Agenda packet — Porterville City Council, December 2, 2025 (part 1 of 2)

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025

Page 1 of 5 ends

CITY OF PORTERVILLE - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY HALL, 291 N. MAIN STREET

PORTERVILLE, CALIFORNIA
DECEMBER 2, 2025, 5:30 PM
The City of Porterville provides access to view city council meetings electronically. Please note that this service is offered as a courtesy and may not always be accessible to the public. To ensure the opportunity to participate in public comments and scheduled public hearings, individuals must attend in person.

This meeting will be available for viewing via YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/@cityofporterville4149
Please direct any questions to the Office of City Clerk at 559-782-7464.

Call to Order
Roll Call

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is the opportunity to address the City Council on any matter scheduled for Closed Session. Unless additional time is authorized by the Council, all commentary shall be limited to three minutes.

CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION:

A. Closed Session Pursuant to:

1 - Government Code Section 54956.8 – Conference with Real Property Negotiators/Property: APN: 243-330-022. Agency Negotiator: Richard Tree. Negotiating Parties: City of Porterville and Michael L McElhany & M Cherry (TRS). Under Negotiation: Terms and Price.

2 - Government Code Section 54956.8 – Conference with Real Property Negotiators/Property: APN: 245-010-091. Agency Negotiator: Richard Tree. Negotiating Parties: City of Porterville and Ben Ennis. Under Negotiation:

Terms and Price.

3 - Government Code Section 54956.8 – Conference with Real Property Negotiators/Property: APN: 245-010-049. Agency Negotiator: Richard Tree. Negotiating Parties: City of Porterville and Pam Coons. Under Negotiation:

Terms and Price.
4- Government Code Section 54956.95 – Liability Claim: Claimant: Lacey Cabrera. Agency claimed against: City of Porterville.

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025

Page 2 of 5 ends

5 - Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) – Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Dominguez v. City of Porterville, et al., Tulare County Superior Court Case No. VCU328001.

6 - Government Code Section 54956.9(d) (2) – Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Significant Exposure to Litigation: One (1) case in which facts are not yet known to potential plaintiff.
7 - Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4) – Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Initiation of Litigation: Two (2) cases. 6:30 P.M. RECONVENE OPEN SESSION AND REPORT ON REPORTABLE ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED

SESSION
Pledge of Allegiance Led by Council Member Green
Invocation

COUNCIL COMMENTS

PRESENTATIONS
Veterans Homecoming Queen and Her Court
Employee of the Month - Robert Ruiz III
City Employee Recognition

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is the opportunity to address the Council on any matter of interest, whether on the agenda or not. Please address all items not scheduled for public hearing at this time. Unless additional time is authorized by the Council, all commentary shall be limited to three minutes.

CONSENT CALENDAR
All Consent Calendar Items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless a request is made, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar. All items removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion will be heard at the end of Scheduled Matters.

1. Approval of Draft Minutes of November 18, 2025
Re: Considering approval of the City Council draft Minutes of November 18, 2025.

2. Authorization of Emergency SCADA System Repairs at Rocky Hill and Martin Hill Reservoir Re: Consideration of emergency authorization for SCADA system repairs at the Rocky Hill and Martin Hill Reservoir, including approval of a not-to-exceed expenditure of $21,043 and direction to the Finance Director to issue a Purchase Order to Primex Company.

3. Authorization to Repair Airport Fuel Island Concrete Re: Consideration to authorize the repair of the Porterville Municipal Airport fuel island concrete pad using the lowest responsive quote from Austin Enterprise and to approve a total project cost not to exceed $13,836.24, including a 10% contingency.

4. Authorization of CivicPlus Contract Renewal
City Council Agenda December 2, 2025

Page 3 of 5 ends

Re: Consider the authorization of the CivicPlus contract renewal for agenda and meeting management services in the amount of $12,552.97.

5. Authorization to Enter into Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Valley Adult Day Services for Coordinated Transportation Services
Re: Consider approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Porterville and Valley Adult Day Services for coordinated transportation services using Porterville Transit’s paratransit demand-response program.

6. Status and Review of Declaration of Local Flood Emergency Re: Review of the Declaration of Local Emergency made on March 13, 2023, concerning the significant weather event and impacts relative to flood event.

A Council Meeting Recess Will Occur at 8:30 p.m., or as Close to That Time as Possible

PUBLIC HEARINGS

7. Villas at Winding Creek Tentative Subdivision Map and Conditional Use Permit Re: Hold a Public Hearing to receive public testimony and consider the Villas at Winding Creek Residential Development Project, located on an 8.76-acre parcel along the Poplar Ditch between Wisconsin Street and Indiana Street, including adoption of the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as well as approval of a Conditional Use Permit for reduced lot sizes and a Tentative Subdivision Map for a 32-lot residential subdivision.

8. Krayola Korner Modification of Conditional Use Permit Re: Consideration of a resolution approving a modification to Conditional Use Permit 10- 88, which authorized the operation of a childcare facility within the existing single-family residential structure at 420 N. E Street.

9. Adoption of an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement Between the City of Porterville and Cannabis Express, Inc. for the Relocation of a Retail Cannabis Dispensary to 1432 W. Olive Avenue, Unit A
Re: Public Hearing regarding the introduction of a draft ordinance approving a Development Agreement between the City and Cannabis Express, Inc. to facilitate relocation of the cannabis dispensary to 1432 W. Olive Avenue, Unit A and enable the State licensing process.

10. Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Article XV to Chapter 2 of the Porterville Municipal Code Establishing Principles of Individual Liberty
Re: Public Hearing to receive public testimony and consider the first reading of the draft Ordinance adding Article XV to Chapter 2 of the Porterville Municipal Code to establish the City’s commitment to individual liberty, including medical freedom, parental rights, nondiscrimination protections, and related provisions.

SECOND READINGS
City Council Agenda December 2, 2025

Page 4 of 5 ends

11. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1921, Amending Article I of Chapter 7 of the Municipal Code of the City of Porterville and Adopting by Reference the 2025 Editions of the California Administrative Code, The California Building Code Along with Designated Appendices, The California Residential Code Along with Designated Appendices, The California Energy Code, The California Historical Buildings Code, The California Existing Building Code, The California Referenced Standards Code, and The Wildland-Urban Interface Code.

Re: Adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 12, Amending Article I Of Chapter 7 Of The Municipal Code Of The City Of Porterville And Adopting By Reference The 2025 Editions Of The California Administrative Code, The California Building Code Along With Designated Appendices, The California Residential Code Along With Designated Appendices, The California Energy Code, The California Historical Buildings Code, The California Existing Building Code, The California Referenced Standards Code, And The Wildland-Urban Interface Code As Published By The International Code Council.

12. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1922, Amending Section 7-4 of the Municipal Code of the City of Porterville, Adopting by reference the 2025 Edition Of The California Mechanical Code
Re: Adoption of an ordinance amending section 7-4 of the Municipal Code of the City of Porterville, adopting by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Mechanical Code, published by The International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials.

13. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1923, Amending Section 7-6 of the Municipal Code of the City of Porterville, Adopting by Reference the 2025 Edition of the California Plumbing Code
Re: Adoption of an ordinance amending section 7-6 of the municipal code of the City of Porterville, adopting by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Plumbing Code published by The International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials

14. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1924, Amending Section 7-9 and Deleting Section 7-10 of the Municipal Code of the City of Porterville and Adopting by Reference the 2025 Edition of the California Electrical Code
Re: Adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Porterville amending section 7-9 and deleting Section 7-10 of the municipal code of the City of Porterville, and adopting by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Electrical Code Published By Bni Publications, Inc.

15. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1925, Amending Article IV of Chapter 7 of the Municipal Code of the City of Porterville, Adopting by Reference the 2025 Edition of the California Green Building Standards Code
Re: Adoption of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Porterville, amending Article IV of Chapter 7 of the municipal code of the City of Porterville, adopting by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Green Building Standards Code, published by The International Code Council.

SCHEDULED MATTERS
City Council Agenda December 2, 2025

Page 5 of 5 ends

16. Authorization to Purchase Veterans Park Playground
Re: Council direction on the purchase of a playground for Veterans Park; consideration of authorization for the Deputy City Manager to negotiate and execute all necessary documents for the playground purchase, in an amount not to exceed $385,000 using budgeted Measure I funds; and consideration of authorizing the distribution of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the ADA connectivity path portion of the project, with a cost not to exceed $15,000.

17. City Hall American Flag Distribution Program
Re: Consideration to implement a quarterly flag replacement program beginning January 2026 and to allocate $2,000 annually from the Community Promotion Budget for replacement flags and presentation materials.

AB 1234 REPORTS
This is the time for all AB 1234 reports required pursuant to Government Code § 53232.3.

1. Downtown Porterville Committee Meeting - November 20, 2025

2. Porterville Area Development Authority (PADA) - November 21, 2025

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

OTHER MATTERS

CLOSED SESSION
Any Closed Session Items not completed prior to 6:30 p.m. will be considered at this time.

ADJOURNMENT - to the meeting of December 16, 2025, at 5:30 p.m.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the California Ralph M. Brown Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, requesting electronic participation as an accommodation, or to be able to access this agenda and documents in the agenda packet, please contact the Office of City Clerk at (559) 782-7464. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting and/or provision of an appropriate alternative format of the agenda and documents in the agenda packet.

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the Agenda packet are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Office of City Clerk, 291 N. Main Street, Porterville, CA 93257, and on the City’s website at www.ci.porterville.ca.us.

Item No. 1.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – DECEMBER 2, 2025
SUBJECT: Approval of Draft Minutes of November 18, 2025 SOURCE: Administrative Services
COMMENT: Presented for Council's approval are the draft Minutes of November 18, 2025.

RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the draft Minutes of November 18, 2025.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Minutes of November 18, 2025
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

Yuliana Andrade, Administrative Services Director
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk

Page 1 of 15 ends

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
CITY HALL, 291 N. MAIN STREET

PORTERVILLE, CALIFORNIA
NOVEMBER 18, 2025, 5:30 PM
Call to Order at 5:30 p.m.

Roll Call: Council Member AJ Rivas, Council Member Stan Green, Council Member Raymond Beltran, Vice Mayor Edward L. McKervey, Mayor Greg Meister

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
• Brian Ennis, Porterville, addressed longstanding Lombardi traffic issues, noted past efforts and recent positive discussions with city officials, and expressed willingness to help find a solution. • Jason Callison, Porterville, opposed reopening Castle, citing high costs, the long process, and negative impacts on property owners, and urged the city to prioritize road repairs instead. • Don Weyhrauch, Porterville, expressed concern over closed session discussions on Lombardi properties, urged support of existing developer partnerships, and recommended reviewing all facts before decisions.
• Pam Coons, Porterville, opposed the proposed road, noting it would harm her property, and asked the Council to consider alternatives and spend funds wisely.

CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION:

A. Closed Session Pursuant to:
1 - Government Code Section 54956.8 – Conference with Real Property Negotiators/Property: APN: 243-330-022. Agency Negotiator: Richard Tree. Negotiating Parties: City of Porterville and Michael L McElhany & M Cherry (TRS). Under Negotiation:

Terms and Price.
2 - Government Code Section 54956.8 – Conference with Real Property Negotiators/Property: APN: 245-010-091. Agency Negotiator: Richard Tree. Negotiating Parties: City of Porterville and Ben Ennis. Under Negotiation: Terms and Price. 3 - Government Code Section 54956.8 – Conference with Real Property Negotiators/Property: APN: 245-010-049. Agency Negotiator: Richard Tree. Negotiating Parties: City of Porterville and Pam Coons. Under Negotiation: Terms and Price. 4 - Government Code Section 54956.8 – Conference with Real Property Negotiators/Property: APN: 253-018-001. Agency Negotiator: Richard Tree. Negotiating Parties: City of Porterville and Dr. Wilson Park. Under Negotiation: Terms and Price. 5 - Government Code Section 54956.95 – Liability Claim: Claimant: Sarai Robles. Agency Claimed Against: City of Porterville.
6 - Government Code Section 54956.9(d) (2) – Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Significant exposure to litigation: Six (6) cases: 1) Five cases in which facts are not

Page 2 of 15 ends

yet known to potential Plaintiffs, and 2) Letter from Attorney Brent Mcmanigal dated 10/02/2025.
7 - Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4) – Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Initiation of Litigation: Two (2) cases.
6:30 P.M. RECONVENE OPEN SESSION AND REPORT ON REPORTABLE ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED

SESSION
City Attorney Lew reported action pertaining to A-5, as follows:

A-5. On a MOTION made by Council Member Beltran, and SECONDED by Vice Mayor McKervey the City Council unanimously denied the claim filed by Sarai Robles.

Documentation: M.O. 01-111825
Disposition: Claim denied.

The Pledge of Allegiance Led by Council Member Rivas
Invocation – a member of the public came forward and gave an invocation.

PRESENTATIONS
Recognition of St. Anne’s School 100th Anniversary
Recognition of SCCA and Porterville College Students – Fire Hydrant Art

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
• Darrin Garrett, Porterville, recognized city staff for exceptional service and expressed frustration with delays in plan review and property splits to his future business, urging timely city processes and accountability.
• Leticia Hinojosa, King Tulare Homeless Alliance, requested continued funding for two Porterville projects housing twenty-three (23) previously homeless individuals, noting federal funding limitations that could jeopardize these programs. • Mary Culver, Central Valley Family Crisis Center, emphasized the potential loss of supportive housing funding for twenty-three (23) clients with disabilities due to new federal Notice of Funding Opportunity requirements.
• Neil Johnson, requested code flexibility for his church’s residential trash bin enclosure, noting minimal trash generation and the site’s location on the city outskirts. • Brian Ennis, Porterville, supported the adoption of the 2025 California Building Code and urged collaboration with builders for smooth implementation. • Jennifer Canela, Springville, urged the Council to address Lombardi/Castle traffic with the least disruptive solution, citing a petition from Pathways parents. • Jean Vafeades, Porterville, raised concerns about two flags on Main Street, questioning funding, approval, and duration, and noted their modern use by extremist groups. • Brock Neeley, Porterville, criticized the political use of Veterans Day and inflammatory communications from Vice Mayor McKervey, urging the Vice Mayor to resign.

Page 3 of 15 ends

• Luis Gonzalez, Porterville, advocated for support of vulnerable populations, including the disabled, elderly, veterans, and low-income residents, emphasizing their voice and inclusion. • John Coffee, Porterville, condemned the use of a veteran’s salute for campaign purposes and requested an apology and resignation from the responsible council member. • Ted Bastion, Porterville, requested city action to address a squirrel infestation originating from airport fields affecting his property.
• Pamela Thompson, Porterville, requested transparency, fairness, and accountability regarding actions toward Police Chief Jake Castellow while on protected leave. • Ador Cardenas, Porterville Chamber of Commerce, provided updates on upcoming Chamber events, including ribbon cuttings, the Children’s Christmas Parade, and Coffee with the CEO/City events.
• Paul Flores, Porterville, criticized the historical justification of city flags, citing modern extremist use, and raised concerns about Porterville Area Coordinating Council operations and associated officials.
• Greg Shelton, Porterville, opposed the proposed $2.1 million road in relation to the Lombardi/Castle area, citing prior abandonment of Castle, a free driveway for a property owner, and urged a practical route solution.
• Ryan Coons, Porterville, opposed the proposed road in relation to the Lombardi/Castle area, noting it would disrupt homes and his trucking business, and urged using the field instead. • Jennifer Sills, Porterville, opposed the favored road route in relation to the Lombardi/Castle area, citing cost, personal vendettas, and the irreplaceable nature of her property and family legacy.
• Taha Saleh, Porterville, thanked the Council and police, requested reactivation of the Charter Review Committee, and suggested improved communication with constituents at council meetings.
• Crystal Barteau, Porterville, addressed the emotional toll on her husband, Assistant Police Chief Dominic Barteau, a police officer on protected leave, urging the Council to act with transparency, dignity, and respect.

REPORTS
I. City Commission and Committee Meetings

1. Animal Control Commission - November 13, 2025

2. Youth Commission - November 12, 2025
II. Staff Informational Reports

1. Fall 2025 Community Clean-Up And Disposal Event Results

CONSENT CALENDAR
There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion.

COUNCIL ACTION: MOVED by Council Member Beltran, SECONDED by Council Member Rivas that the City Council approve Items Nos. 1-8. The motion carried unanimously.

Page 4 of 15 ends

1. AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE COUNCIL

CHAMBERS RENOVATION PROJECT
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Authorize staff to advertise Request for Proposals for the Council Chambers Renovation Project; and

2. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to take such actions as necessary to implement the RFP process and return to the City Council with a recommendation for award.

Documentation: M.O. 02-111825
Disposition: Approved.

2. AWARD OF PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING ALLOCATION (PLHA) YEAR 3

UNSUBSCRIBED FUNDS
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Award CCFCC in the amount of $31,813.45 for Emergency Shelter & Bridge Housing Operations and $8,101.57 for Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) Operations;

2. Award FSTC in the amount of $7,710.00 for PSH Operations; and

3. Award Kings View in the amount of $31,813.46 for Emergency Shelter & Bridge Housing.

Documentation: M.O. 03-111825
Disposition: Approved.

3. AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD CONTRACT – FIRE STATION 72 ADDITION AND

REMODEL PROJECT
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Award the Fire Station 72 Addition and Remodel Project to 4C Global, Inc (dba 4Creeks Build) in the amount of $2,695,000;

2. Authorize progress payments up to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract amount;

3. Authorize a ten percent (10%) contingency to cover unforeseen circumstances; and

4. Authorize an additional ten percent (10%) for construction management, surveying, quality control and inspection services.

Documentation: M.O. 04-111825
Disposition: Approved.

Page 5 of 15 ends

4. ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT - HENRAHAN STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Accept the Henrahan Street Reconstruction Project as complete;

2. Authorize the filing of the Notice of Completion by the City Clerk; and

3. Authorize the return of $425,614.81 in unused Measure I funds to the Measure I fund balance for future eligible improvement projects.

Documentation: M.O. 05-111825
Disposition: Approved.

5. AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL PROJECT FUNDS FOR THE CHARGING

STATION REPLACEMENT PROJECT
Recommendation: That the City Council authorize an increase of $126,000 in project funds for the Charging Station Replacement Project to cover additional expenses for sales tax, freight, performance bond, and engineering services, with costs to be funded by existing project-specific grant funds.

Documentation: M.O. 06-111825
Disposition: Approved.

6. APPROVAL OF A 90-DAY EXTENSION OF THE OPTION TO PURCHASE AND SALE

AGREEMENT WITH SELF-HELP ENTERPRISES
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Approve a 90-day extension of the Option to Purchase – Purchase and Sale Agreement with Self-Help Enterprises for the City-owned property located at Springville Avenue and Jaye Street (APN 260-300-034); and

2. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute the Option to Purchase – 90-Day Extension Agreement and any related documents necessary to complete the extension.

Documentation: M.O. 07-111825
Disposition: Approved.

7. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT OF CALTIP BOARD MEMBER AND

ALTERNATES
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Approve the draft resolution designating Administrative Services Director Yuliana Andrade as the City's CalTIP Board Member, and Transportation

Page 6 of 15 ends

Director Russell Isom and Chief Deputy City Clerk Fernando GabrielMoraga as the Alternate Members; and

2. Authorize the Mayor to execute said Resolution for submission to CalTIP.

Documentation: Resolution No. 104-2025
Disposition: Approved.

8. STATUS AND REVIEW OF DECLARATION OF LOCAL FLOOD EMERGENCY Recommendation: That the City Council receive the report of status and review of the Declaration of Local Emergency and determine the need exists to continue said Declaration.

Documentation: M.O. 08-111825
Disposition: Approved.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

9. ADOPTION OF THE 2025 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODES
Recommendation: That City Council:

1. Conduct a Public Hearing to receive input regarding the adoption of the 2025 Editions of the California Administrative, Building, Residential, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Energy, Green Building Standards, Historical Buildings, Existing Buildings, Referenced Standards, and Wildland Urban Interface Codes;

2. Approve for first reading the draft Ordinances adopting the 2025 Editions of the California Administrative, Building, Residential, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Energy, Green Building Standards, Historical Buildings, Existing Buildings, Referenced Standards, and Wildland Urban Interface Codes; and

3. Waive further reading and order the Ordinances to print.

City Manager Tree introduced the item and Engineering and Project Management Director Javier Sanchez presented the staff report.

Mayor Meister opened the public hearing at 7:44 p.m.
• Brian Ennis,representing the board of directors for the Building Industry Association of Tulare and Kings County, spoke in favor of its adoption and requested that the city work with builders for a smooth implementation of the new codes, as they had done during previous changes.

Page 7 of 15 ends

Mayor Meister closed the public hearing at 7:44 p.m. when no one else came forward to speak.

Council Member Beltran inquired about the possibility of providing a grace period for builders submitting plans, referencing the January 1, 2026 effective date, to which staff indicated that they intend to continue to work with builders and developers to allow projects to proceed under existing code during a brief grace period.

Council Member Rivas raised concerns regarding the applicability of state code provisions to intermodal shipping containers used solely for storage. He noted that the code does not expressly address containers used for basic storage purposes. Staff clarified that once a container is placed for fixed storage use under an S-1 or S-2 occupancy, it is considered a structure and therefore subject to the building code, even if no modifications have been made to the container.

Council Member Rivas further noted that a letter, requested approximately five months prior to the California Building Standards Commission, seeking an increase in permit-exempt accessory structure size from 120 square feet to 210 square feet had not yet been sent.

Mayor Meister recommended proceeding with the adoption of the building codes as presented, noting that they will become effective statewide on January 1, 2026, regardless of local action. He suggested that the requested amendment related to cargo containers be addressed separately through a formal request and letter to be sent to the California Building Standards Commission.

COUNCIL ACTION: MOVED by Mayor Meister, SECONDED by Council Member Rivas that the City Council approve the first reading of ordinances, being,

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING ARTICLE I OF CHAPTER 7 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITIONS OF THE

CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE

ALONG WITH DESIGNATED APPENDICES, THE CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL

CODE ALONG WITH DESIGNATED APPENDICES, THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY

CODE, THE CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDINGS CODE, THE CALIFORNIA

EXISTING BUILDING CODE, THE CALIFORNIA REFERENCED STANDARDS

CODE, AND THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE CODE AS PUBLISHED BY THE

INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL,

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING SECTION 7-4 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE

CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL

ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS,

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING SECTION 7-6 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF

Page 8 of 15 ends

PORTERVILLE ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE

CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL

ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS,

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PORTERVILLE AMENDING SECTION 7-9 AND DELETING SECTION 7-10 OF

THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE PUBLISHED BY BNi PUBLICATIONS, INC., and

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING ARTICLE IV OF CHAPTER 7 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE

CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL, waive further readings, and order the ordinances to print., and directed that a letter be sent to the California Building Standards Commission with regard to an amendment to the square footage of storage containers to 210 feet.

