obstructions to Driver Visibility. Signs that interfere with visibility at driveways, intersections, or within corner cut-off areas, as defined in Section 300.16.

Obstructions to Ventilation. Signs that block or interfere with any opening required for natural or mechanical ventilation.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
126
Posters. Posters of a temporary nature that are tacked, painted, pasted, or otherwise affixed and made visible from a public way on walls of buildings, barns, sheds, trees, fences, utility poles, or other structures, sidewalks, or patios are prohibited, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter. This section excludes signs placed in windows per Section 305.10 (e).

Signs Creating Traffic Hazards. Signs that simulate the color, size, or design of any traffic control sign, signal, or device, or use words, symbols or characters in a way that could mislead or confuses drivers or pedestrians, are prohibited. No sign, light, or advertising structure shall be placed in a location that creates a hazard to vehicular or pedestrian traffic, or that obstructs clear vision where its position, shape, color, or movement could interfere with, block the view of, or be mistaken for an authorized traffic control device.

Private signs on public property. Unless otherwise permitted by this code, private signs located on public lands, including public rights-of-way, parks, public buildings, storm drainage basins, and similar facilities, are prohibited. However, signs may be placed during an event that has an approved rental or reservation for the site. All such signs must be removed at the end of the reservation period.

General Standards
This section establishes general standards and requirements for signage. More detailed standards for specific sign types, such as wall signs or awning signs, are provided in Section 305.10, Standards for Specific Sign Types. In addition to these general standards, all signs must comply with the specifications set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 3, Advertising and Signs.

Abandoned Signs. Any sign, including its supporting structure, that no longer identifies the current occupant after ninety (90) days shall be deemed abandoned and must be removed by the property owner. When a wall sign is removed, the wall surface behind it shall be repaired and painted to match the surrounding facade. Any abandoned signs not removed or made blank within this period shall be removed in accordance with the procedures established in this Chapter.

Building Frontage. Building frontage refers to the wall of a building that faces and runs roughly parallel to a public street, excluding alleys.

Changeable Copy. Changeable copy may cover up to one hundred (100) percent of a manually changeable sign and an electronic message center sign with copy that can be changed or altered by electric, electro-mechanical, electronic, or any other artificial energy means.

Clearance from Utilities. Signs and their supporting structures shall maintain clearance from and not interfere with electrical conductors, communications equipment or lines, surface and underground facilities and conduits for water, sewage, gas, electricity, and communications equipment or lines. Signs shall not be placed in public utility easements unless express written permission from the affected public utility is obtained.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
127
Construction and Maintenance ±
Unless exempt, signs and supporting structures shall be installed in accordance with the current adopted Building Code.

All signs, together with all supporting structures, shall be maintained in the following manner:

Signs shall be kept free of rust, dirt, and chipped, cracked or peeling paint.

All hanging, dangling, torn or frayed parts of signs shall be promptly repaired, and graffiti and unauthorized attachments shall be removed.

Failed, damaged, or blinking illumination shall be promptly replaced.

Sign areas shall be kept free and clear of all noxious substances, rubbish, and weeds.

Discolored or faded panels on plastic faces shall be restored to their original condition and color.

Encroachment into Public Street or Sidewalk. Any sign projecting into a public right of way requires an encroachment agreement approved by the City Engineer.

Temporary signs such as A-frame/sandwich board signs as regulated under 305.10(f)(2) below are exempt from this requirement.

Illumination. Channel letters, internally illuminated signs and neon signs are permitted. Due to glare and non-directional illumination, bare bulbs visible from the public right-of-way are prohibited. For signs with external illumination, lights shall be provided with proper reflectors to concentrate the illumination on the area of the sign to prevent glare on the street or adjacent properties. All sign illumination shall adhere to the performance standards for lighting and glare in Chapter 306, Performance Standards.

Materials. Paper, cardboard, untreated plywood, and other materials subject to rapid deterioration shall be limited to signs displayed for no more than (30) days.

Sign Standards for Residential Districts
Residential subdivisions are allowed one (1) monument sign or wall sign per street frontage for entry into the subdivision.

Religious facilities, multi-family residential projects, schools, civic uses and other nonresidential uses in R districts are allowed one (1) building-mounted sign and one (1) monument sign or freestanding sign/
Sign Standards for Non-Residential Districts
Signage in non-residential districts may include one or more of the following types of signs:
awning and canopy signs, marquee signs, projecting signs, wall signs, window signs, monument signs, freestanding signs, commercial center identification signs, and temporary, Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
128
portable A-frame, or sandwich board signs. Signs shall comply with the standards of Section 305.10.

Standards for Signs
Awning and Canopy Signs. Marquee Signs, Projecting Signs. These signs are subject to the following standards:

Sign Clearance. Minimum of eight (8) feet.

Projection.

An under-canopy sign, attached to and hanging from an awning or canopy shall be located completely under the canopy or awning and shall not project beyond its edge.

A projecting sign cannot extend more than three (3) feet from the building to which it is attached.

Visibility. A projecting sign shall be erected in such a manner as not to create a traffic hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.

Wall Signs. Wall signs include any sign attached to, erected against, or painted upon the wall of a building or structure, the face of which is in a single plane parallel to the plane of the wall. Wall signs also include signs on a parapet or mansard roof. No wall sign may cover wholly or partially any required wall opening. Wall signs are also subject to the following standards:

Projection. Wall signs cannot extend more than twelve (12) inches beyond the face of the wall to which they are attached.

Window Signs. Window signs painted or otherwise adhered directly onto a window are exempt from the permit requirements of this chapter but are subject to the following standards:

Coverage. Window signs may up to one-hundred (100) percent of the total glass window area along each building façade, subject to other applicable laws triggered by type and use of business.

Height. Window signs shall not be mounted or placed on windows higher than the second story.

Monument Signs. Freestanding signs erected on the ground or on a monument base designed as an architectural unit are allowed subject to the following standards:

Visibility. A monument sign shall be erected in such a manner as not to create a traffic hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.

Freestanding Signs. Freestanding signs are allowed subject to the following standards:

Visibility. A freestanding sign shall be erected in such a manner as not to create a traffic hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
129
Projection. Freestanding signs shall not project beyond the property line.

Other Sign Types
Commercial Center Identification Signs. Commercial center identification signs may be erected in the Commercial and Employment districts, subject to the following limitations:

Visibility. A commercial center identification sign shall be erected in such a manner as not to create a traffic hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.

A-Frame/Sandwich Board Signs. Temporary portable A-frame or sandwich board signs may be erected in all nonresidential zone districts, subject to the following limitations:

Maximum Number of Signs. Two (2) A-frame/sandwich board signs per tenant space.

Location. One (1) A-frame sign may be placed within the building frontage. A second sign may encroach into the right-of-way up to two (2) feet from the property line provided there remains a contiguous five (5)-foot-wide walkable area when the sign is in place.

Removal. Such sign is to be removed during non-business hours.

Mobile Signs. Signs pulled on a trailer or otherwise mounted to a vehicle may be allowed subject applicable laws such as the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, in the Federal Size Regulations for Commercial Motor Vehicles.

Permits Required; Review Process
Authority. Unless otherwise stated, the building official shall review and approve all signs as specified in this chapter.

Applicability. Except for certain signs exempted in compliance with Section 305.05, Exempt Signs, no regulated sign shall be erected, re-erected, constructed or altered (excluding change of copy on a can or cabinet sign) without building official approval and a building permit issued by the Building Division.

Applications for Filing, Processing and Review
Applicant. Sign owners or their designees shall apply for Building Permits for signs that require them.

Filing and Filing Fee. Application for such permits shall be made upon forms furnished by the building official and accompanied by the required fee and working drawings adequate to show the location, construction and design, including colors, materials, lighting, electrical elements, and advertising copy, of the sign in accordance with applicable sign design guidelines and the linear footage of building frontage owned or leased by the business Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
130
Compliance with Standards.

Upon acceptance of a sign application, the building official shall review the request for compliance with the locational and operational standards identified in this chapter, and with any standards established in a Master Sign Program pursuant to Section 305.13, Master Sign Program.

The building official’s decision shall clearly state any conditions of approval or reasons for disapproval and applicable appeal provisions.

Appeals. Decisions by the building official may be appealed subject to the provisions of Chapter 612, Appeals.

Master Sign Program
Purpose. The purpose of a Master Sign Program is to provide a method for an applicant to integrate the design and placement of signs within a project with the overall development design to achieve a more unified appearance. It is not the intent of this section to be used solely to request relief from the sign regulations in order to circumvent any requirements or purpose of this chapter.

Applicability. A Master Sign Program may be processed for any development.

However, shown below are examples of when a Master Sign Program may be most appropriate:

Nonresidential developments of three (3) or more separate tenants that share either the same parcel or structure and use common access and parking facilities (e.g., shopping centers, malls, office complexes and industrial parks); or
Developments with multiple structures with limited frontage or no frontage on a public street; or
Businesses conducted primarily outside of a building; or New multi-family residential developments of one hundred (100) or more units, or
Other developments where the strict application of the sign code unduly restricts the allowable signage that can be located on the parcel.

Application. Master Sign Program applications shall contain all written and graphic information needed to fully describe the proposed sign program, including the proposed location and dimension of each sign, as well as proposed color schemes, font types, materials, methods of attachment or support, and methods of illumination.

A Master Sign Program application shall also include calculation of total allowed sign area, and total proposed sign area, for the site.

Allowable Modifications. A Master Sign Program may provide for additional sign area and other deviations from the standards of this chapter, provided that the Master Sign Program is consistent with the sections on design principles and general standards.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
131
Review Authority. All Master Sign Programs are subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator, unless the signs are associated with a project that requires City Council review and approval; then the City Council shall review and approve it as part of the overall project approval.

Required Findings. In order to approve a Master Sign Program, the decision-making body shall find that all of the following are met, in addition to other applicable regulations in this section:

The proposed signs are compatible in style and character with any building to which the signs are to be attached, any surrounding structures and any adjoining signage on the site;
Future tenants will be provided with adequate opportunities to construct, erect or maintain a sign for identification;
Directional signage and building addressing is adequate for pedestrian and vehicular circulation and emergency vehicle access; and Use of the Master Sign Program provides a more desirable functional and aesthetic appearance than would otherwise be provided by standard code requirements.