AYES: Rivas, Green, McKervey, Meister
NOES: Beltran
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Documentation: Ordinance No. 1921 (Admin, Building, Residential, Energy, Historical, etc.) Ordinance No. 1922 (Mechanical)
Ordinance No. 1923 (Plumbing)
Ordinance No. 1924 (Electrical)
Ordinance No. 1925 (Green Building Standards)
Disposition: Approved.

10. CONSIDERATION OF REVOCATION OF BUSINESS LICENSE FOR A HOME

OCCUPATION PERMIT
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Hold a public hearing to consider whether the business license associated with a Home Occupation Permit for 1910 W. Putnam Avenue should be revoked; and

2. Based on the evidence presented during the public hearing, take action to revoke the business license for the Home Occupation Permit if the City Council finds that continued violations have occurred and compliance has not been achieved.

Page 9 of 15 ends

City Manager Tree introduced the item, and Finance Director Janie Rodriguez presented the staff report.

Mayor Meister opened the public hearing at 7:59 p.m.
• Elida Suarez, the business owner, objected to the proposed revocation, stating she had not been properly notified of the hearing or provided with a list of allegations.

She asserted that these issues constituted a violation of her due process rights. Ms.

Suarez also requested that Council Member Beltran and the City Attorney recuse themselves, alleging potential conflicts of interest and inadequate legal guidance. She further stated that the matter originated from a single neighbor complaint, that she had corrected the issues, and that she felt she continued to be unfairly targeted. • Unknown Name, Daughter of the complainant, spoke on behalf of her father, Francisco, stating that the issues involving the business have been ongoing since 2022. She described continual noise, increased vehicle traffic, and frequent customer visits, noting that one to six or more cars arrive daily. She reported that customers often block the family’s driveway, mailbox, and garbage bins, resulting in missed mail and trash service, and stated that one customer had struck their fence. She requested the Council’s assistance in restoring peace and safety to her parents’ home and the neighborhood.

Mayor Meister closed the public hearing at 8:06 p.m. when no one else came forward to speak.

Council Member Beltran expressed support for revocation. He stated he had been contacted about the issues shortly after being elected and noted reports that the business had been advertising on social media, which had been confirmed by Code Enforcement at the time. He referenced staff findings indicating repeated noncompliance with conditions of approval over several years. He also acknowledged that a family member had previously purchased items from the residence. He stated that while revocations are rare, he supported the staff recommendation based on ongoing impacts to neighbors and the owner’s failure to responsibly manage the business license.

Council Member Rivas stated he did not support revocation. He reviewed the timeline, noting four reports filed between March and October 2022, but also that a 2023 inspection showed no violations. He believed the city should exhaust corrective measures before removing the license and expressed concern that Ms. Suarez’s due process rights may have been violated, citing the lack of certified-mail notice. He recommended implementing a Compliance and Improvement Plan with reasonable timelines (30–60 days) rather than revoking the license. He requested more detailed documentation of violations, observing that the record appeared to consist primarily of letters sent to the owner.

Council Member Green also opposed revocation. While he acknowledged the neighbor’s concerns about traffic, he stated it was difficult to conclude that one to six vehicles per day over a full workday constituted a neighborhood disruption.

Page 10 of 15 ends

Mayor Meister sought clarification regarding the source of the complaints, asking whether they came from multiple parties or a single individual. Finance Director Janie Rodriguez reported that several complaints had been anonymous.

Vice Mayor McKervey stated he was not in favor of revocation. He described the reports as vague and inconsistent and expressed concern about the use of anonymous complaints, noting that such mechanisms can be misused in neighbor disputes. He emphasized reluctance to revoke someone’s livelihood based on the evidence provided and supported a remedial or “second look” approach, consistent with Council Member Rivas’s recommendation.

Mayor Meister asked Ms. Suarez to comply with the ordinance by refraining from allowing customers to pick up goods at her home, especially if the Council opted to support her business.

Ms. Suarez responded that she delivers items and asserted that she continues to experience harassment from neighbors.

COUNCIL ACTION: MOVED by Council Member Rivas, SECONDED by Council Member Green that the City Council decline to revoke the business license and allow Ms.

Elida Suarez to retain her license, with direction to staff to provide Ms.

Suarez with clear, detailed guidance on required compliance measures and applicable ordinance provisions, and to ensure ongoing adherence to all laws governing the operation of her business.

AYES: Rivas, Green, McKervey, Meister
NOES: Beltran
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Documentation: M.O. 09-111825
Disposition: Approved.

SECOND READINGS

11. SECOND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 1920, AMENDING CHAPTER 12, ARTICLE 1 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
Recommendation: That the City Council give Second Reading to Ordinance No. 1920, waive further reading, and adopt said Ordinance.

City Manager Tree introduced the item and presented the staff report.

COUNCIL ACTION: MOVED by Council Member Beltran, SECONDED by Council Member Rivas that the City Council give second reading to Ordinance No. 1920, being an

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE

Page 11 of 15 ends

AMENDING CHAPTER 12, ARTICLE 1 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF

PORTERVILLE ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS ARTICLE, THE 2025 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE ALONG

WITH DESIGNATED APPENDICES, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL, waive further reading, and adopt said ordinance. The motion carried unanimously.

Documentation: Ordinance No. 1920
Disposition: Approved.

Council took a recess at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened at 8:40 p.m.

SCHEDULED MATTERS

12. CONSIDERATION TO PARTICIPATE IN COMMUNITY WATER CENTER

FEASIBILITY STUDY
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Authorize the City of Porterville to participate in the Community Water Center Feasibility Study; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute a Letter of Interest with the Community Water Center supporting inclusion in the feasibility study.

City Manager Tree introduced the item and Public Works Director Robert Alvarez presented the staff report.

Council Member Beltran expressed support for proceeding with the study but noted that the State focuses solely on drinking-water contamination while neglecting related wastewater issues. He stated that the State invests heavily in providing clean drinking water but does not address underlying contamination tied to wastewater systems such as septic tanks. He suggested the State should approach both issues together to create a more comprehensive solution.

Council Member Green questioned the extent to which the City should commit to supplying water to external communities, asking where the City should draw the line and whether it could reasonably continue expanding service. He referenced nearby areas, including Terra Bella, Strathmore, Lindsay, Poplar, and Cotton Center, and stated he could not support the item at this time.

Council Member Rivas echoed Council Member Green’s concerns. He stated that, as he is not a water expert, he would require additional information and factual analysis before offering a position on the matter.

Vice Mayor McKervey agreed with Council Member Beltran’s remarks regarding shortcomings in State policy. He expressed concern that while the State may offer up to 100% funding, it could later alter the terms, referencing the Atkins Well project in which the City was

Page 12 of 15 ends

ultimately required to connect additional properties to justify full reimbursement. He cautioned that undertaking the study could result in future State mandates that impose added responsibilities and financial burdens on the City.

Staff clarified that the State did modify the terms of the Atkins Well agreement by requiring additional service connections due to the well’s higher-than-anticipated production capacity. Staff noted the project remains ongoing and also includes a 70-foot communication tower funded by the State.

Mayor Meister highlighted potential benefits of completing the study, noting that the city currently recharges more water into the ground than it uses. He stated that the study could identify long-term opportunities to connect additional users, decommission private wells, and support future growth and development. He emphasized that the study would be fully funded and noted that private builders are already active in the corridor under discussion.

COUNCIL ACTION: MOVED by Council Member Beltran, SECONDED by Mayor Meister that the City Council approve the city to participate in the Community Water Center Feasibility Study.

AYES: Beltran, McKervey, Meister
NOES: Green
ABSTAIN: Rivas
ABSENT: None
Documentation: M.O. 10-111825
Disposition: Approved.

13. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL PROCEDURAL

HANDBOOK
Recommendation: That the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached Draft Resolution revising the Order of Business and rescinding Resolution No. 08-2023;

2. Approve the updated Appendix F (Social Media Policy) as reviewed and recommended by the City Attorney; and

3. Approve the updated City Council Procedural Handbook incorporating the redline amendments, including the clarification to Section F.

City Manager Tree introduced the item and presented the staff report.

Vice Mayor McKervey noted that changing the sequence of the meeting would improve productivity for both the public and the Council. He acknowledged that the final proposal was an improvement over his original suggestion. He opposed recommendations #2 and #3, stating that the

Page 13 of 15 ends

procedural handbook and Section F were acceptable as currently written and that his intent was not to make policy changes.

Council Member Rivas concurred with Vice Mayor McKervey, supporting recommendation #1 as a means to streamline communication. He opposed recommendations #2 and #3, indicating that he found the procedural handbook adequate and did not see a need for redlines or additional changes.

City Attorney Lew explained that some redlined changes were necessary to update references to old case law. The revisions were intended to simplify and clarify the guidelines by consolidating Supreme Court references, which establish a clearer standard for council members’ use of social media. She noted that the current law governing council members’ social media use is less restrictive than previous interpretations.

Council Member Beltran indicated that the sequence change itself was not significant, but he expressed concern that adding a council comment section at the beginning of the meeting (per the Mayor’s request) could lengthen the meeting.

Mayor Meister explained that the early comment section would allow elected officials to report on their duties, committee work, and public events sooner, while the section at the end would remain for meeting-specific comments.

Council Member Beltran sought confirmation that, if the handbook was not amended regarding meetings, he could continue using discretionary funds for district meetings. City Attorney Lew confirmed that this was consistent with existing rules.

Council Member Beltran requested a list of authorized conference rooms for constituent meetings, to which City Manager Tree listed Centennial Plaza, the Coleman conference room, the McCracken conference room, and the Council Chambers, confirming that constituent meetings must occur at City Hall sites.

City Attorney Lew reminded the Council that if Recommendation #1(Revision of the Order of Business) was approved but Recommendation #2 (social media) was rejected, a modified version of Recommendation #3 would still need to be passed to formally adopt the handbook with the approved changes.

COUNCIL ACTION: MOVED by Vice Mayor McKervey, SECONDED by Mayor Meister that the City Council approve recommendation #1 (revising the order of business via a draft resolution) and to modify Recommendation #3 (adopting the procedural handbook) to incorporate the order changes while removing the old case law references, consistent with the City Attorneys modified suggestion. The motion carried unanimously.

Documentation: Resolution No. 105, M.O. 11-111825
Disposition: Approved.

Page 14 of 15 ends

AB 1234 REPORTS

1. Local Initiatives Navigation Center Committee (LINC) - November 5, 2025 Council Member Beltran noted the navigation center has served 2,910 individuals since July 2023, with 1,162 sheltered, and is currently full. He highlighted the winter coat drive, food pantry info, the committee’s January transition to the PIT Planning Committee, the need for a pet services volunteer, and upcoming meetings.

2. Mighty 190 Committee Meeting - November 10, 2025
Community Development Director Claudia Calderon highlighted social media engagement, the marketing schedule, a March 9 partner event, budget approval, upcoming events including the Children’s Christmas Parade and State of the City, and the new commemorative city logo.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
• John Coffee, Porterville, raised concerns about a council member’s comment on trust in government and reported semi-truck parking hazards near Les Schwab Tire Center and Walmart.
• Brock Neeley, Porterville, emphasized that anonymous reporting is valid but urged the Council to implement proactive code enforcement rather than rely on citizen complaints. • Paul Flores, Porterville, criticized past Porterville Area Coordinating Council management by Korey Wells, including a costly relocation and unnecessary purchases, and highlighted broader concerns about misuse of city authority and political influence. • Jean Vafeades, Porterville, asked whether the Vice Mayor’s prior request to modify oral communications in the Procedural Handbook had been implemented. • Luis Gonzalez, Porterville, urged Council decisions on homelessness and funding to protect vulnerable populations and ensure proper oversight of shelters. • Greg Shelton, Porterville, opposed the water feasibility study and the $2.1 million Castle/Lombardi Road project, citing mismanagement, unfair benefits to property owners, and longstanding traffic concerns.
• Don Weyhrauch, Porterville, commented on meeting tone, praised staff improvements on Lombardi and Westwood, urged addressing road hazards, and requested reconsideration of call-in options for meetings.
• Taha Saleh, Porterville, thanked the Council for a calm meeting, praised honest abstentions by Council Member Rivas, and raised concerns regarding a recent local tragedy and city chase policies.

OTHER MATTERS
• Council Member Beltran addressed concerns about Main Street flags, the Temple of Praise trash enclosure, Porterville Area Coordinating Council leadership, and the Police Chief situation, urged the council to maintain compassion, praised Veterans Day events, condemned offensive email language, and extended Thanksgiving wishes. • Council Member Rivas praised Veterans Day events, offered condolences and prayers for recent tragedy victims, reminded residents to exercise caution in fog and rain, and wished the community a safe Thanksgiving.

Page 15 of 15 ends

• Vice Mayor McKervey highlighted the success of Veterans Day events and run/walk, commended the flyover, provided historical context for the Main Street flags and Thanksgiving, and encouraged community gratitude and civil discourse. • Mayor Meister expressed disappointment over the Lombardi/Castle traffic issue, committed to resolving it, directed staff to follow up on complaints (trash bins, squirrels), praised community beautification efforts, recognized employee dedication, celebrated Veterans Day events, and addressed the recent tragic chase while urging support for law enforcement. • City Manager Tree thanked staff for Veterans Day efforts, commended handling of illegal vendors, highlighted the “Stuff the Bus” event, recognized Public Works sandbag preparation, and announced upcoming recognition of promotions and new employees.

Council reconvened into Closed Session at 9:55 p.m.

CLOSED SESSION
None.

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 11:19 p.m. to the meeting of December 2, 2025, at 5:30 p.m.

Fernando Gabriel-Moraga,
Chief Deputy City Clerk
SEAL
Greg Meister, Mayor
Item No. 2.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – DECEMBER 2, 2025
SUBJECT: Authorization of Emergency SCADA System Repairs at Rocky Hill and Martin Hill Reservoir
SOURCE: Public Works
COMMENT:

The Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that monitors and controls the Rocky Hill and Martin Hill Reservoirs is experiencing ongoing communication failures. The SCADA system, originally installed in 1994 and built on a proprietary Siemens platform, is essential for daily operations, including monitoring water levels, operating wells and booster pumps, managing pressure zones, and supporting sewer lift stations and storm drain pump stations throughout the City.

Due to system failures, staff have been required to manually operate several facilities, resulting in increased overtime and reduced operational reliability.

Immediate corrective action is necessary to stabilize operations and prevent further disruption to the City’s water and wastewater systems.

Because of the age, design, and proprietary configuration of the existing SCADA system, Primex Company is the only qualified integrator capable of diagnosing and repairing communication failures. Primex has provided a detailed cost proposal that includes all necessary labor, travel, materials, and engineering services. The estimated cost for the repairs is $19,130, as shown in the attached quote.

To account for unforeseen field conditions and the complexity of the decadesold system, staff recommends including a 10 percent contingency. This results in a total authorization not to exceed $21,043. Funding is available from the Water Operating Fund.

Emergency authorization will allow the City to proceed immediately with the necessary repairs and restore reliable automated control of the reservoir system.

Item No. 2.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Authorize Primex Company to complete emergency repairs to the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)
communication system serving the Rocky Hill and Martin Hill Reservoir at a cost not to exceed $21,043, inclusive of all parts, taxes, labor, and a 10 percent contingency.

2. Direct the Finance Director to initiate a Purchase Order to Primex Company in the amount not to exceed $21,043.

3. Direct the Finance Director to make payment to Primex Company upon receipt of an invoice approved by the Public Works Director.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Primex Quote
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

Robert Alvarez, Acting Public Works Director
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk

Item No. 3.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – DECEMBER 2, 2025
SUBJECT: Authorization to Repair Airport Fuel Island Concrete SOURCE: Transportation
COMMENT: The concrete pad at the Porterville Municipal Airport fuel island has deteriorated due to age, fuel exposure, weather conditions, and aircraft and service-vehicle activity. The fuel island pad functions as secondary containment for the facility’s fueling infrastructure and is required to remain intact to maintain operational, safety, and environmental compliance standards.

Cracking, settlement, and worn concrete around the fuel piping and related components now prevent the pad from providing effective secondary containment. Repairs are necessary to restore the pad’s structural integrity and ensure continued compliance. Work will include rebuilding the concrete berm, sealing concrete joints and miscellaneous cracking, and sealing around fuel system fixtures. Leak detection testing is not required, as noted on the contractor’s bid form.

Staff requested bids from the following vendors, and the responses were as follows:

Vendor Quote
Austin Enterprise $12,578.40
Fuel-Tek Non-Responsive
Denny McCowan General Engineering Non-Responsive
Franzen Hill Corporation Non-Responsive
Wester Pump Non-Responsive
Austin Enterprise submitted the lowest responsive quote. The total project cost, including the contractor’s quote and a 10 percent contingency, is $13,836.24. Funding is available in the Airport Replacement Fund and no General Fund impact is anticipated.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

Item No. 3.

1. Authorize the repair of the Airport fuel island concrete at a cost not to exceed $13,836.24 (inclusive of all parts, taxes, freight, and a 10% contingency); and

2. Authorize payment upon completion of the repair.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Austin Enterprise Quote
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

Russell Isom, Director of Transportation
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk 1500.00

34.62 1500.00
11,078.40
12,578.40
Item No. 4.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – DECEMBER 2, 2025
SUBJECT: Authorization of CivicPlus Contract Renewal
SOURCE: Administrative Services
COMMENT:

In September 2019, the City Council approved an agreement with CivicPlus, previously known as CivicClerk, to implement a web-based agenda and meeting management system. The system has significantly improved agenda preparation, internal routing, public accessibility, and legislative transparency.

In 2024, the City Council approved the annual renewal of this agreement, which includes a five percent annual increase and automatic one-year extensions.

The City’s current agreement expired on October 31, 2025, and the renewal payment is now due. The cost for the renewal period of November 1, 2025, through October 31, 2026, is $12,552.97, as identified in the attached invoice.

Funding for this subscription is included in the Administrative Services General Fund operating budget.

Renewal of the contract will ensure uninterrupted access to the agenda and meeting management platform and continued support for the City’s legislative processes.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the renewal of the CivicPlus contract for agenda and meeting management services in the amount of $12,552.97.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. CivicPlus Invoice
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

Item No. 4.

Yuliana Andrade, Administrative Services Director
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk Updated Remittance Address:
(FOR PAYMENTS ONLY)
CivicPlus LLC
PO Box 737311
Dallas TX 75373-7311
Invoice
#349514
11/1/2025
Please submit payment via ACH using the details below. Please send notification of ACH transmission via email to [email protected]. That address is not monitored for other inquiries or notifications. For any other invoice questions or information, please contact us at [email protected].

Bank Name Account Name Account Number Routing Number
JPMorgan Chase CivicPlus LLC 910320636 021000021
Bill To TOTAL DUE
Fernando Gabriel-Moraga
City of Porterville, CA
291 North Main Street
Porterville CA 93257 $12,552.97
Due Date: 12/1/2025
Terms Customer Approving Authority
Net 30 City of Porterville, CA
Qty Item Start Date End Date
1 Agenda and Meeting Management Annual Fee Renewal 11/1/2025 10/31/2026 Total $12,552.97
Due $12,552.97
Item No. 5.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – DECEMBER 2, 2025
SUBJECT: Authorization to Enter into Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Valley Adult Day Services for Coordinated Transportation Services SOURCE: Transportation
COMMENT: Staff have collaborated with Valley Adult Day Services (VADS) to prepare a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that establishes responsibilities for coordinated transportation services for eligible VADS program participants.

The MOU outlines the use of Porterville Transit’s existing paratransit demandresponse service to provide transportation to and from the VADS facility within the Porterville Transit service area. This agreement does not create a new service but utilizes and schedules trips within the existing operational framework.

Under the MOU, Porterville Transit will provide eligible demand-response trips, and the City’s contracted operator, SM Transit, will provide monthly reporting that includes trip counts, dates, times, pickup and drop-off locations, and any service-related issues. The City will then issue monthly invoices to VADS based on reported activity.

VADS will ensure that all riders meet eligibility requirements under Transit program rules, schedule transportation using mutually agreed methods, and compensate the City for services provided. The MOU includes a one-year term, with the option for extension upon mutual agreement.

This agreement operates as a cost-recovery model using existing transit resources. All services will continue to be provided within Porterville Transit’s established service area and performance standards.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Porterville and Valley Adult Day Services (VADS) for coordinated transportation services within the Porterville Urbanized Area; and

2. Authorize the Mayor to execute the MOU and any subsequent amendments necessary to implement these services.

Item No. 5.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. MOU with Valley Adult Day Services
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

Russell Isom, Director of Transportation
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Between
Valley Adult Day Services (VADS)
and
The City of Porterville – Porterville Transit System
This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is made and entered into on this ___ day of __________, 2025, by and between Valley Adult Day Services (VADS), a nonprofit adult day services provider, and the City of Porterville, through its Porterville Transit System ("City" or "Transit").

1. Purpose
The purpose of this MOU is to establish the terms and responsibilities under which the City’s Transit System will provide transportation services for eligible VADS program participants and outline billing and reporting expectations.

2. Scope of Services
The City, through Porterville Transit, agrees to provide transportation services for participants traveling to and from Valley Adult Day Services within the Porterville Transit service area, according to the following:
• Transportation shall be scheduled through existing Transit paratransit demand-response service or other mutually agreed scheduling methods.
• VADS shall ensure that all riders meet eligibility requirements pursuant to Transit program rules and ADA guidelines.

3. Monthly Reporting
Porterville Transit’s contracted operator, SM Transit, shall provide monthly reporting to VADS and the City, including at minimum:
• Number of passenger trips provided
• Trip dates and times
• Pickup and drop-off locations
• Any no-show, cancellation, or service-related issues
Reports are expected to be provided on or before the 10th business day of each month for the preceding month’s activity.

4. Invoicing and Payment
The City of Porterville shall prepare and issue monthly invoices to VADS based on reported trip activity. Invoices will include:
• Total trip count and cost per trip
• Any administrative fees, if applicable
• Applicable taxes or surcharges, if any
Payment shall be due within thirty (30) days of invoice receipt unless otherwise agreed.

5. Term and Termination
This MOU shall remain in effect from __________, 2025, through __________, 2026, and may be extended upon mutual written agreement.

Either party may terminate this MOU with thirty (30) days written notice.

6. Indemnification
Each party shall be responsible for the acts and omissions of its officers, employees, agents, and contractors. Nothing in this MOU shall be construed as a waiver of any legal protections or immunities afforded to public agencies under California law.

7. Insurance
VADS shall maintain appropriate liability insurance coverage for its program operations. The City shall maintain insurance or self-insurance coverage for Transit operations.

8. Amendments
Any modification or amendment to this MOU must be in writing and signed by authorized representatives of both parties.