Lessees to Be Informed of Master Sign Program. Lessees within developments subject to the requirements of an approved Master Sign Program shall be made aware of the Master Sign Program in their lease.

Revisions to Master Sign Programs. Revisions to an approved Master Sign Program shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator.

Nonconforming Signs
All legal nonconforming signs are permitted to remain unless they are subject to a permit condition or development agreement providing for their removal after a fixed period of time.

Any changes to legal nonconforming signs or their structures in terms of location, orientation, size, or height other than routine maintenance and repair or change of sign copy shall require the signs to be brought into conformance with this chapter.

A legal nonconforming sign loses its legal nonconforming status when the activity, product, business, service, or other use which was being advertised has ceased or vacated the premises for one hundred eighty (180) days, at which time it shall be considered an abandoned sign, subject to the requirements of Section 305.07(c), Abandoned Signs.

Abatement and Removal of Illegal Signs
Authority to Abate. The City has the authority to abate illegal, abandoned signs and signs that pose a threat to health and life safety.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
132
Illegal Signs in the Public Right-of-Way. Illegal signs posted in the public right-ofway or upon public property may be removed by Code Enforcement officer without notice or hearing. Signs shall be retained by the City for a period of not less than thirty (30) days if identifiable. Thereafter, any unclaimed signs may be discarded.

Recovery of Costs. When the City is required to remove illegal or abandoned signs in compliance with this chapter, the reasonable cost of the removal may be assessed against the owner of the sign(s).

Sign Removal
Any sign, including its supporting structure, which no longer identifies the current occupant or products currently sold, or which otherwise fails to serve its original purpose, or is not maintained in a safe, presentable, and good condition, including the replacement of defective parts, painting, repainting, and cleaning, shall be removed by the owner of the property within 30 calendar days after written notice to do so from the Building Division.

Any sign which the Building Division establishes as unsafe or unsecure shall be corrected or removed, together with all supporting structures, by the owner of the property upon which the sign is located within thirty (30) days after written notice by the Building Division.

Such notice shall state the location of the sign, the nature of the violation, and/or the manner in which the sign constitutes a public nuisance. The notice also shall require the removal or other abatement of the sign before the date specified in the notice. Further, the notice shall state that failure to comply may result in the removal of the sign by the City and that the cost of such removal may be imposed on the owner of the property. The notice shall also include instructions for the filing of an appeal of the determination of the Building Official that the sign is in violation of this chapter or constitutes a public nuisance. Such notice shall be served by posting on the property on which the sign is located and by registered or certified mail delivery, postage prepaid to the owner of the property, and, if known, the owner of the sign.

After the periods specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) above, the Building Division may cause such sign to be removed, and the cost of such removal shall become a lien against the property.

If a hazardous condition exists, the condition shall be corrected forthwith upon notice by the Building Division.

If an appeal is received prior to the date specified in the notice, abatement proceedings shall be suspended, and any deadlines shall be suspended, pending the outcome of such appeal.
121
Signs
Sections:
305.01 Purpose
305.02 Policies
305.03 Applicability
305.04 Design Principles
305.05 Exempt Signs
305.06 Prohibited Signs
305.07 General Standards
305.08 Sign Standards for Residential Districts
305.09 Sign Standards for Non-Residential Districts
305.10 Standards for Specific Types of Signs
305.11 Permits Required; Review Process Temporary Signs 305.12 Master Sign Program Permits Required; Review Process 305.13 Nonconforming Signs Master Sign Program
305.14 Abatement and Removal of Illegal Signs Nonconforming Signs 305.15 Abatement and Removal of Illegal Signs
Purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to establish clear and reasonable regulations to ensure the orderly display of signs as a city-wide information system, consistent with State and Federal federal law. These regulations recognize the desire and need right of each individual, business, firm or corporation to identify its place of residence, business, or service., At the same time, they acknowledge and realizing that the indiscriminate erection, locationplacement, illumination, coloring, size, and lack of proper maintenance of signs and advertising structures may create conditions affect public safety or , property values, or the visual character of the city. constitutes a significant contributing factor detrimental to the well-being and continuing activity of a city's people and economy. Specifically, these regulations are intended to:

Assure Ensure that all signs and advertising structures are designed, erected, and maintained in a manner thato enhances the overall appearance of the area, supports effective communication, , rather than detract from, the ultimate design and appearance of the affected locality, and do not impairavoids obstructing the view visibility of nearby or adjacent signs;
Prohibit the installation and maintenance of signs or advertising structures that create unduly unsafe distract distractions for motorists' attention from driving, and which detract from attention to traffic movement and toor interfere with visibility of traffic signs, and signals, promoting traffic safetysafe vehicle movement; Prevent the installation and maintenance of signs or advertising structures, that hat individually or collectively, negatively impact the overall psychological well-being of the peoplecommunity and the city’s have an injurious effect on the morale of the people and the economic well-being of the cityhealth;
Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
122
Assure Ensure that the size and location of signs and advertising structures do not constitute interfere an with obstacle to effective fire protection and firefighting techniquesor emergency response efforts, and do ; notr constitute a direct or potential danger tocreate safety hazards for vehicvehicleular or pedestrian traffic, especially particularly in the eventcases of structural failure during severe the period of inclement weather and or earthquakes, or in the event ofdue to impaired vision visibilitydue to improper size or location; and
Otherwise Pprotect the public health and, safety, moralesupport community wellbeing, and promote the public general welfare.

Policies
The policies and principles stated in this Section apply to all signs within the regulatoryregulated scope ofunder this Chapter, and to all related procedures set forth in, or invoked by, this Chapter. These policies are to prevailtake precedence over any other conflicting provisions, to the contrary, even if those provisions appear more specific.

Permit Requirement. Unless expressly exempted by a provision of this Chapter, or by other applicable law, a Building Permit is required only for Signs that are subject to review by the Building Department. All other signs regulated by this Chapter may be displayed without a permit unless otherwise specified. If the sign requires such permit it a signs within the regulatory scope of this Chapter may be displayed only pursuant towith a valid permit issued by the City.

Message Neutrality. It is the City’s policy to regulate signs in a constitutional, common-sense manner that, which is content neutral as tofor noncommercial signs messages and viewpoint neutral as tofor commercial signsmessages.

Regulatory Interpretations. All regulatory interpretations of this Chapter are toshall be exercised in light ofmade in accordance with the City’s message neutrality policy. Where a particular type of If a proposed sign type is proposed not in a permit application, and the type is neither expressly allowed nor prohibited by this Chapter, or wherever if a sign does not qualify meet the definition ofas a “structure” as defined inunder the Building Code, then the Zoning Administrator shall approvereview, conditionally approve, or disapprove the application based on the most similar comparable regulated sign type and determine whether to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the request using reasonable and consistent judgement. that is expressly regulated by this Chapter.

Substitution of Messages. Subject to the property owner’s consent, any noncommercial message of any type may be substituted for any duly permitted or allowedanother noncommercial message on a, provided that the sign structure or mounting device is legally permitted or allowed sign, without requiring additional permits or approvals, provided that the sign structure or mounting device itself is lawful without regard consideration of theto message content. Such substitution of message may be made without any additional approval or permitting. This provision prevails over any more specific provision to the contrary within this Chapter. The purpose of this provision is to prevent any inadvertent favoring ofis intended to ensure Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
123
treatment of noncommercial speech and to avoid any unintentional preference for over any other noncommercial messages. This provision section does not create the right topermit an increase in the total amount number or area of signsage on a parcel, lot or land use; does not affect the requirement that a sign structure or mounting device be properly permitted; does not allow aauthorize changes toin the physical structure of a sign or its mounting devicelocation of a sign, or; does not allow the substitution of an off-site commercial message in place offor an on-site commercial message. Changing one; and does not allow one particular on-site commercial message to be substituted for another may still require without a permit if otherwise required by this Chapter.

Rules for Non-communicative Aspects of Signs. All rules and regulations concerning the non-communicative aspectsrelated to the physical characteristics of signs, such asincluding location, size, height, illumination, spacing, and orientation, etc., standremain fully enforceable regardless of message content and apply independently of theany permitting or approval process.

Situs of Non-commercial Message Signs. The distinction between onsite and /offsite signs distinction applies only to commercial messages on signs. Noncommercial messages are not subject to location-based restrictions under this Chapter.

Property Owner’s Consent. No sign may be displayed without the consent of the legal owner(s) of the property on which the sign is mounted or displayed. For purposes of this policy, “owner” means the person or entity the holder ofholding the legal title to the property, as well as anyone with a current and all parties and persons holding a present right to possession, control, or use of the property.

Legal Nature of Signage Rights and Duties. As toFor all signs attached to property, whether real or personal, the signage rights, duties responsibilities, and obligations arising fromunder this Chapter apply attach to and remain and travel with the land or other property on which awhere the sign is mounted or displayed. This provision does not modify change or affect the laws related toof fixtures, sign-related provisions in private lease termss regarding about signages (so long as they are do not in conflict with this Chapter), or the ownership of sign structures.

Sign Programs. Sign programs for specific developments, as well asincluding special sign districts or special sign overlay zones, may allow modifications to the rules in this Chapter related to when approved by the Approving Authority, may modify the rules stated herein as to sign size, height, number, illumination, spacing, orientation or other non-communication aspects of signs, subject to agreement between the private parties to comply with said program and but may not override or modify any of the Basic Policies stated in this Sectionif approved by the Approving Authority. However, no sign program may override or change the basic policies outlined in this Section. All the provisions inof this Section shall automatically apply to , and be deemed a part of, any sign program approved after the effective date of this ordinance.on which this provision is initially adopted.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
124
Severabilitynce. If any section, sentence, clause, phrase, word, portion or provision of this Chapter is held found to be invalid, or unconstitutional, or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not affect, impair, or invalidate any other section, sentence, clause, phrase, word, portion, or provision of this Chapter which can be giventhe remaining portions shall remain in full force and effect without the invalid portion. In adopting this Chapter, Tthe City Council affirmatively affirms declares that it would have approved and adopted thise Chapter even without any portion part that which may later be held found invalid or unenforceable.