9. Notices
Official notices shall be delivered to:

Valley Adult Day Services
Attn: ________________________
Address: ______________________
Phone: ________________________
Email: ________________________
City of Porterville – Porterville Transit System
Attn: Transit Manager
291 N. Main Street
Porterville, CA 93257
Phone: (559) 782-7448
Email: ________________________

10. Signatures
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Memorandum of Understanding as of the date first written above.

Valley Adult Day Services City of Porterville
_______________________________ _______________________________ Name/Title: _____________________ Name/Title: _____________________ Date: ____________________ Date: ____________________
Item No. 6.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – DECEMBER 2, 2025
SUBJECT: Status and Review of Declaration of Local Flood Emergency SOURCE: City Manager's Office
COMMENT: On March 13, 2023, former Mayor Martha A. Flores, in conjunction with Acting City Manager Patrice Hildreth, declared the existence of a local emergency within the City of Porterville. This declaration was made pursuant to Chapter 9 of the Porterville Municipal Code and in response to a series of storm systems impacting the Porterville area, increasing flows in the Tule River and posing a significant threat to life and property. The City Council ratified the declaration at its Special Meeting on March 17, 2023, in accordance with the California Emergency Services Act (Government Code § 8558 et seq.). Per State requirements, the declaration must be renewed every sixty (60) days to remain in effect. At its most recent meeting on November 18, 2025, the Council renewed the emergency declaration.

Staff continues to work with FEMA to resolve outstanding claims and identify a timeline and path forward. In an effort to reduce the size of the agenda binder while still keeping the Council informed, staff is including only the most current Armory Census as an attachment to this report. Once the declaration of local flood emergency is officially concluded, and in coordination with FEMA guidance, staff will prepare a final close-out report that includes all supporting documentation and attachments currently on file.

Chronology of Emergency Response Actions:
• March 10–19, 2023: Tulare County Sheriff and City officials issued a series of evacuation warnings and mandatory orders due to rising water levels and flood threats, including areas near Success Lake, River Springs Drive, and Rio Vista Avenue.
• March 13, 2023: The City declared a Local Emergency.
• March 15–25, 2023: City Public Works performed extraordinary flood mitigation efforts. Evacuation orders were adjusted based on river activity.
• March 17, 2023: The City Council ratified the emergency declaration. • April 11, 2023: The Temporary Evacuation Point (TEP) and Emergency Shelter relocated from Porterville College to the Porterville Armory.

Item No. 6.
• April 14–May 5, 2023: The City and County executed an MOU to continue Armory TEP operations without Cal OES funding. • May 5, 2023: The City assumed full operational and financial responsibility for the Armory site.
• May 16, 2023: The Council approved a one-year no-cost license agreement for exclusive use of the Armory.
• April–July 2023:
o Council approved emergency expenditures including water rescue equipment, mobile ADA-compliant restrooms, and flood mitigation services.
o Due to contract violations, TopKnotch Security was terminated and replaced by Good Guard Security for ongoing Armory safety services.
• State and Federal Declarations:
o Governor Newsom issued Executive Orders N-6-23, N-7-23, and N-10-23 to support flood response and recovery.
o President Biden’s Major Disaster Declaration (April 3, 2023) activated federal recovery funding; FEMA formally closed the incident period on July 10, 2023.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive the report of status and review of the Declaration of Local Emergency and determine the need exists to continue said Declaration.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Armory Census
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

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

Item No. 7.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – DECEMBER 2, 2025
SUBJECT: Villas at Winding Creek Tentative Subdivision Map and Conditional Use Permit SOURCE: Community Development
COMMENT: The City of Porterville received an application for a proposed land division for the Villas at Winding Creek Residential development project (Project) on February 12, 2025. Staff met with the applicant during the Project Review Committee (PRC), where the assessment of the Project (PRC 2025-006) commenced. During the PRC meeting, staff provided comments pertaining to the proposed project, which outlined the entitlement process and the department’s development standards.

The Project consists of a tentative subdivision map for future residential development of APN 268-100-008, on an 8.76-acre parcel located along the Poplar Ditch between Wisconsin Street and Indiana Street. The Porterville 2030 General Plan Land Use Element designates the Project Site as Low Density Residential and is currently zoned RS-2 (Low Density Residential).

Development would generally include the subdivision of the Project Site into 32 lots for residential development, with construction of interior local streets and necessary onsite infrastructure, and improvements within abutting major street right-of-way. Additionally, the Project proposes 9,241 square feet of open space, including a 10-foot-wide trail and a 12-foot-wide service road along the north side of the Poplar Ditch.

The Project is subject to the findings outlined in Series 600 of the Porterville Development Ordinance (PDO) for each respective entitlement: Article 604, Conditional Use Permit; Article 611, Environmental Review. The Project will also be required to meet the standards contained within Article 400, General Provisions, and Article 402, Tentative Subdivisions.

City staff initiated tribal consultation on August 5, 2025, pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (codification of SB 18) and Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, et seq. (codification of AB 52, 2013-14). The consultation period ran from August 5, 2025, to September 4, 2025. One response was received from the Table Mountain Rancheria dated August 14, 2025, stating that the Project site is beyond their area of interest. No other responses were received.

Item No. 7.

The proposed tentative subdivision map would provide new residential housing on lots ranging from 5,046± SF to 8,242± SF. The minimum lot size permitted in the RS-2 Zone District is 6,000 square feet. However, pursuant to Porterville Development Ordinance Section 201.04(C), the City Council may approve a Conditional Use Permit authorizing lots of reduced size. The proposed tentative subdivision map is consistent with the Porterville Development Code, Series 400: Land Division regulations.

Circulation is provided through the planned internal streets, which include parkway strips, streetlights, and sidewalks. The subdivision provides two points of ingress and egress on Wisconsin Street and one point of ingress and egress on South Indiana Street, with improvements to sections of Wisconsin Street and Indiana Street that include a parkway strip and pedestrian sidewalk adjacent to the Project Site. The subdivision consists of short blocks, which tend to slow traffic and enhance pedestrian connectivity within the proposed development.

The Project’s gross density is 3.65 units per acre, which falls below the maximum of 6.0 units per acre allowed in the Low Density Residential Land Use designation. The Project Site is surrounded by rural residences to the north, south, and west and a single-family subdivision to the east. Adjacent to the north of the Project Site is the storm basin, and adjacent to the south is the Poplar Ditch. The Project’s development pattern is compatible with the area and falls well within the prescribed density mandated by the City’s General Plan.

The RS-2 Zone has a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. To allow for the smaller lot sizes proposed, the Project would need a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Conditional Use Permits must meet the following findings from PDO Section 604.04.

1. Approval of 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.

1. The General Plan Land Use of Low-Density Residential satisfies this requirement. There are no other applicable plans that would apply to this project.

2. Applicable General Plan Policies Met

1. LU-G-8: allow and encourage efficient infill development in existing neighborhoods.

2. LU-G-9: Provide sufficient land with appropriate parcel sizes to support a full range of housing types and prices.

3. LU-I-10: Sustainable design standards that will achieve compact, walkable neighborhoods and provide an
interconnected network of local streets.

Item No. 7.

2. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed project are consistent with the purposes of the district where it is located and conforms in all significant respects with the General Plan, the Development Ordinance, and with any other applicable plan adopted by the City Council.

3. The Project meets the allowed densities in the RS-2 Zone District and complies with all other requirements of the Porterville Development Ordinance except for lot size, width, and depth. The zone also allows for small lot subdivisions. It will be conditioned to comply with Section 201.04(C), Reduced Minimum Lot Size, Depth and Width, allowing for variation from lot size, width, and depth, which will satisfy this requirement.

The California Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410, et seq.) establishes most of the procedures for subdivision of land. Other components are contained within the PDO, Series 400: Land Division. Generally, a tentative and final map is required in order to subdivide land into five or more parcels.

Pursuant to both the Subdivision Map Act and PDO Series 400, tentative maps are valid for twenty-four (24) months following approval, with various mechanisms available to extend the life of the tentative map. The Project would be responsible for the dedication and improvement of the abutting major streets, along with payment of specified fair-share costs for other capital improvements, payment of development impact fees as applicable, and installation of sidewalk on the east side of Wisconsin St. and on the west side of Indiana Street to enhance pedestrian access.

Pursuant to PDO Section 400.04, the City Council must deny a tentative map if it makes any of the following findings:

1. The proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
o The tentative map proposes 32 residential lots on 8.76± acres for a density of 3.65 units per gross acre and therefore is consistent with the General Plan as proposed. There is no applicable specific plan.

2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
o The design and improvement of the project are in accordance with the Circulation Element of the General Plan as well as with the development standards contained within the Development Ordinance, which is itself the primary tool for implementation of the General Plan. There is no applicable specific plan.

3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. o The site is generally flat and level, making it physically optimal for the development as proposed.

Item No. 7.

4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
o The Project proposes 3.65 units per gross acre, which is under the maximum requirement of 6 units per gross acre in the RS-2 (Low Density Residential) Zone District.

5. That the design of the subdivisions or the proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
o An Initial Study - Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project. With the inclusion of mitigation measures, the Project will not result in any significant effects on the environment, fish, wildlife, or their habitats.

6. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.
o An Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project. With the inclusion of mitigation, the Project will not result in any serious public health problems.

7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. o With the possible exception of easements dedicated to major street right-of-way, which will be further dedicated and improved for the benefit of the public at large, there are no easements for access through or use of the property.

Based on a fair reading of the record, including the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (described in further detail below), there is no indication that any of the findings requiring denial of the Tentative Map can be made.

The proposed land division and subsequent development of the site into a residential subdivision will provide much-needed housing in conformance with the City’s General Plan Land Use and Housing Elements, as well as to help meet the City of Porterville’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation quota. Staff and the applicants' agents have worked through the design details to ensure adherence to the City’s General Plan and the Development Ordinance, as well as verify compliance with the California Subdivision Map Act and other applicable codes.

In addition to enhanced notification provided related to CEQA, which was completed (see below), public notice of this hearing was provided in accordance with Government Code Sections 65090 and 65091 and PDO Section 609.06. The procedures prescribed therein are the standard for hearings involving Conditional Use Permits and Tentative Maps. Additionally, as described in the Background section above, this project was discussed during the Project Review Committee meeting on February 12, 2025.

Item No. 7.

Information regarding PRC is readily available on the City’s website. PRC meetings are held regularly, are agendized, and are accessible to the public.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: During review of the Project, the City contracted with the environmental consultant, Precision Civil Engineering, to prepare an Initial Study (IS) to analyze the potential for environmental effects that could result from the Project. Based on the results of technical studies prepared in conjunction with the IS, the City made the preliminary determination that, with mitigation included, the Project would not have a significant effect on the environment, and that adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be appropriate. Mitigation was identified for Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, and Tribal Cultural Resources; incorporation of that mitigation would reduce all potentially significant effects to a less than significant level.

Upon completion of the Draft Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), the Notice of Availability and Intent, and Notice of Completion were filed in accordance with CEQA. The IS/MND was sent to the State Clearinghouse (SCH No. 2025101555) and circulated for a period of 30 days starting on October 31, 2025, through November 30, 2025. The City received a comment letter from the Department of Toxic Substances Control, dated November 5, 2025. The letter provided information on the requirements of further analysis for agricultural land uses proposed or rezoned for residential use in regard to contaminants of concern.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Hold the public hearing to receive comments on the Villas at Winding Creek Residential Development Project;

2. Adopt the Draft Resolution, adopting the IS/MND and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program;

3. Adopt the Draft Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit; and

4. Adopt Draft Resolution approving the Tentative Subdivision Map with Conditions.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Locator Map

2. Zoning Map

3. General Plan Land Use Map

4. Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration - Public Review Draft

5. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

6. Draft Resolution - Mitigated Negative Declaration

7. Draft Resolution - Conditional Use Permit
Item No. 7.

8. Draft Resolution - Tentative Subdivision Map
Appropriated/Funded:

Review By:

Department Director:

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

Villas at Winding Creek (City of Porterville, CA)
(PRC 2025-006-S, PRC 2025-006-C)
INITIAL STUDY – MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
October 2025
Prepared for:

City of Porterville
291 N Main Street
Porterville, CA 93257

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 2 Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................... 7

1.1 Regulatory Information................................................................................................................. 7

1.2 Document Format......................................................................................................................... 7 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM.................................................................................................... 9

2.1 Project Title................................................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Contact Person and Phone Number ............................................................................................. 9

2.4 Study Prepared By......................................................................................................................... 9

2.5 Project Location ............................................................................................................................ 9

2.6 Latitude and Longitude ................................................................................................................. 9

2.7 General Plan Designation............................................................................................................ 12

2.8 Zoning ......................................................................................................................................... 12

2.9 Description of Project ................................................................................................................. 15

2.10 Project Setting and Surrounding Land Uses................................................................................ 17

2.11 Site Preparation .......................................................................................................................... 17

2.12 Project Construction and Phasing............................................................................................... 17

2.13 Required Project Approvals ........................................................................................................ 17

2.14 Consultation with California Native American Tribes.................................................................. 18 3 DETERMINATION................................................................................................................................ 19

3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ............................................................................... 19

3.2 Determination............................................................................................................................. 19 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .................................................................................... 21

4.1 AESTHETICS................................................................................................................................. 21

4.1.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 21

4.1.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 22

4.1.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 24

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ................................................................................ 25

4.2.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 25

4.2.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 28

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 3

4.2.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 29

4.3 AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................................ 30

4.3.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 30

4.3.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 35

4.3.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 37

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................................................. 38

4.4.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 39

4.4.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 46

4.4.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 53

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 58

4.5.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 58

4.5.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 60

4.5.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 62

4.6 ENERGY ....................................................................................................................................... 63

4.6.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 63

4.6.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 64

4.6.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 66

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................................................. 67

4.7.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 68

4.7.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 72

4.7.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 75

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................................................... 76

4.8.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 76

4.8.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 78

4.8.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 81

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ...................................................................................... 82

4.9.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 82

4.9.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 86

4.9.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 88

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................................................ 89

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 4

4.10.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 90

4.10.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 91

4.10.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 96

4.11 LAND USE PLANNING.................................................................................................................. 98

4.11.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 98

4.11.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 98

4.11.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 100

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 101

4.12.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 101

4.12.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 102

4.12.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 102

4.13 NOISE ........................................................................................................................................ 103

4.13.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 103

4.13.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 106

4.13.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 109

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................................................................................... 110

4.14.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 110

4.14.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 111

4.14.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 111

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES....................................................................................................................... 112

4.15.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 112

4.15.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 114

4.15.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 116

4.16 RECREATION ............................................................................................................................. 117

4.16.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 117

4.16.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 117

4.16.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 117

4.17 TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................................................... 118

4.17.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 118

4.17.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 122

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 5

4.17.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 124

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................. 125

4.18.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 125

4.18.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 125

4.18.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 127

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.............................................................................................. 128

4.19.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 128

4.19.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 129

4.19.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 133

4.20 WILDFIRE................................................................................................................................... 134

4.20.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 134

4.20.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 135

4.20.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 136

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ............................................................................... 137

4.21.1 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 137 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM................................................................. 139 6 REPORT PREPARATION..................................................................................................................... 150 7 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................................... 151

7.1 Appendix A: Air Quality/Energy/Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reference Materials................... 151

7.2 Appendix B: Biological Resources Database Results ................................................................. 152

7.3 Appendix C: Cultural Resources Reference Materials............................................................... 153 Figures
Figure 2-1 Villa at Winding Creek Project Location.................................................................................................. 10 Figure 2-2 Villas at Winding Creek Project Aerial..................................................................................................... 11 Figure 2-3 General Plan Land Use Designation Map................................................................................................ 13 Figure 2-4 Zoning District Map................................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 2-5 Tentative Subdivision Map...................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 4-1 Farmland Type ........................................................................................................................................ 27 Figure 4-2 CNDDB Occurrences within 5-miles of the Project Site .......................................................................... 42

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 6 Figure 4-3 Soils Map ................................................................................................................................................ 71 Figure 4-4 Flood Zone Map...................................................................................................................................... 95 Figure 4-5 Flood Zone Map...................................................................................................................................... 97 Figure 4-6 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments............................................................... 104 Tables
Table 2-1 Existing Uses, General Plan Designations, and Zoning Districts of Surrounding Properties..................... 17 Table 4-1 SJVAPCD Recommended Air Quality Thresholds of Significance2F.......................................................... 33 Table 4-2 SPAL Thresholds for Residential Projects................................................................................................. 35 Table 4-3 SPAL Significance Thresholds................................................................................................................... 36 Table 4-4 Special-Status Species Occurrences within 5-mile radius of Project Site ................................................. 41 Table 4-5 Essential Habitats and Potential Existence of Special-Status Species on Site........................................... 43 Table 4-6 Project Energy Consumption.................................................................................................................... 65 Table 4-7 Scoping Plan Priority GHG Reduction Strategies Consistency Analysis .................................................... 79 Table 4-8 City of Porterville Existing and Projected Potable Water Demands by Use Type, 2020 - 2040................ 92 Table 4-9 Discussion on Land Use Policies in the General Plan for Residential Development................................. 99 Table 4-10 Exterior Noise Level Standards, dBA .................................................................................................... 105 Table 4-11 Guideline Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria (Acoustical Analysis Table III)................................. 106 Table 4-12 Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria (Acoustical Analysis Table IV) .................... 106 Table 4-13 Receptors and Baseline Analyzed in the RCNM ................................................................................... 107 Table 4-14 Typical Vibration Levels During Construction....................................................................................... 108 Table 4-15 City of Porterville Water Supply and Demand Comparison, Hydrologic Conditions, 2025 - 2040 ....... 130

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 7 1 INTRODUCTION
Precision Civil Engineering, Inc. (PCE) has prepared this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) on behalf of the City of Porterville (City) to address the environmental effects of the proposed Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision (“Project” or “proposed Project”). This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000, et. seq. The City of Porterville is the Lead Agency for this proposed Project. The site and the proposed Project are described in detail in SECTION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM.

1.1 Regulatory Information
An Initial Study (IS) is a document prepared by a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 14,Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq., also known as the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064 (a)(1) states that an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared if there is substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the proposed project under review may have a significant effect on the environment and should be further analyzed to determine mitigation measures or project alternatives that might avoid or reduce project impacts to less than significant levels.

A negative declaration (ND) may be prepared instead if the lead agency finds that there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. An ND is a written statement describing the reasons why a proposed project, not otherwise exempt from CEQA, would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why it would not require the preparation of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15371). According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a ND or mitigated ND shall be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when either:
a. The IS shows there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, or b. The IS identified potentially significant effects, but:

1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur is prepared, and

2. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment.

1.2 Document Format
This IS/MND contains five (5) sections plus appendices. SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION provides the basis of the IS/MND’s regulatory information and an overview of the Project. SECTION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM provides a detailed description of Project components. SECTION 3 DETERMINATION concludes that based on the Initial Study, a mitigated negative declaration will be prepared, identifies the environmental factors potentially affected based on the analyses contained in this IS, and includes with the Lead Agency’s determination based upon those analyses. SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS presents the CEQA checklist and environmental analyses for all impact areas and the mandatory findings of significance. A brief discussion of the reasons why the Project impact is anticipated to be potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation incorporated, less than significant, or why no impacts are expected is included. SECTION 5 MITIGATION

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 8 MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM presents the mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND for the Project. The CalEEMod Results (Appendix A), IPaC and CNDDB Occurrence Report (Appendix B), CHRIS Search Record and NAHC Correspondence (Appendix C) are provided at the end of this document.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 9 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
This section describes the components of the proposed Project in more detail, including Project location, Project objectives, and required Project approvals.

2.1 Project Title
Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision (Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2025-006-C, Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM) 2025-006-C)

2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Porterville
291 N. Main Street
Porterville, CA 93257

2.3 Contact Person and Phone Number
Lead Agency
City of Porterville
Community Development Department
Claudia Calderon, Director
(559) 782-7460
Applicant
Smee Homes, Inc.
444 N. Prospect Street, Suite A
Porterville, CA 93257
(559) 788-0525

2.4 Study Prepared By
Precision Civil Engineering
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 449-4500

2.5 Project Location
The Project Site is located in the City of Porterville, Tulare County, California. The site is located on the northwest corner of the Poplar Ditch and South Indiana Street (Figure 2-1), consisting of one (1) parcel that totals approximately 8.78 acres (Figure 2-2). The area is identified by the Tulare County Assessor as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 268-100-008. The site is a portion of Section 03, Township 22 South, Range 27 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian.

2.6 Latitude and Longitude
The centroid of the Project Area is 36.045168, -119.036313.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 10 Figure 2-1 Villa at Winding Creek Project Location

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 11 Figure 2-2 Villas at Winding Creek Project Aerial

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 12

2.7 General Plan Designation
The City of Porterville 2030 General Plan Land Use Diagram identifies the Project Site as having a land use designation of Low Density Residential (Figure 2-3). According to the General Plan, Low Density Residential “represents typical single-family subdivisions. The maximum residential density is 6.0 units per gross acre.”

2.8 Zoning
The Project Site is within the RS-2 Low Density Residential zoning district (Figure 2-4). The Porterville Development Ordinance (PDO; Chapter 21 of the Porterville Municipal Code, or PMC) identifies the purpose of the RS-2 district 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.”

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 13 Figure 2-3 General Plan Land Use Designation Map

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 14 Figure 2-4 Zoning District Map

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 15

2.9 Description of Project
To facilitate the future development of the Project Site, the Applicant, Smee Homes, Inc., has requested a Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM No. 2025-006-S) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP No. 2025-006-C). These entitlements pertain to one (1) approximately 8.76-acre parcel located north of the Poplar Ditch between Wisconsin Street and South Indiana Street in Porterville, CA (APN 268-100-008).

The TSM proposes to subdivide the Project Site into 32 single-family lots (Lots 1 to 32), ranging from 5,046 square feet (sf.) to 8,242 sf., with an average lot size of 5,903 sf. (Figure 2-5). Each lot is proposed to be developed with one unit (3.21 du/ac). The Project also includes a Remainder Parcel of approximately 2.31 acres. The Project proposes an internal network of local streets with two (2) points of ingress/egress on Wisconsin Street and one (1) point of ingress/egress on South Indiana Street. All roadways within the proposed subdivision would be designed in accordance with City standards and would have curb, gutter, and sidewalk. In addition, Indiana Street and Wisconsin Street in proximity to the Project site would be improved to their ultimate rights-of-way, with curb, gutter, and sidewalk, in addition to landscaping. The Project also proposes approximately 9,241 square feet of open space including a 10-foot-wide trail, and a 12-foot-wide service road along the north side of Poplar Ditch.

The CUP would allow for reduced lot sizes. According to the PMC, the RS-2 Zoning District requires a minimum lot size of 6,000 sf., a minimum lot width of 60 feet (ft.), and a minimum lot depth of 75 ft. However, smaller lots with a minimum area of 3,000 sf., a minimum lot width of 35 ft., and a minimum lot depth of 60 ft. may be approved with a CUP when the City Council finds that the lot size and configuration are consistent with the General Plan and will not adversely affect adjoining uses.