Applicability
The requirements and development standards in this chapter apply to signs in everyall zoning districts, unless a specific exception is stated otherwise specified.

Design Principles
The City Council may choose to adopt design principles via resolution or via amendment of this ordinance. Criteria may include but are not limited to architectural compatibility, consistency with area character, legibility, finish, and visibility. Any such criteria may be applied throughout the city or to specific, delineated areas.

Architectural Compatibility. A While signs should respect the character of the (including its supporting structure, if any) shall be designed as an integral design element of a building and surrounding area, strict’s architecture conformity is not required. Property owners are encouraged to design signs that complement the and architecturally compatible, including color, and scale, and features of the with any building to which the sign is to be attached. Signs should avoid covering and with surrounding structures. A sign that spills over “natural” boundaries or architectural features elements or disrupting the overall appearance and obliterates parts of upper floors, but final design choices remain at the discretion of the owner, provided they do not create safety issues or visual hazards. of buildings, or is detrimental to visual order is not permitted.

Consistency with Area Character. A While signs are not required to match specific shall be consistent with distinct area or district characteristics themes or and incorporate common design elements such as sign materials, property owners are encouraged to consider the visual character of the surrounding area when designing and placing signs. In locations near or themes. Where a sign is located in close proximity to a residential areaneighborhoods, the signs shall should be positioned and illuminated in a way that avoids unnecessary designed and located so it has little or no impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoodsnearby homes. These considerations are intended to support compatibility without imposing design mandates.

Legibility. The proportion of the elements of the sign’s message, including logos, letters, icons and other graphic images, shall be selected based on the anticipatedSigns should be easy to read based on the viewer’s distance and travel speed of the viewer. Elements such as logos, letters, and graphics should be appropriately sized, and cColors choices should offer enoughsen for the sign text Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
125
and/or graphics shall have sufficient contrast with the sign background in order to be easily readmaintain visibility in during both day and night hoursconditions.

FIGURE 305.04(C): LEGIBILITY OF SIGNS
Finish. Signs shall must have finished edges with a clean, smooth, and finished edges.consistent surface. Lettering should be appropriately on the sign is to be of complementary sized and, proportioned, using and font that complements the overall design. Letters may be and either carved, routed, painted or applied using other suitable methods.

Visibility. A sign shall be conspicuousmust be clearly visible and readily easily distinguishable from its surroundings to ensure it effectively communicates its intended message.

Exempt Signs
The following signs are exempt from the permit requirements of this Cchapter, and they do not count toward the total sign number or area of signs allowed on limit for a site, provided that they conform meet to the specified applicable standards and obtain a building permits when if required by law.

Government-Recognized Historical or Memorial Markers. Signs installed by a civic organization recognized by the City Council, for historical or memorial buildings, when constructed of bronze, stone, or otherother durable, nonincombustible materials, or permanently cut into any masonry surface, and used to identify historical or memorial buildings or sites. installed by a civic organization recognized by the City Council.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
126
Temporary Business Transition Signs. A temporary attachment or covering made of wood, plastic, or canvas, or similar material may be placed over an existing permanent sign during a business transition, such as a change in ownership or remodeling. The temporary sign must not exceed the size of the previous sign and may be displayed for up tono longer than thirty (30)one (1) year days following after the a change of in ownership, or up to ninety (90) days following issuance of a building permit. For maintenance, see Section 306.08, Maintenance. The sign shall be no larger than the previously permitted permanent sign.

Construction or Development Signs. One (1) sign per street frontage is allowed on a property where construction, structural alteration, or repair is planned or underway.

Each, with a maximum sign may not exceed area of thirty-two (32) square feet in area., per street frontage on real property where construction, structural alteration or repair is to take place, or is taking place. Construction signs shall must be removed upon after final building inspection.

Incorporated Product or Equipment Signs. Signs, not more thanexceeding four (4) square feet in area that are built , incorporated into equipment or displays , machinery or equipment by a manufacturer, distributor, or vendor are allowed. This includes, such as signs on customarily fixed to automated teller machines (ATMs), gasoline pumps, vending machines, menu boards, and branded umbrellas, such as those representedillustrated in Figure 305.05(D).

FIGURE 305.05(D)
Flags. Noncommercial fFlags (e.g.e.g., national, sState, civic, or organizational). with the display of only noncommercial speech.

Handbills. Handbills, Advertising advertising Circularscirculars, Etcetc., must comply with the standards and licensing contained in Chapter 3, Article II, of the Porterville Municipal Code
Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
127
Real Estate Sign. A maximum of Oone (1) on-site real estate sign per street frontage is allowed when a property is for sale, rent, or lease. In residential districts, signs must gn per apartment house, boarding or rooming house, or similar use, not exceeding six (6) square feet in area and six (6) feet in height. In all other districts, signs must not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet and eight (8) feet in heightSigns .

Signs must be removed within five (5) days of the property being no longer listed or advertised for sale, lease, or rent.

Window and Entry Signs. A maximum of two sSigns per building may be placed within six (6) feet of the building entrances for commercial, industrial, and office uses, not exceeding six square feet per building. . In addition, gGovernment uses, in addition to the aforementioned six square feet per buildings, may display include not more than one shadowboxes with not more thanexceeding ten (10) square feet of in display area.

On-Site Directional or Informational Signs. Up to two (2) oOn-site signs are allowed for public or private developments, provided each sign does not exceeding four (4) square feet in area per face, and not exceeding forty-eight (48) inches in height provided they are. These , provided such signs are must not be otherwise prohibited or further regulated by other sections of this or any other Cchapter or any other provision of the Porterville Municipal Code. Uses that includewith a drivethrough service window may install are allowed one (1) additional sign per under this exemption.

Properties or lease spaces may display not more than one (1) on-site sign with a maximum size of six (6) square feet (excluding rider signs no larger than a total of six (6) square feet) and a maximum height of six (6) feet in the R districts, and a maximum size of thirty-two (32) square feet and a maximum height of eight (8) feet in all other districts, per street frontage of a parcel when the property is currently for sale or rent. Such signs shall be removed within 5 days following close of escrow or finalization of sale, rental or lease.

Reader Panels. Permanent reader panels are allowed for public, charitable, or religious institutions, provided they said reader panels are located on the same property to which such reader panelsthey pertain. These panels shall and do not exceed twenty (20) square feet in total area per face nor more than ten (10) feet in height, and further provided said reader panels are located in such a manner as not to constitutemust be positioned so they do not create a hazard to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Electronic reader boards are also allowed under this exemption if they comply with applicable which otherwise comply with the signage requirements of the zone requirements, in which they are located, and do not include animation, characters, flashing, or similar rapid movements, and display which are programmed to change messages that change no more frequently than once every three (3) seconds. shall also be allowed as exempt signs for public, charitable or religious institutions.

Civic Event Sponsorship. One sign per business provided by said business, whichthat sponsors and contributes to the sports activities held upon public premisesproperty may be placed at said property is permitted, not to exceed thirtysix (36) square feet in area, per site. The sign may be displayed shall be permitted for Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
128
up to a period not to exceed ninety (90) days preceding before the event or season and must . Such sign shall be removed within fifteen (15) days after the event or season concludes.

Transit Advertising. Bus stop, shelter, and bench advertisements authorized under the City’s displays as permitted by the Transit Advertising Policy are exempt.

City Welcome Signs. Up to four (4) sSigns placed, owned, or funded by the City of Porterville may be installedand owned or funded by the City, around the periphery of the city limits at major transportation routes, either within public rights- of- way, or on third-partyprivate property with the property owner’s consent.d by a third party, as authorized by that party.

Prohibited Signs
The following types of signs and devices are specifically prohibited due to safety concerns, regulatory conflicts, or negative community impacts:

Animated, Flashing or Moving Signs. Signs that incorporate, flashing, moving, rotating, pulsating or intermittent lighting, with the exception of changeable copy message center display signs and barber poles, except as allowed elsewhere in this chapter. Any sign that, because of brilliant lighting, interferes with the enjoyment of surrounding residential property or interferes with traffic, vehicular or pedestrian, is prohibited.

Balloons, Banners, Streamers and Pennants. Signs, balloons, banners, pennants, or any other advertising display constructed of cloth, canvas, light fabric, paper, cardboard, wallboard or other light materials, except awnings or as allowed for Automobile/Vehicle Sales and Leasing establishments, or in Section 305.11, Temporary Signs.

Billboards. Any sign directing attention tothat advertises a business, service, or product that is not offered on the same property is prohibited, unless specifically allowed conducted, sold, produced, or offered by any use on the same lot, or which identifies by brand name a product which, although sold on the premises, does not constitute one (1) of the principal items for sale on the premises unless otherwise provided by the California Outdoor Advertising Act (Business and Professions Code Sections §§ 5200- – 5486, inclusive). A sign that promotes a brand name not considered a principal item for sale on the premises is also considered a prohibited billboard.

Noise, Odor, and Emissions. Signs that produce noise in excess of forty (40) decibels, excluding voice units at drive-through facilities, and signs that emit produce noise in violation of the City’s Noise Ordinanceexceeding forty (40) decibels, except for speaker units at drive-through facilities, contained in Article IX of this code, and signs that emit odor, or visible smoke, vapor, or particles.

Fence Signs. Signs attached or painted on fences or freestanding walls that are not part of a building, except for subdivision entry signs as allowed in Section 305.08 (b).

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
129
Feather Signs. Also known as feather flag, or advertising flag, constructed of a lightweight material with the shape resembling a bird’s feather or a teardrop that is designed to wave or move in the wind.

Obscenities. Signs that depict, describe or relate to “specified sexual activities” or “specified anatomical areas” as defined in Chapter 700Porterville Municipal Code Chapter 15, Article V, Section 15-43, Terms and Definitions.