Though no physical development is proposed at this time, any future development would be built in accordance with all mandatory water use requirements as outlined in the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11 and verified through the building permit process. As a residential development that would contain plumbing fixtures and fittings, the Project would be required to comply with water-conserving measures for water closets, urinals, showerheads, and faucets. Additionally, as a residential development that would contain landscaping including trees, shrubs, groundcover/annual plants, and lawn, the Project would be required to comply with the updated Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 2.7, Division 2), as implemented and enforced through the building permit process.

The Project is within City limits and thus, future development would be required to connect to water, wastewater, and stormwater services. Domestic water service would be provided to the site through proposed water mains located throughout the site and would connect to the City system. Sanitary sewer service would be provided though sewer mains located throughout the site and would connect to the City system. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. In addition, the Project would be subject to fees for the construction, acquisition, and improvements for public services including, but not limited to, fire protection services, police protection services, and schools.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 16 Figure 2-5 Tentative Subdivision Map

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 17

2.10 Project Setting and Surrounding Land Uses
Project Setting
The Project site is currently vacant but has historically been utilized for agricultural purposes. The existing biotic site conditions and resources of these parcels can be defined primarily as ruderal and are highly disturbed due to annual disking.

Surrounding Land Uses
As referenced in Table 2-1, the Project Site is surrounded by vacant land and single-family residences to the north, single-family residences to the south, single-family residences and a church to the east, and single-family residences to the west. The vacant property to the north is planned and zoned for residential uses within the City of Porterville.

Table 2-1 Existing Uses, General Plan Designations, and Zoning Districts of Surrounding Properties Direction from
the Project Site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zoning District
North
Rural residence / Storm
Basin Low Density Residential RS-2 Low Density Residential South Rural Residences Low Density Residential RS-2 Low Density Residential
East Single-family residence Low Density Residential RS-2 Low Density Residential
West Rural residences Low Density Residential RS-2 Low Density Residential

2.11 Site Preparation
Site preparation would include typical grading activities and minor excavation for installation of utility infrastructure for conveyance of water, sewer, stormwater, and irrigation. Demolition, site preparation, building, grading, encroachment, and site utilities permits would be subject to review and approval by the appropriate agency and/or department to ensure compliance with applicable codes and regulations. Compliance would be verified through the building permit and inspection process.

2.12 Project Construction and Phasing
No physical development is proposed at this time; however, this IS has been prepared with the assumption that full buildout will occur in one phase over a twenty four-month period.

2.13 Required Project Approvals
The City of Porterville requires the following review, permits, and/or approvals for the proposed Project. Other approvals not listed below may be required as identified through the entitlement process. • Conditional Use Permit
• Tentative Subdivision Map
In addition, other agencies may have the authority to issue permits prior to implementation of the Project including but not limited to: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Southern California Edison, and Regional Water Quality Control Board.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 18

2.14 Consultation with California Native American Tribes CEQA requires lead agencies to consider the potential effects of proposed projects and consult with California Native American tribes during the local planning process for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal Cultural Resources. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1, the lead agency shall begin consultation with the California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographical area of the proposed project. Such significant cultural resources are either sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a tribe which is either on or eligible for inclusion in the California Historic Register or local historic register, or, the lead agency, at its discretion, and support by substantial evidence, choose to treat the resources as a Tribal Cultural Resources (PRC Section 21074(a)(1-2)). According to the most recent census data, California is home to 109 currently federally recognized Indian tribes.

Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See PRC Section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per PRC Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that PRC Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

A consultation list of tribes with traditional lands or cultural places located within Tulare County was requested and received from the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on June 16, 2025. The listed tribes include Kitanemuk & Yowlumne Tejon Indians, Table Mountain Rancheria, Tule River Indian Tribe, and Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band. The NAHC also conducted a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search which was negative.

The City of Porterville sent formal tribal consultation notices for the proposed Project pursuant to AB 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) on August 5, 2025. Letters were sent to the tribes identified above. The request for consultation period for AB 52 ended on September 4, 2025. One response was received from Table Mountain Rancheria dated August 14, 2025, stating that the Project site is beyond their area of interest. No other responses were received.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 19 3 DETERMINATION

3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Tribal and Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
Wildfire

For purposes of this Initial Study, the following answers have the corresponding meanings:
“No Impact” means the specific impact category does not apply to the Project, or that the record sufficiently demonstrates that Project specific factors or general standards applicable to the Project will result in no impact for the threshold under consideration.
“Less Than Significant Impact” means there is an impact related to the threshold under consideration, but that impact is less than significant.
“Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation” means there is a potentially significant impact related to the threshold under consideration, however, with the mitigation incorporated into the Project, the impact is less than significant. For purposes of this Initial Study “mitigation incorporated into the Project” means mitigation originally described in the GP PEIR and applied to an individual Project, as well as mitigation developed specifically for an individual Project.
“Potentially Significant Impact” means there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant related to the threshold under consideration.

3.2 Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation (to be completed by the Lead Agency):

I find that the proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 20 I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) is required.

I find that the proposed Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An EIR is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed Project, nothing further is required.

Approved By:

Claudia Calderon, Director Date
City of Porterville, Community Development Department

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 21 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

4.1 AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources
Code Section 21099, would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on
a scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock out-croppings, and
historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
X
c) In non-urbanized areas,
substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality public
views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point).

If the Project is in an urbanized area,
would the Project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic
quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X

4.1.1 Environmental Setting
Generally, aesthetic resources may include scenic vistas and scenic resources (e.g. trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings, highways). Porterville’s visual features predominately include urbanized and agricultural land uses. The City of Porterville is nestled at the base of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and foothills, which are located to the east of the City. Depending on conditions, the Sierra Nevada’s are prominent and visible from just about anywhere within the City.

The Project Site is approximately 8.76 acres located along the Poplar Ditch between Wisconsin Street and South Indiana Street. The Project Site is currently vacant and has no on-site structures or improvements (i.e., streets, curb, gutter, sidewalks). The Project site is surrounded by rural residences to the north, south, and west and the Royal Oaks single-family subdivision to the east.

Porterville 2030 General Plan
According to the Porterville 2030 General Plan, the City identifies its agricultural foundation, topography, landscape, as well as parkland, as a contribution to community identity, aesthetic value, environmental quality, habitat

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 22 protection, and recreational activities. However, the General Plan does not identify any specific scenic corridors or scenic vistas within the City’s Planning Area.

The City Code of Porterville, California
The City Code of Porterville, California, also known as the Porterville Municipal Code (PMC), outlines enforceable requirements for all new developments to prevent lighting and glare impacts, as listed below:

Section 306.07 - Lighting and Glare
B. Lighting. Lights shall be placed to deflect light away from adjacent properties and public streets, and to prevent adverse interference with the normal operation or enjoyment of surrounding properties. Direct or sky-reflected glare from floodlights shall not be directed into any other property or street. Except for public streetlights, no light or combination of lights, or activity shall cast light on a public street exceeding one (1) foot-candle as measured from the centerline of the street. No light, combination of lights, or activity shall cast light onto a residentially zoned property, or any property containing residential uses, exceeding one half foot-candle. Refer to Section 300.07 Lighting and Illumination and Section 304.10(g) Parking Lot Lighting for additional lighting standards required by this code.

Section 300.07 - Lighting and Illumination
E. Shielding. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded in accordance with Table 300.07(B) so as not to produce obtrusive glare onto the public right-of-way or adjoining properties. All luminaries shall meet the most recently adopted criteria of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) for “Cut Off” or “Full Cut Off” luminaries, as illustrated in Figure 300.07.

California Scenic Highway Program
The California Scenic Highway Program was established in 1963 with the purpose of protecting and enhancing the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors, through special conservation treatment. A highway may be designated scenic depending upon how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler's enjoyment of the view. There are no officially designated State Scenic Highways in the City of Porterville, however, State Route (SR) 190, east of SR 65, is categorized as an eligible State Scenic Highway. SR 190 is located approximately 0.4 miles north of the Project Site.
1 4.1.2 Impact Assessment
Except as provided in PRC Section 21099, would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than Significant Impact. The Project Site is currently vacant and has no on-site structures or improvements (i.e., streets, curb, gutter, sidewalks). The Project site is surrounded by rural residences to the north, south, and west and the Royal Oaks single-family subdivision to the east. Mountain ranges and foothills can be seen to the east 1 Caltrans. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Accessed on June 26, 2025, https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 23 of the Project site; however, most of this long-range view is blocked by existing development on properties east of the site. While views of the mountain ranges would be further obstructed by the development of the Project Site, impacts would be less than significant due to view obstruction by existing development. Additionally, the General Plan does not identify or designate scenic vistas or corridors within the general vicinity of the Project Site. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. According to the California State Scenic Highway Program, there are no officially designated State Scenic Highways in the City of Porterville, inclusive of the Project Site. SR 190 is an eligible State Scenic Highway but is located approximately 0.4 miles north of the Project Site and would not be impacted by the Project due to its distance. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway and no impact would occur. c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the Project is in an urbanized area, would the Project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project Site is in an urbanized area surrounded by residential uses. Once developed, the Project Site will not have a substantially different character from the surrounding area. Further, the proposed use is subject to compliance with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality, which will ensure the minimization of any visual impact by upholding the visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. The Project would be subject to compliance with applicable policies and regulations that govern scenic quality including but not limited to the General Plan, Porterville Municipal Code (PMC), and California Building Code (CBC). Compliance would ensure that development of the site would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. Generally, lighting impacts are associated with artificial lighting in evening hours either through interior lighting from windows or exterior lighting (e.g., street lighting, parking lot lighting, landscape lighting, adjacent vehicle traffic). Development of the Project Site would incrementally increase the amount of light from streetlights, exterior lighting, and vehicular headlights. Such sources could create adverse effects on day or nighttime views in the area.

Project construction would also introduce light and glare resulting from construction activities such as construction equipment traversing the site that could adversely affect day or nighttime views. Although construction activities are anticipated to occur primarily during daylight hours, it is possible that some activities could occur during dusk or early evening hours (PMC Section 18-90.6 permits construction work to take place between 6:00 am and 9:00 pm on any day except Saturday and Sunday, or between 7:00 am and 5:00 pm on Saturday or Sunday). Construction during these time periods could result in light and glare from construction vehicles or equipment. However,

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 24 construction would occur primarily during daylight hours and would be temporary in nature. Once construction is completed, any light and glare from these activities would cease to occur.

Once developed, the Project would be required to comply with the applicable General Plan policies and the enforceable requirements and restrictions contained in the PMC intended to prevent light and glare impacts (See Environmental Setting). Further, compliance with Title 24 lighting requirements as verified through the Building Permit process would reduce impacts related to nighttime light. The lighting requirements cover outdoor spaces including regulations for mounted luminaires (i.e., high efficacy, motion sensor controlled, time clocks, energy management control systems, etc.). As such, conditions imposed on the Project by the City pursuant to the General Plan, PMC, and Title 24 would result in a less than significant impact.

4.1.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 25

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown
on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined
by Government Code section
51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to nonforest use? X
e) Involve other changes in the
existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
X

4.2.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within the City of Porterville and is planned and zoned for residential use. The Project site is currently vacant but has historically been used for agricultural purposes. There are no existing structures or improvements on site (i.e., roads, curb, gutter, sidewalk). The existing biotic conditions and resources of the site can be defined primarily as ruderal and are highly disturbed due to annual disking. There are four (4) total trees on site, three (3) of which are located on the southern bank of the Poplar Ditch. The Poplar Ditch runs through the southern portion of the property. No development is proposed south of the ditch. A drainage ditch runs along the western edge of the property, along South Wisconsin Street, that allows the basin to the north of the Project site to drain into the Poplar Ditch. The Project site does not contain any forestry resources (e.g., forest land or timberland).