Obstructions to Exits. Signs erected, constructed, or maintained which in a way that obstruct any firefighting equipment, fire escapes, required exits, or door openings intended as a means offor emergency ingress and/or egress, unless approved by the Fire Marshal.

Obstructions to Driver Visibility. Signs in corner cut-offs and lines of sight in accordance with the provisions ofthat interfere with visibility at driveways, intersections, or within corner cut-off areas, as defined in Section 300.16, Visibility at Driveways and Intersections..

Obstructions to Ventilation. Signs that block or interfere with any opening required for natural or mechanical ventilation.Portable Signs. Signs not permanently attached to, mounted upon or affixed to a building, structure or the ground, except as otherwise provided herein.

Posters. Posters of a temporary character nature that are tacked, painted, pasted, or otherwise placed or affixed and made visible from a public way, on the walls of buildings, on barns, sheds, trees, fences, utility poles, or other structures, sidewalks, or patios are prohibited, except as otherwise provided in this Cchapter. This section excludes signs placed in windows per Section 305.10 (e). Roof Signs. Signs erected or painted upon, over or above the roof of a building or structure, or any sign affixed to the wall of a building so that it projects above the ridge line or top of parapet, except as allowed in this chapter.

Figure 305.06(L): Roof Signs
Signs Creating Traffic Hazards. Signs that simulate in the color, size, or design of any traffic control sign, signal, or device, or that make use of words, symbols or characters in a manner way that interferes with, could misleads or confuses pedestrian drivers or vehicular trafficpedestrians, are prohibited. No sign, light, or advertising structure shall be placed in a location that creatested a in such a manner as to constitute a hazard to pedestrian vehicular or vehicular pedestrian traffic, or in such a manner as tothat obstructs free and clear vision where its, at any location where, by reason of the position, shape, color, or movement may could interfere with, obstruct block the view of, or be confused mistaken for with any authorized traffic sign, signal orcontrol device.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
130
Private signs on public property. Unless otherwise permitted by this code, private signs located on public lands, including but not limited to public rightss- of- way, parks, public buildings, storm drainage basins, and similar facilities, are prohibited, except as allowed in other sections of this ordinance. However, When associated withwith a community civic event, rental or reservation of such facility, signs may be placed during the an event that has an approved rental or reservation for the site. All such for which the reservation was made; however, such signs must be removed at the end of the reservation period. Any sign interfering with accessibility, the public right-of-way, or public safety will be subject to immediate removal.

General Standards
This section establishes general physical standards and requirements for signage. More detailed standards applicable tofor specific sign types, such as (e.g. wall signs or, awning signs,) are provided in Section 305.10, Standards for Specific Sign Types. In addition to these general standards, all signs shall must conform comply to with the specifications set forth of in Municipal Code Chapter 3, Advertising and Signs.

Maximum Allowable Sign Area. All signs shall conform to the maximum area requirements specified in Table 305.09, unless a different limit is approvedmodified through under an approved Master Sign Program.

Measuring Sign Area. The area of a sSign area includes the entire face of a the framed sign, including any border or frame, but does not include theexcludes supporting structures or poles. For signs composed of iIndividual letters, symbols, or logos attached mounted directly to a building wall or surface, the sign shall be measured by as the area enclosed bywithin a single continuous line outlining the perimeter drawn around the outermost edges of all elements of the sign.of the words, emblems, and logos.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
131
FIGURE 305.07(B): MEASURING SIGN AREA
Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
132
Double-Faced Signs. For double-faced signs, only one (1) side face shall be counted as the totalwhen calculating sign area. Where If the faces are not equal in size, the larger sign face shall be used as the basis for calculating sign area.

Multi-faced Signs. The For signs area of signs with three (3) or more sign faces, the sign area shall be calculated as the sum of two (2) sign faces. Where the faces are not equal in size, the larger sign faces shall be used as the basis for calculating sign area.

Three-dimensional Signs. For sSigns that include or consist of, or have attached to them, one (1) or more three-dimensional objects (i.e.i.e., ballsspheres, cubes, clusters of objects, sculpture, or statue-like trademarks), the sign shall have a sign area ofbe calculated as the sum of two (2) adjacent sides or sign faces.

Figure 305.07(B)(3): Three-dimensional Signs
Abandoned Signs. Any sign, including its supporting structure, which that no longer identifies the current occupant after a lapse of ninety (90) days, shall be deemed an abandoned sign and shall must be removed by the property owner of the property on which it is located. When a wall sign is removed, the wall surface behind it the sign shall be repaired and painted to match the surrounding facade. rest of the building wall. Any abandoned signs not removed or made blank within this time period shall be removed in accordance with pursuant to the removal procedures set forthestablished in this Cchapter.

Building Frontage. Building frontage shall be consideredrefers to the wall of a building that faces and is runs roughly parallel with to a public street, excluding an alleys. The length of that wall determines the allowable sign area. linear dimension of that building frontage shall be used to calculate allowable signage. Buildings with walls facing more than one public street may use the shall be allowed signage for each building frontage on each side to calculate permitted signage, as outlined in accordance with Table 305.09. For bBuildings located on interior lots (not located on a corner) and that are oriented perpendicular to a publicthe street shall, the larger of the front or side elevations shall be used to determine sign allowances. Sign be allowed signage based on the longer of the front or side building elevation. All, or a percentage, of the allowable sign area may be transferred between to the other Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
133
building elevations, provided no individual the sign area on any wall shall not exceeds the maximum allowable permitted sign area for that elevation, as set forth in for that wall in accordance with Table 305.09. If a For buildings that havehas no public street frontage along a public street, the Zoning Administrator will determine the applicable building frontage shall be determined by the Zoning Administrator. for sign calculation purposes.

Changeable Copy. Changeable copy shall may cover up to one hundred (100) no more than forty (40) percent of a the total sign allowance for manually changeable signs and an . For electronic message center signs with copy that can be changed or altered by electric, electro-mechanical, electronic, or any other artificial energy means, the changeable portion of the sign shall cover no more than forty (40) percent of the total sign allowance. The following uses are exempt from this restriction:
religious institutions, cinemas, government or civic uses, gas station uses, indoor theaters, schools, and colleges.

Clearance from Utilities. Signs and their supporting structures shall maintain clearance from and not interfere with electrical conductors, communications equipment or lines, surface and underground facilities and conduits for water, sewage, gas, electricity, and communications equipment or lines. Signs shall not be placed in public utility easements unless express written permission from the affected public utility is obtained.

Construction and Maintenance ±
Unless exempt, signs and supporting structures shall be installed in accordance with the current adopted Building Code.

All signs, together with all supporting structures, shall be maintained in the following manner:

Signs shall be kept free of rust, dirt, and chipped, cracked or peeling paint.

All hanging, dangling, torn or frayed parts of signs shall be promptly repaired, and graffiti and unauthorized attachments shall be removed.

Failed, damaged, or blinking illumination shall be promptly replaced.

Sign areas shall be kept free and clear of all noxious substances, rubbish, and weeds.

Discolored or faded panels on plastic faces shall be restored to their original condition and color.

Encroachment into Public Street or Sidewalk. Any sign projecting into a public right of way requires an encroachment agreement approved by the City Engineer.

Temporary signs such as A-frame/sandwich board signs as regulated under 305.10(f)(2) below are exempt from this requirement.

Illumination. Channel letters, internally illuminated signs and neon signs are permitted. Due to glare and non-directional illumination, Bbare bulbs visible from the public right- of -way are prohibited. On For signs with external illumination, Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
134
lights shall be provided with proper reflectors to concentrate the illumination on the area of the sign to prevent glare on the street or adjacent properties. All sign illumination shall adhere to the performance standards for lighting and glare in Chapter 306, Performance Standards.

Materials. Paper, cardboard, untreated plywood, and other materials subject to rapid deterioration shall be limited to signs displayed for no more than (30) days.

Sign Standards for Residential Districts
(a) Residential subdivisions are allowed one (1) monument sign or wall sign per street frontage for entry into the subdivision.

Religious facilities, multi-family residential projects, schools, civic uses and other nonresidential uses in R districts are allowed one (1) building-mounted sign and one (1) monument sign or freestanding sign/ with a maximum cumulative sign area of thirty-two (32) square feet.
(b) Residential subdivisions are allowed one (1) monument sign or wall sign per street frontage for entry into the subdivision. Each sign shall not exceed a maximum size of thirty-two (32) square feet.

Sign Standards for Non-Residential Districts
Signage in non-residential districts shall may include one or more of the following types of signs: awning and canopy signs, marquee signs, projecting signs, wall signs, window signs, monument signs, freestanding signs, commercial center identification signs, and temporary, portable A-frame, or sandwich board signs. Signs shall comply with the standards of Section 305.10.comply with the standards in Table 305.09 unless a different sign area allowed for a specific use is described elsewhere in this code. Buildings without clearly defined tenant space frontage shall share total sign area allowed per building as determined in Table 305.09.

All properties in non-residential districts shall be allowed a minimum sign area of twenty (20) square feet.

Table 305.09: SIGN AREA AND SIGN STANDARDS FOR

SPECIFIC SIGN TYPES AND ZONING DISTRICTS
Zoning
Districts
(Frontage)
Sign Area Allowed (Sq. Ft. Per
1 Linear Ft. Of Building
Frontage)
Permitted Sign Types
DR-N, D-MX 2 Awning and canopy
Marquee
Projecting
Wall
Window
D-PO 2 Awning and canopy
Projecting
Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
135
Monument
Window
D-PS 2 Awning and canopy
Marquee
Monument
Projecting
Wall
Window
DR-D, DR-S 2 Awning and canopy
Marquee
Projecting
Wall
Window
D-GC 2 Awning and canopy
Marquee
Monument
Projecting
Wall
Window

CMX, CN,
PO

1.5 Awning and canopy
Marquee
Monument
Freestanding
Projecting
Wall
Window
CG, CR 3 Awning and canopy
Marquee
Monument
Freestanding
Projecting
Wall
Window
IP, IG, IA 2 Awning and canopy
Marquee
Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
136
Standards for Signs
Awning and Canopy Signs. Marquee Signs, Projecting Signs. These signs are subject to the following standards:

Sign Clearance. Minimum of eight (8) feet.

Projection.

An under-canopy sign, attached to and hanging from an awning or canopy shall be located completely under the canopy or awning and shall not project beyond its edge. An under-canopy sign shall not count towards the sign area allowed.

A projecting sign cannot extend more than three (3) feet from the building to which it is attached.

Visibility. A projecting sign shall be erected in such a manner as not to create a traffic hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.

Figure 305.09(B): Marquee Signs
Figure 305.10(C): Projecting OR UNDER-CANOPY Signs
Wall Signs. Wall signs include any sign attached to, erected against, or painted upon the wall of a building or structure, the face of which is in a single plane parallel to the plane of the wall. Wall signs also include signs on a parapet or mansard roof. No wall sign may cover wholly or partially any required wall opening. Wall signs are also subject to the following standards:

Projection. Wall signs cannot extend more than twelve (12) inches beyond the face of the wall to which they are attached.

Monument
Freestanding
Projecting
Wall
Window
REC, PK, PS 2 Awning and canopy
Monument
Freestanding
Projecting
Wall
Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
137
Window Signs. Window signs painted or otherwise adhered directly onto a window are exempt from the permit requirements of this chapter and do not count towards the total sign area limit for a site, but are subject to the specific zoning district standards and the following standards:

Coverage. Window signs may shall cover no more than fifty (50) pup to onehundred (100) percent of the total glass window area along each building façade, subject to other applicable laws triggered by type and use of business.

Height. Window signs shall not be mounted or placed on windows higher than the second story.

Monument Signs. Freestanding signs erected on the ground or on a monument base designed as an architectural unit are allowed, subject to the specific zoning district standards and the following standards:

Visibility. A monument sign shall be erected in such a manner as not to create a traffic hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.

Figure 305.10(F): Monument Signs
Freestanding Signs. Freestanding signs are allowed subject to the specific zoning district standards and the following standards:

Visibility. A freestanding sign shall be erected in such a manner as not to create a traffic hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.

Projection. Freestanding signs shall not project beyond the property line.

FIGURE 305.10(G): FREESTANDING SIGNS
Other Sign Types
Commercial Center Identification Signs. Commercial Ccenter Iidentification signs may be erected in the Commercial and Employment districts, subject to the following limitations:

Visibility. A commercial center identification sign shall be erected in such a manner as not to create a traffic hazard to vehicles or pedestrians.

A-Frame/Sandwich Board Signs. Temporary, portable A-frame or sandwich board signs may be erected in all nonresidential zone districts, subject to the following limitations:

Maximum Number of Signs. One Two (12) A-frame/sandwich board signs per tenant space..

Maximum Sign Area. The total sign area shall not exceed a maximum of six (6) square feet per side.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
138
Location. One (1) A-frame Such sign may be placed within the building frontage. A second sign may encroach into the right -of -way up to two (2) feet from the property line provided there remains a contiguous five (5)- foot -wide walkable area when the sign is in place.

Removal. Such sign is to be removed during non-businessoperational hours.

Mobile Signs. Signs pulled on a trailer or otherwise mounted to a vehicle may be allowed subject to the following limitations:applicable laws such as Permit process. Only three such signs shall be permitted at a given time. A party wishing to present signage in a mobile or semi-mobile manner may apply for a conditional use permit. The conditional use permit will be valid for a term of one year. The three terms will initiate on a rotational basis, beginning in January, May, and September of each year. A lottery will be held in December, April, and August of each year for the respective terms.

Materials. A mobile sign permitted per this section shall be developed of materials as prescribed in Section 305.07, and shall include any additional design considerations to assure that such signs are securely and safely affixed to the host vehicle in consideration of its use on local streets and roadways.

Size. Signs may not exceed the height of the vehicle to which they are affixed by more than eighteen inches, and may not extend beyond the horizontal dimensions of the trailer on which they are mounted.

Exemptions. Decals, paint, stickers, and similar treatments affixed directly to the exterior of the host vehicle, or to a trailer, are exempted from this ordinance, provided that:

Lighting, changeable copy, and digital signs are not permissible exemptions.

In order for signage on a trailer to be exempt, the trailer shall meet the standard minimum dimensions established by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, in the Federal Size Regulations for Commercial Motor Vehicles.

Signs placed or displayed on vehicles parked in a conspicuous location that do not otherwise suit the above noted exemptions shall be considered mobile signage and are subject to this section.

Temporary Signs
Temporary Signs are not regulated by this ordinance.

Temporary signs shall be considered banners, flags, & other similar signs meant for a time period of ninety (90) days or less. These signs are typically made of cloth, plastic, or similar fast- deteriorating materials.

Any temporary sign may be removed/abated for public health and safety issues, accessibility restriction, or encroachment into the public right-ofwayROW/ or public property (except as expressly allowed in this ordinance)." Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
139
The following types of temporary signs are permitted, provided that they conform to the standards of this section:

Signs Associated with Non-Residential Uses: Banners, handheld signs, portable signs and other similar temporary advertising devices shall be prohibited, except for business openings, special events, promotional events and new subdivisions being developed in the City and are subject to the following:

A temporary sign permit shall be secured prior to the installation or display of any such sign. Issuance of a temporary sign permit may be contingent upon the overall permissible area available for temporary signs within a geographic area as identified in subsection (a)(6) of this section. In addition, the application would be reviewed in light of other temporary sign permit applications submitted for the same area, which may put such signs in conflict with subsection (a)(6) of this section.

A temporary sign permit shall be granted for any one business or building for a period of three (3) calendar months. A temporary sign permit shall authorize the business to display a banner, handheld sign, portable sign or inflatable sign for the duration of the sign permit. A maximum of two (2) such signs may be permitted with a single application.

No more than one temporary sign permit shall be in effect simultaneously for any business.

Each business shall be limited to a maximum of four (4) temporary sign permits in any calendar year. A temporary sign is not intended to be in lieu of a permanent sign. A temporary sign permit shall not be permitted longer than one (1) year before a permanent sign is installed.

Each business shall be limited to a maximum of one temporary sign permit during a “going out of business sale,” or the equivalent in any calendar year.

Unless otherwise authorized by a master sign program, freestanding temporary signs for multiple tenants of any one building, shopping center, office complex, or unified development shall be separated by a minimum of one hundred (100) feet.

All banners, regardless of their ratio allowance of signage to linear building frontage, shall not exceed forty (40) square feet in size.

A-frame signs are not considered temporary and as such do not apply to this section.

No temporary sign shall be mounted on or above roofs or mansards or otherwise extend above a parapet wall or ridge line of a structure.

During the period of time beginning sixty (60) days before a general, special, primary, or runoff election, and ending fifteen (15) days after such election, one additional temporary sign may be permitted without a temporary use permit, subject to the following size limitations:

Size Limitations in a Residential Zone District. The following size limitations apply:

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
140

0. Four (4) square feet of cumulative signage when located on private property with frontage on a local street as designated in the General Plan.

0. Eight (8) square feet of cumulative signage when located on private property with frontage on an Arterial or Collector Street as designated in the General Plan.

Size Limitations in a Non-Residential Zone District. The following size limitations apply:

0. Sixteen (16) square feet of cumulative signage when located on private property.

0. Four (4) square feet of cumulative signage when located within the public right of way.

Signs Associated With Residential Uses. On residential uses, non-illuminated temporary signs, with the size restrictions as specified below may be displayed at any time. However, during the period of time beginning sixty (60) days before a general, special, primary or runoff election, and ending fifteen (15) days after such election, the amount of display area may be doubled. Flags do not count toward the signage allowed under this provision.

Size Limitations in a Residential Zone District. The following size limitations apply:

Four (4) square feet of cumulative signage when located on private property with frontage on a local street as designated in the General Plan.

Eight (8) square feet of cumulative signage when located on private property with frontage on an Arterial or Collector Street as designated in the General Plan.

Size Limitations in a Non-Residential Zone District. The following size limitations apply:

Sixteen (16) square feet of cumulative signage when located on private property.

Four (4) square feet of cumulative signage when located within the public right of way.

Violations. Violation to any of the above regulatory conditions shall be deemed a public nuisance and may be summarily abated as such, and each day that such violation continues shall be regarded as a new and separate offense.

Developers of a new subdivision being developed in the City may be permitted signs subject to the following requirements:

One (1) sign per street frontage with a maximum of three (3) temporary signs may be permitted on the subdivision site in accordance with the following:

Maximum Sign Area. The maximum sign area may be no more than one hundred (100) square feet (total of all signs).

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
141
Height. A maximum of ten (10) feet
Duration. Signs shall be removed twelve (12) months from the date the permit for same is issued, or within one year of the date that the most recent building permit was issued for a new house within the subdivision.

Letter of Agreement. A Letter of Agreement from the property owners giving the City right of entry to remove signs in the event the above stipulations are not complied with shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of a sign permit. If at any time the property on which the signs are located is sold, the signs shall be removed, or a new Letter of Agreement shall be submitted from the buyer to permit the signs to remain and granting the City right to enter the property and remove the signs.

Up to four (4) off-site signs may be permitted in any zone, provided that:

Maximum Sign Area. The maximum sign area per sign may be no more than thirty-two (32) square feet.

Height. A maximum twelve (12) feet.

Duration. Said signs shall be removed twelve (12) months from the date the permit for same is issued, or within one year of the date that the most recent building permit was issued for a new house within the subdivision.

Consent of Landowner. A completed application form, including a notarized affidavit signed by each property owner of each site is required prior to issuance of a sign permit.

Permits Required; Review Process
Authority. Unless otherwise stated, the Zoning Administratorbuilding official shall review and approve all signs as specified in this chapter.

Applicability. Except for certain signs exempted in compliance with Section 305.05, Exempt Signs, no regulated sign shall be erected, re-erected, constructed or altered (excluding change of copy on a can or cabinet sign) without building official Zoning Administrator approval and a building permit is issued by the Building Division.

Applications for Filing, Processing and Review
Applicant. Sign owners or their designees shall apply for Building Permits for signs that require them.

Filing and Filing Fee. Application for such permits shall be made upon forms furnished by the Zoning Administratorbuilding official and accompanied by the required fee and working drawings adequate to show the location, construction and design, including colors, materials, lighting, electrical elements, and advertising copy, of the sign in accordance with applicable sign design guidelines and the linear footage of building frontage owned or leased by the business
Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
142
Compliance with Standards.

Upon acceptance of a sign application, the Zoning
Administratorbuilding official shall review the request for compliance with the locational and operational standards identified in this chapter, and with any standards established in a Master Sign Program pursuant to Section 305.13, Master Sign Program.

The Zoning Administratorbuilding official’s decision shall clearly state any conditions of approval or reasons for disapproval and applicable appeal provisions.

Appeals. Decisions by the Zoning Administratorbuilding official may be appealed subject to the provisions of Chapter 612, Appeals.

Master Sign Program
Purpose. The purpose of a Master Sign Program is to provide a method for an applicant to integrate the design and placement of signs within a project with the overall development design to achieve a more unified appearance. It is not the intent of this section to be used solely to request relief from the sign regulations in order to circumvent any requirements or purpose of this chapter.

Applicability. A Master Sign Program may be processed for any development.

However, shown below are examples of when a Master Sign Program may be most appropriate:

Nonresidential developments of three (3) or more separate tenants that share either the same parcel or structure and use common access and parking facilities (e.g., shopping centers, malls, office complexes and industrial parks); or
Developments with multiple structures with limited frontage or no frontage on a public street; or
Businesses conducted primarily outside of a building; or New multi-family residential developments of one hundred (100) or more units, or
Other developments where the strict application of the sign code unduly restricts the allowable signage that can be located on the parcel.

Application. Master Sign Program applications shall contain all written and graphic information needed to fully describe the proposed sign program, including the proposed location and dimension of each sign, as well as proposed color schemes, font types, materials, methods of attachment or support, and methods of illumination.

A Master Sign Program application shall also include calculation of total allowed sign area, and total proposed sign area, for the site.

Allowable Modifications. A Master Sign Program may provide for additional sign area and other deviations from the standards of this chapter, provided that the Master Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
143
Sign Program is consistent with the sections on design principles and general standards.

Review Authority. All Master Sign Programs are subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator, unless the signs are associated with a project that requires City Council review and approval; then the City Council shall review and approve it as part of the overall project approval.

Required Findings. In order to approve a Master Sign Program, the decision-making body shall find that all of the following are met, in addition to other applicable regulations in this section:

The proposed signs are compatible in style and character with any building to which the signs are to be attached, any surrounding structures and any adjoining signage on the site;
Future tenants will be provided with adequate opportunities to construct, erect or maintain a sign for identification;
Directional signage and building addressing is adequate for pedestrian and vehicular circulation and emergency vehicle access; and Use of the Master Sign Program provides a more desirable functional and aesthetic appearance than would otherwise be provided by standard code requirements.

Lessees to Be Informed of Master Sign Program. Lessees within developments subject to the requirements of an approved Master Sign Program shall be made aware of the Master Sign Program in their lease.

Revisions to Master Sign Programs. Revisions to an approved Master Sign Program shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator.

Nonconforming Signs
All legal nonconforming signs are permitted to remain unless they are subject to a permit condition or development agreement providing for their removal after a fixed period of time.

Any changes to legal nonconforming signs or their structures in terms of location, orientation, size, or height other than routine maintenance and repair or change of sign copy shall require the signs to be brought into conformance with this chapter.

A legal nonconforming sign loses its legal nonconforming status when the activity, product, business, service, or other use which was being advertised has ceased or vacated the premises for one hundred eighty (180) days, at which time it shall be considered an abandoned sign, subject to the requirements of Section 305.07(c), Abandoned Signs.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
144
Abatement and Removal of Illegal Signs
Authority to Abate. The City has the authority to abate illegal, and abandoned signs and signs that pose a threat to health and life safety.

Illegal Signs in the Public Right-of-Way. Illegal signs posted in the public right-ofway or upon public property may be removed by the Zoning Administrator orCode Enforcement officer without notice or hearing. Signs shall be retained by the City for a period of not less than thirty (30) days if identifiable. Thereafter, any unclaimed signs may be discarded.

Recovery of Costs. When the City is required to remove illegal or abandoned signs in compliance with this chapter, the reasonable cost of the removal may be assessed against the owner of the sign(s).

Sign Removal
Any sign, including its supporting structure, which no longer identifies the current occupant or products currently sold, or which otherwise fails to serve its original purpose, or is not maintained in a safe, presentable, and good condition, including the replacement of defective parts, painting, repainting, and cleaning, shall be removed by the owner of the property within 30 calendar days after written notice to do so from the Building Division.

Any sign which the Building Division establishes as unsafe or unsecure shall be corrected or removed, together with all supporting structures, by the owner of the property upon which the sign is located within thirty (30) days after written notice by the Building Division.

Such notice shall state the location of the sign, the nature of the violation, and/or the manner in which the sign constitutes a public nuisance. The notice also shall require the removal or other abatement of the sign before the date specified in the notice. Further, the notice shall state that failure to comply may result in the removal of the sign by the City and that the cost of such removal may be imposed on the owner of the property. The notice shall also include instructions for the filing of an appeal of the determination of the Zoning AdministratorBuilding Official that the sign is in violation of this chapter or constitutes a public nuisance. Such notice shall be served by posting on the property on which the sign is located and by registered or certified mail delivery, postage prepaid to the owner of the property, and, if known, the owner of the sign.

After the periods specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) above, the Building Division may cause such sign to be removed, and the cost of such removal shall become a lien against the property.

If a hazardous condition exists, the condition shall be corrected forthwith upon notice by the Building Division.

If an appeal is received prior to the date specified in the notice, abatement proceedings shall be suspended, and any deadlines shall be suspended, pending the outcome of such appeal.

Series 300: Additional Use and Development Regulations
145
ORDINANCE NO. __________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING SERIES 300

OF THE PORTERVILLE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE REGARDING SIGNS WHEREAS: At a regular meeting on June 17, 2025, the City Council of the City of Porterville reviewed Article 305 – Signs of the Porterville Development Ordinance.

WHEREAS: At said regular meeting, the City Council did direct staff to form a staff-led working group to conduct a comprehensive text amendment to Article 305 of the Porterville Development Ordinance, focused on relaxing regulatory requirements.

WHEREAS: The purpose of the proposed amendment is to streamline requirements and reduce regulatory burden on property owners and business pertaining to signs while retaining only those provisions necessary to protect public safety, health, and life.

WHEREAS: The staff-led working group thoroughly examined Article 305 and assessed opportunities for regulatory relief. As part of this process, staff conducted outreach efforts to engage the community and to solicit input from interested business owners and other stakeholders regarding the current sign regulations.

WHEREAS: At a regular meeting on August 18, 2025, the City Council of the City of Porterville did review the proposed changes to Article 305 and directed staff to schedule a public hearing for adoption of the text amendment.

WHEREAS: The proposed ordinance is an implementation measure of the policies, goals and objectives of the Porterville 2030 General Plan. Environmental Coordinator made a determination on the basis of substantial evidence that there is no possibility that the proposed text amendment could have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Porterville does hereby repeal and replace Series 300, Article 305-Signs of Chapter 21 of the Porterville Municipal Code, commonly referred to as the Development Ordinance, as attached hereto as Exhibit A, and fully incorporated herein by reference. This ordinance shall be in full force and effective thirty (30) days from and after its publication and passage.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this _____ day of _____________, 2025. ____________________________
Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:

Richard Tree, Interim City Clerk
By: _________________________________ Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk Item No. 19.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – SEPTEMBER 16, 2025
SUBJECT: Adoption of Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Budget
SOURCE: City Manager's Office
COMMENT: Consistent with the City Charter, the Interim City Manager has submitted for the City Council’s consideration the proposed Budget for the 2025–2026 Fiscal Year. Section 51 of the Charter requires the City Manager to provide, not later than thirty (30) days before the end of the City’s fiscal year, an estimate of expenditures and revenues for City departments for the ensuing year.

Included with the draft 2025–2026 Budget is the City Manager’s budget message, which outlines significant projects, operational priorities, and financial factors shaping the proposed budget. The message emphasizes the importance of maintaining fiscal discipline, aligning resources with City Council priorities, and reviewing budgetary targets throughout the fiscal year to make adjustments if necessary.

All spending authority from the continued Fiscal Year 2024–2025 Budget will expire on September 30, 2025. Adoption of the new budget is required to ensure payroll obligations are met and routine expenditures may continue to be incurred effective October 1, 2025.

On September 2, 2025, the proposed draft budget was presented to the City Council for review. Based on Council input and updated information, staff has made several refinements in preparing the final budget now before the Council for adoption. These include updated labor cost projections to reflect recently ratified agreements, adjustments to the Capital Improvement Program to ensure full funding for the 4th Street Community Center and Park and the Fire Station #72 remodel, a one-year funding allocation for the Armory Emergency Shelter, and the addition of two Water Utility Worker II positions to support the water meter replacement project.

These updates strengthen the proposed budget by addressing labor obligations, advancing priority community and public safety facilities, supporting emergency shelter operations, and bolstering utility staffing to meet infrastructure demands.

Item No. 19.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council conduct the Public Hearing; and consider for adoption the proposed 2025-2026 Fiscal Year Budget, including any modifications.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Manager Budget Message

2. Draft Resolution for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 General Fund Budget

3. Draft Resolution for the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Budgets for the Special Revenue, Proprietary, Capital Projects and Debt Service Funds

4. FY 2025-2026 Annual Budget - Fund Summaries

5. Draft FY 2025-2026 Annual Budget - Fund Details

6. Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Capital Improvement Program

7. Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Equipment Replacement Schedule

8. Fiscal Year 2025 - 2026 Recertification of Measure H Expenditure Plan
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

Richard Tree, Interim City Manager
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
1 City Manager’s FY 2025-2026 Budget Message
September 16, 2025
Honorable Mayor Meister, Vice Mayor McKervey, Councilmembers Beltran, Rivas, and Green, and the Residents of Porterville:

I am honored to present the City of Porterville’s Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2025–2026. This budget safeguards the essential services that residents rely on every day, invests in the critical infrastructure that supports growth, and advances the priorities of the City Council while maintaining the City’s long-term financial stability. It reflects our shared responsibility to manage resources with care, ensure that investments deliver measurable results, and positions Porterville to meet the challenges and opportunities of the future with confidence.

While this budget is balanced and forward looking, departments will also be required to manage their budgets in a disciplined manner, targeting 95% of their appropriations by the end of the fiscal year. This approach allows the City to address unforeseen needs that may arise during the year and strengthens sustainability as we move into the following fiscal cycle.

Community engagement has been central to the development of this budget. Input from residents, local organizations, and business partners has helped identify priorities that not only reflect the needs of today, but also position Porterville for the opportunities of tomorrow.

To guide this effort, City staff developed a management framework that identifies long-term priorities and organizes the City’s work around key focus areas. This framework aligns resources, strengthens organizational capacity, and ensures that operations remain focused on delivering value to the public.

CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
2 The budget also begins to address structural challenges that have strained the City in recent years.

It addresses the deficit in the Risk Management Fund, supports Golf Course operations while reducing its deficit, supports the Zalud House for long-term sustainability, and proposes ending the Armory Emergency Shelter with the conclusion of one-time funding. Together, these actions direct resources toward services and projects that can be sustained over time.

Financial Overview
The Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2025–2026 totals $187.6 million across all funds. The General Fund Operating Budget includes $35.54 million in expenditures dedicated to core services such as public safety, parks and recreation, community services, and general government operations. On the revenue side, the City is projecting $35.98 million in total General Fund revenues for this fiscal year, reflecting a modest 1% increase over last year despite property tax and sales tax revenues remaining relatively flat.

This year’s budget was prepared in the context of persistent inflationary pressures and the need to correct structural issues from the past. Rising employee salaries and benefits, higher construction and infrastructure costs, increased utility prices, and growth in administrative expenses all place added strain on City operations. These challenges, combined with slow revenue growth, create limited capacity for new initiatives without careful planning.

By acknowledging these realities and planning accordingly, the City is able to protect essential services while still investing in the future. This year’s budget is fiscally responsible and strategically targeted. It addresses long-term liabilities while directing resources toward projects that will strengthen Porterville for years to come.

A major component of this plan is the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which totals $149.1 million in planned projects. Highlights include:
• $41.5 million for bridges, streets, and traffic signals, including the final phase of the Main Street Reconstruction, citywide pavement preservation, and major regional mobility projects such as the State Route 190/Main Street intersection improvements, the State Route 65 Interchange, and the Westwood Roundabout.
• $31.6 million for water system improvements, including the Del Oro and Hope School system consolidations, construction of Well No. 37, upgrades at Well No. 34, compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) through GSA local CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
3 governance, planning for future tertiary treatment needs, and continuation of the citywide water meter replacement program. To support these projects and ensure timely implementation of the citywide water meter replacement program, this budget also adds two new Water Utility Worker II positions. These positions will expand the City’s capacity to perform maintenance, enhance reliability of service delivery, and meet the increased demands of Porterville’s growing water system infrastructure. • $6.9 million for wastewater treatment facility improvements, including local governance efforts to address state-mandated denitrification requirements, repairs to Digesters #1 and #4, and construction of a new water filling station to support community and operational needs.
• $38.1 million for parks and leisure improvements, including the City Hall roof replacement and ADA upgrades, Butterfield Corridor enhancements, construction of the new Community Center and Park at 4th Street, continuation of the design of the new Library, construction of the Santa Fe Sportsplex, expansion of the Navigation Center, and new amenities at Veteran’s Park including Trail Phase 2, a playground, and a community monument.
• $8.6 million for fire and police facilities, including the remodel of Fire Station #72, the design of Fire Station #71, and upgrades to the Police Emergency Operations Center • $17.3 million for Transportation Department improvements, including the design and construction of the new maintenance facility, the purchase of nine compressed natural gas (CNG) buses, and upgrades to transit facilities and bus stops throughout the city. • $1.28 million for airport improvements, including airfield electrical upgrades and fuel containment compliance.

Understanding the Budget
The City’s budget can be complex, but this year’s document has been organized into clear sections to make it easier for residents, stakeholders, and policymakers to understand how resources are managed. The Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2025–2026 includes the following components:

1. City Manager’s Budget Message provides a narrative overview of the City’s financial direction, key priorities, and major initiatives for the upcoming year.

2. Draft FY 2025–2026 Annual Budget – Fund Details outlines the specific revenues and expenditures within each City fund. For the first time, this section includes a column showing the variance between the FY 2024–2025 and FY 2025–2026 budgets, giving readers a clear picture of year-to-year changes.

CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
4 3. Fund Summaries present an overview of the City’s financial position across all funds, including available balances and reserves that protect services during economic downturns.

4. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) highlights planned investments in infrastructure, facilities, parks, and transportation projects that address both immediate needs and longterm growth.

5. Equipment Replacement Schedule identifies planned investments in vehicles, equipment, and technology to ensure operations remain safe, efficient, and modern.

6. Draft Resolutions authorize the General Fund Budget, Special Revenue Funds (including Measure H and Measure I), Capital Projects Funds, and Debt Service Funds, and provide for the annual recertification of the Measure H Expenditure Plan.

By organizing the budget in this way and incorporating new tools such as variance columns, the City aims to make the document more transparent and user friendly. These efforts allow residents and decision-makers to clearly see how funds are allocated, how priorities are reflected, and how resources are managed responsibly from one year to the next.

Management Framework
The City Manager’s Office has developed a management framework that guides how this budget is organized and how resources are aligned with community needs. The management framework provides staff with a clear set of priorities that connect financial decisions to measurable outcomes.

The framework identifies six priority areas: Safety and Quality of Life, Organizational Stewardship, Housing and Economic Development, Engaged and Collaborative Community, Reliable Infrastructure, and Workforce Development. Each of these areas reflects the balance between preserving essential services today and investing in the capacity to meet the demands of tomorrow.

This framework is more than a list of goals. It is a practical tool that ensures departments are not working in isolation, but instead are coordinating their efforts to support the larger vision for Porterville. It allows the City to measure progress, adjust strategies as needed, and keep accountability at the forefront of decision making. By linking budgetary resources to these six priorities, we can demonstrate how every dollar spent contributes to outcomes that matter to residents.

The framework also reinforces the value of long-term planning. Public safety, infrastructure renewal, housing opportunities, and workforce stability all require consistent investment over CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
5 multiple years. By integrating these focus areas into the budget process, the City can look beyond short-term pressures and remain committed to building a resilient, sustainable, and highperforming organization.

In this way, the management framework serves as both a financial guide and an operational compass. It provides clarity of direction, strengthens organizational capacity, and ensures that the City remains accountable to the community it serves.

Key Budget Initiatives

1. Safety and Quality of Life
Public safety remains the cornerstone of this budget. The Fire Department is fully funded and staffed, with $5.4 million allocated for the remodel of Fire Station #72 and $1.25 million for the design of Fire Station #71. These investments ensure that firefighters have the facilities, equipment, and resources necessary to meet the challenges of modern emergency response.

The Police Department is also fully funded and staffed. Resources are dedicated to fleet replacement, technology upgrades, and long-term facility planning. This year’s budget provides $500,000 for Emergency Operations Center upgrades and HVAC improvements, strengthening resiliency and reliability. Investments in training and community engagement will continue to build trust and accountability.

At the same time, quality of life improvements are central to the City’s vision for a safe, healthy, and connected community. Safety is not only measured by emergency response, but also by the environments where residents live, work, and raise families. This year’s budget directs substantial resources toward projects that improve parks, recreation, accessibility, and community services.

Investments include the new Community Center and Park at 4th Street, the continuation of the new Library design, and the expansion of the Navigation Center.

Neighborhoods will also benefit from the Veteran’s Park Trail Phase 2, a new playground and community monument at Veteran’s Park, and the design and construction of the Santa Fe Sportsplex, which will expand recreational opportunities and serve as a regional destination for CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
6 sports and family activities. Accessibility improvements, such as ADA upgrades at City Hall, ensure that public facilities remain welcoming and inclusive for all members of the community. These projects, combined with continued trail and corridor improvements, strengthen the sense of place, encourage active lifestyles, and reinforce pride in Porterville’s public spaces.

Together, these investments underscore the City Council’s belief that safety and quality of life are inseparable. By pairing investments in emergency preparedness with initiatives that support recreation, learning, accessibility, and community well-being, the City is taking a comprehensive approach to public service. This strategy ensures that Porterville not only remains safe, but also thrives as a community where residents enjoy a high quality of life and a strong connection to the places they call home.

2. Organizational Stewardship
Organizational Stewardship addresses the foundational systems that ensure the City can deliver services effectively while maintaining long-term fiscal health. The overall goal is to align the workforce and resources with the priorities of the City Council so that every action taken by the organization supports the broader direction of the community.

This budget reflects the principle that every dollar must count. To achieve this, the City is pursuing a multi-year strategy that carefully evaluates staffing levels, operational practices, and financial commitments. Aligning the workforce means ensuring that staff capacity is targeted toward the Council’s goals and community priorities. It also requires the City to responsibly reduce workforce pressure on the General Fund, Measure I, and Measure H, with a focus on creating long-term sustainability. This is not a one-year fix. It is a diligent, ongoing effort that will require discipline, regular review, and a shared commitment by all Department Directors to carry forward a strategic plan that reflects both fiscal realities and community needs.

Modernizing operations is another essential part of stewardship. The City is investing in technology that allows residents to access services such as permits and business licenses online, while also streamlining internal processes to reduce costs and improve efficiency. A comprehensive energy audit will establish the foundation for lowering long-term utility costs, while investments in modern municipal software will break down silos across departments, improve planning and CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
7 reporting, and provide clear accountability by mapping dollars to strategic initiatives and tracking key performance indicators.

Customer service is also a key part of stewardship. The City is committed to ensuring that every resident’s experience with their local government is timely, professional, and reliable. Streamlining operations and investing in technology are not only about cost savings, they are also about improving responsiveness to the community. By focusing on customer service, the City reinforces the trust between residents and their government and ensures that every interaction provides value.

Organizational Stewardship is ultimately about ensuring that every dollar contributes to the success of the community. Through careful workforce alignment, modernization of operations, improved customer service, and a disciplined multi-year approach, the City of Porterville is building a framework that supports both immediate service delivery and long-term sustainability.

3. Housing and Economic Development
The City Council continues to strengthen Porterville’s businessfriendly climate through efforts to reduce regulations in the Development Ordinance. These actions send a clear message that Porterville is open for business and ready to support investment.

This year’s budget prioritizes downtown, the heart of Porterville’s economy and community life. The final phase of the Main Street Reconstruction and the new Main Street Parking Lot will improve accessibility, support small businesses, and enhance the overall downtown experience.

Beautification projects, including painting historic light poles, installing new trash receptacles, and displaying historical flags, will add character and prepare downtown as we honor Porterville’s 100 years as a Charter City alongside the nation’s 250 years of independence.

Beyond downtown, the budget continues the design of the new Library, expands the Navigation Center, and funds improvements at the Santa Fe Sportsplex and Veteran’s Park. Pedestrian safety projects near schools and high-traffic areas will make neighborhoods safer and more connected.

At the same time, updated sidewalk vending policies will ensure that local businesses are protected and supported.

CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
8 These efforts balance regulatory reform, investment in public spaces, and protection for small businesses, ensuring that Porterville remains a city where families and businesses can thrive.

4. Engaged and Collaborative Community
The City is committed to strengthening public trust and fostering collaboration with residents, businesses, and community partners.

Engagement is not only about listening, it is about creating meaningful opportunities for participation and ensuring that residents can see how their input shapes decisions.

The study sessions held this year for both the operating budget and the Capital Improvement Program set an important precedent for transparency and collaboration. By presenting a line-by-line review and openly acknowledging the structural issues that have challenged the City for years, staff and Council began a candid conversation with the community about both the realities we face and the solutions being proposed. These study sessions are not the conclusion of that dialogue, but the beginning of an ongoing process to keep residents engaged, informed, and involved in shaping Porterville’s financial future.

Technology also plays a vital role in supporting an engaged and collaborative community.

Investments in modern communication platforms, digital access to services, and improved reporting systems allow residents to connect with City Hall anytime and from anywhere. These tools make government more accessible and ensure that community voices remain at the center of the decision-making process.

5. Reliable Infrastructure
Reliable infrastructure is one of the most critical responsibilities of City government and a top priority of the City Council. Deferred maintenance remains one of the most significant long-term challenges facing the City. Decades of underinvestment in streets, water systems, and community facilities cannot be resolved in a single year, but this budget takes a strong step toward addressing those needs.

CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
9 This year’s budget dedicates $41.5 million to streets and transportation. Investments include the final phase of the Main Street Reconstruction and a new Main Street Parking Lot, which together will complete a major downtown revitalization effort. The City is also committing $1.35 million for pavement preservation projects and $3 million for self-performed street maintenance, ensuring that neighborhoods see visible improvements while extending the life of existing roadways.

Regional mobility is being advanced with $1.71 million allocated for State Route 190 Main Street Intersection Improvements, $3.3 million in matching funds for the State Route 65 Interchange, and $3.7 million for the Westwood Roundabout.

Pedestrian and traffic safety are equally important. This budget funds the design and construction of the Newcomb and Mulberry Traffic Signal at $385,914 million, along with three HAWK crossings and nine new rapid flashing beacons throughout the community.

Water infrastructure also receives major attention, with $31.7 million in planned projects. This includes $14 million for the Del Oro and Hope School system consolidations, $4.5 million for the construction of Well No. 37, and $3 million for improvements at Well No. 34. In addition, $430,000 has been allocated to support compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

Facility and park improvements are also key components of the Capital Improvement Program, with $41.6 million planned for FY 2025–2026. These include a new Library design at $3.2 million, the Navigation Center expansion at $2.3 million, the Butterfield Corridor at $2.1 million, $2.75 million for improvements at Veteran’s Park, and $4.7 million for enhancements at the Santa Fe Sportsplex.

6. Workforce Development
The City’s workforce is the foundation of its ability to deliver services effectively, and this budget makes clear that investing in employees is also an investment in the community. This year’s budget provides a 10% wage increase over the next two years for the Police Department, a 13% wage increase over the next three years for the Fire Department, and a 3% wage increase for all other bargaining units and unrepresented employees.

Workforce development is about more than compensation. The City is dedicated to fostering an environment where employees can grow and succeed through CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
10 expanded training opportunities and cross-functional collaboration. This approach breaks down silos, strengthens teamwork across departments, and ensures the organization can adapt to challenges while delivering services more effectively.

Technology investments are also central to workforce development. The City is providing employees with modern tools that improve communication, streamline workflows, and enhance customer service. These investments will allow staff to better meet the needs of residents and ensure that every interaction reflects the professionalism and responsiveness that the community expects.

Improving customer service is another priority. Employees are being equipped not only with the technical skills, but also with the training and resources to serve residents with efficiency, accuracy, and respect. The goal is to ensure that every resident’s experience with their local government is one of trust and reliability.

In addition to these investments, this budget also adds two Water Utility Worker II positions in the Public Works Department to support the water meter replacement program and strengthen the City’s ability to maintain reliable service delivery as infrastructure demands increase.

By combining fair compensation, recognition of performance, training and development opportunities, collaboration across departments, and investments in technology and customer service, the City is building a workforce that is motivated, accountable, and results driven.

Looking Ahead
Porterville will continue to face financial challenges, including pension and benefit obligations, inflationary costs, and the need to reduce decades of deferred maintenance. These pressures require careful management and forward thinking. At the same time, the City is entering a period of opportunity, with major regional projects advancing, new state and federal funding sources on the horizon, and community momentum building around downtown, transit, and parks.

Over the next several years, City staff will be focused on building long-term sustainability. This means continuing to align the workforce with Council priorities, stabilizing internal service funds, and ensuring that enterprise operations such as transit, water, and refuse remain financially strong.

Looking beyond FY 2025–2026, the Capital Improvement Program identifies several transformative projects. In FY 2026–2027, the City will need to carefully reevaluate whether it is in the best interest of the community to move forward with major wastewater improvements, CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
11 including the denitrification project and the tertiary treatment facility expansion. Together, these represent some of the largest utility investments in the City’s history, and staff will continue to analyze costs, regulatory requirements, and long-term impacts before recommending a path forward.

The next fiscal year will also advance public safety priorities, with the planned remodel of Fire Station #71 and Emergency Operations Center, supported by a $10 million federal earmark secured by Senator Hurtado. These investments will expand capacity, modernize facilities, and ensure the City is prepared to respond effectively to emergencies.

A key element of long-term sustainability is addressing the City’s reliance on local revenue measures. Both Measure I and Measure H lack the strategic planning and leadership needed to ensure their effectiveness over the next decade. Without corrective action, many of the projects scheduled in this year’s Capital Improvement Program may be delayed or canceled, and future planned projects face the risk of being unfunded. To protect the City’s financial stability, the Council and staff must carefully evaluate operational needs and capital priorities over the next ten years, aligning expenditures with available revenues. By doing so, Porterville can safeguard its ability to deliver essential infrastructure and maintain community confidence in these voterapproved measures.

As Porterville prepares to celebrate its 100th anniversary as a Charter City and the nation’s 250th year of independence, these milestones provide perspective not only on where we have been, but where we are going. The choices made in this budget lay the groundwork for the next chapter, positioning Porterville to remain resilient, innovative, and community-centered. With these commitments, the City is advancing with purpose, guided by a commitment to serve residents today while preparing responsibly for the needs of tomorrow.

Executive Leadership
The preparation of this budget reflects the collaborative leadership of Porterville’s executive team, whose dedication ensures effective service delivery aligned with the City Council’s vision. Each director plays a vital role in managing operations, resources, and community outcomes:
• Richard Tree, Interim City Manager / Director of Transportation • Donnie Moore, Acting Deputy City Manager / Director of Parks and Leisure Services • Janie Rodriguez, Finance Director
CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
291 N. MAIN STREET, PORTERVILLE, CA 93257
(559) 782-7466
12 • Yuliana Andrade, Administrative Services Director
• Chief Jake Castellow, Chief of Police
• Chief Bryan Cogburn, Fire Chief
• Claudia Calderon, Director of Community and Economic Development • Javier Sanchez, Director of Engineering & Project Management • Robert Alvarez, Acting Public Works Director
Together, this leadership team brings diverse expertise and a unified commitment to public service.

Their coordinated efforts ensure that each department not only fulfills its mission, but also contributes to the City’s broader goals and the well-being of Porterville residents.

Gratitude and Collaboration
This budget is the result of countless hours of work, collaboration, and dedication. I want to recognize the skill and professionalism of each Department Director and their staff, whose efforts to plan, prepare, and formalize this year’s document reflect an unwavering commitment to the community. Special recognition is due to Acting Deputy City Manager Donnie Moore, Finance Director Janie Rodriguez, and Assistant Finance Director Trisha Whiteley, whose leadership and expertise guided this process.

I also extend my gratitude to Mayor Meister, Vice Mayor McKervey, Councilman Beltran, Councilman Rivas, and Councilman Green for their guidance and commitment to the priorities of Porterville. Most importantly, I recognize the residents of Porterville, whose trust and engagement provide the foundation for everything we do.

This collaborative spirit between City Council, staff, and community partners ensures that Porterville continues to move forward with strength and purpose.

Sincerely,
Richard Tree
Interim City Manager