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 26 Farmland Monitoring and Mapping Program
The California Department of Conservation manages the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) that provides maps and data for analyzing land use impacts on farmland. The FMMP produces the Important Farmland Finder as a resource map that shows quality (soils) and land use information. Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation status, in addition to many other physical and chemical characteristics. The highest quality land is called “Prime Farmland” which is defined by the FMMP as “farmland with the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. 2 Maps are updated every two years. According to the FMMP, California Important Farmland Finder, the Project Site is classified as “Vacant or Disturbed Land” as defined below. 3Figure 4-1 shows the farmland type classification within the Project vicinity.

Vacant or Disturbed Land (V): Open field areas that do not qualify for an agricultural category, mineral or oil extraction areas, and rural freeway interchanges.

California Land Conservation Act
The California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (i.e., the Williamson Act) allows local governments to enter contracts with private landowners to restrict parcels of land for agricultural or open space uses. In return, property tax assessments of the restricted parcels are lower than full market value since the restricted parcels are assessed according to their restricted use rather than their development potential free of such restriction. The minimum length of a Williamson Act contract is 10 years and automatically renews annually upon its anniversary date; as such, the contract length is essentially indefinite unless appropriately cancelled. The Project Site is not subject to the Williamson Act.
2 California Department of Conservation. Important Farmland Categories. Accessed on June 26, 2025, https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Important-Farmland-Categories.aspx 3 California Department of Conservation. (2020). California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed on June 26, 2025, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 27 Figure 4-1 Farmland Type

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 28

4.2.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located on or adjacent to any lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. According to the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), California Important Farmland Finder, the Project Site is classified as “Vacant or Disturbed Land.” Surrounding properties are classified as Vacant or Disturbed Land, Urban and Built-Up Land, or Farmland of Local Importance. The nearest Prime Farmland is approximately 0.5 miles west (west of SR-65), and the nearest Farmland of Statewide Importance is about 0.18 miles to the south and west (west of SR-65). No Unique Farmland exists within a two (2)-mile radius of the site. Therefore, the Project would not convert any designated farmland to non-agricultural use and impacts would be less than significant. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Project site and surrounding properties are not zoned for agricultural use and are not under Williamson Act contracts. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, and no impact would occur.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? No Impact. The Project site is not located on land zoned for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production, as defined by the relevant sections of the Public Resources Code and Government Code. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for these land uses or require any rezoning, and no impacts would occur. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The Project site does not contain forest land, nor is it designated or zoned for forest uses. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use, and no impacts would occur.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located on or adjacent to any lands designated as Farmland or forest land, nor is the site and surrounding properties zoned for agricultural, or forestry uses. The Project would not require the extension of infrastructure, such as new roads or utilities, into areas containing Farmland or forest land that could result in future conversion of Farmland or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest use. The Project is consistent with the existing residential land use patterns in the surrounding area. This consistency minimizes the potential for the Project to result in future conversion of Farmland or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest use. In addition, the Project does not have any components that would affect the continued agricultural or forestry uses on nearby lands. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 29

4.2.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 30

4.3 AIR QUALITY
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
X

4.3.1 Environmental Setting
The City of Porterville lies within the central portion of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) that is bounded by the Sierra Nevada Mountain range to the east, Coastal Ranges to the west, and Tehachapi mountains to the south.

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) regulates air quality in eight (8) counties including:

Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare. The SJVAPCD oversees the SJVAB.

Impacts on air quality result from emissions generated during short-term activities (construction) and long-term activities (operations). Construction-related emissions consist mainly of exhaust emissions (NOX, PM10, and PM2.5) from construction equipment and other mobile sources, and fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) emissions from earth moving activities. Operational emissions are source specific and consist of permitted equipment and activities and non-permitted equipment and activities.

Air pollution in the SJVAB can be attributed to both human-related (anthropogenic) and natural (nonanthropogenic) activities that produce emissions. Air pollution from significant anthropogenic activities in the SJVAB includes a variety of industrial-based sources as well as on- and off-road mobile sources. Four (4) main sources of air pollutant emissions in the SJVAB are motor vehicles, industrial plants, agricultural activities, and construction activities. All four (4) of the major pollutant sources affect ambient air quality throughout the SJVAB. These sources, coupled with geographical and meteorological conditions unique to the area, stimulate the formation of unhealthy air. Air pollutants can remain in the atmosphere for long periods and can build to unhealthful levels when stagnant conditions that are common in the San Joaquin Valley occur. Pollutants are transported downwind from urban areas with many emission sources which are also recirculated back to the urban areas.

Further, the SJVAB is in non-attainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, which means that certain pollutants' exposure levels are often higher than the normal air quality requirements. Air quality standards have been set to protect

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 31 public health, particularly the health of vulnerable people. Therefore, if the concentration of those contaminants exceeds the norm, some susceptible individuals in the population are likely to experience health effects.

Concentration of the pollutant in the air, the length of time exposed and the individual's reaction are factors that affect the extent and nature of the health effects.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
The SJVAPCD is the agency primarily responsible for ensuring that National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) are not exceeded and that air quality conditions are maintained in the SJVAB, within which the Project is located. Responsibilities of the SJVAPCD include, but are not limited to, preparing plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollution, inspecting stationary sources of air pollution and responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implementing programs and regulations required by the federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act .

The SJVAPCD rules and regulations that may apply to projects that will occur during buildout of the Project include but are not limited to the following:

Rule 2010 – Permits Required. The purpose of this rule is to require any person constructing, altering, replacing or operating any source operation which emits, may emit, or may reduce emissions to obtain an Authority to Construct or a Permit to Operate. This rule also explains the posting requirements for a Permit to Operate and the illegality of a person willfully altering, defacing, forging, counterfeiting or falsifying any Permit to Operate.

Rule 2201 – New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule. The purpose of this rule is to provide for the following:

The review of new and modified Stationary Sources of air pollution and to provide mechanisms including emission trade-offs by which Authorities to Construct such sources may be granted, without interfering with the attainment or maintenance of Ambient Air Quality Standards; and No net increase in emissions above specified thresholds from new and modified Stationary Sources of all nonattainment pollutants and their precursors.

Rule 4001 – New Source Performance Standards. This rule incorporates the New Source Performance Standards from Part 60, Chapter 1, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Rule 4002 – National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. This rule incorporates the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Part 61, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories from Part 63, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Rule 4102 – Nuisance. The purpose of this rule is to protect the health and safety of the public and applies to any source operation that emits or may emit air contaminants or other materials.

Rule 4601 – Architectural Coatings. The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from architectural coatings. This rule specifies architectural coatings storage, cleanup, and labeling requirements.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 32 Rule 4641 – Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations. The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from asphalt paving and maintenance operations. This rule applies to the manufacture and use of cutback asphalt, slow cure asphalt and emulsified asphalt for paving and maintenance operations.

Regulation VIII – Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions. The purpose of Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) is to reduce ambient concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM10) by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate anthropogenic fugitive dust emissions.

Rule 9510 – Indirect Source Review. The purposes of this rule are to:

1. Fulfill the District’s emission reduction commitments in the PM10 and Ozone Attainment Plans.

2. Achieve emission reductions from the construction and use of development projects through design features and on-site measures.

3. Provide a mechanism for reducing emissions from the construction of and use of development projects through off-site measures.

Thresholds of Significance
To assist local jurisdictions in the evaluation of air quality impacts, the SJVAPCD has published the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI). SJVAPCD recommends a three (3)-tiered approach to air quality analysis based on Project size to allow quick screening for CEQA impacts:

1. Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL): based on the District’s New Source Review, the District pre-quantified emissions and determined values as thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants. Residential, commercial, retail, industrial, educational, and recreational land uses are eligible to use this for screening.

The SPAL was published on November 13, 2020, by the SJVAPCD to determine potential impacts in GAMAQI.
4 SPAL is based on a CalEEMod version 2016.3.2.

2. Cursory Analysis Level (CAL): CAL is used to determine significance on Projects that exceed the SPAL criteria.

Analysis includes using CalEEMod to estimate emissions and air pollutants.

3. Full Analysis Level (FAL): this level of analysis is usually required for an EIR. It requires a full air quality report that describes impacts on the public.

GAMAQI also includes recommended thresholds of significance to be used for the evaluation of short-term construction, long-term operational, odor, toxic air contaminant, and cumulative air quality impacts. Accordingly, the SJVAPCD-recommended thresholds of significance are used to determine whether implementation of the proposed Project would result in a significant air quality impact. Projects that exceed these recommended thresholds would be considered to have a potentially significant impact on human health and welfare. The thresholds of significance are summarized, as follows:
4 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. (2020). “Small Project Analysis Levels (SPAL)”. Accessed on July 24, 2025, https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/CEQA%20Rules/GAMAQI-SPAL.PDF

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 33 Criteria Air Pollutants
SJVAPCD adopted thresholds of significance for criteria air pollutants, as shown in Table 4-1. The thresholds of significance are based on a calendar year basis. For construction emissions, the annual emissions are evaluated on a rolling 12-month period. The following summarizes these thresholds:

Short-Term Emissions of Particulate Matter (PM10): Construction impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the feasible control measures for construction in compliance with Regulation VIII as listed in the SJVAPCD guidelines are not incorporated or implemented, or if Project-generated emissions would exceed 15 tons per year (TPY).

Short-Term Emissions of Ozone Precursors (ROG and NOX): Construction impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the Project generates emissions of Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) or NOX that exceeds 10 TPY.

Long-Term Emissions of Particulate Matter (PM10): Operational impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the Project generates emissions of PM10 that exceed 15 TPY.

Long-Term Emissions of Ozone Precursors (ROG and NOX): Operational impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the Project generates emissions of ROG or NOX that exceeds 10 TPY.

Table 4-1 SJVAPCD Recommended Air Quality Thresholds of Significance2F 5 Pollutant
Significance Threshold
Construction Emissions (tons/year) Operational Emission (tons/year) CO 100 100
NOX 10 10
ROG 10 10
SOX 27 27
PM10 15 15
PM2.5 15 15
Conflict with or Obstruct Implementation of Applicable Air Quality Plan Air Quality Plans (AQPs) are plans for reaching the attainment of air quality standards. The applicable AQP for the SJVAB is the GAMAQI. Due to the region’s nonattainment status for ozone, PM2.5, and PM10, if the Project-generated emissions of either of the ozone precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NOx) or PM10 would exceed the SJVAPCD’s significance thresholds, then the Project would be considered to be conflicting with the AQP. In addition, if the Project would result in a change in land use and corresponding increases in vehicle miles traveled, the Project may result in an increase in vehicle miles traveled that is unaccounted for in regional emissions inventories contained in regional air quality control plans. Vehicle Miles Traveled is analyzed in Section 4.17.

5 SJVAPCD. (2015). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. Accessed on July 24, 2025, https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI-2015/FINAL-DRAFT-GAMAQI.PDF

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 34 Local Mobile-Source CO Concentrations
Local mobile source impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the Project contributes to CO concentrations at receptor locations in excess of the CAAQS (i.e., 9.0 ppm for 8 hours or 20 ppm for 1 hour).

Toxic Air Contaminants
Exposure to toxic air contaminants (TAC) would be considered significant if the probability of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed Individual (i.e., maximum individual risk) would exceed 10 in 1 million or would result in a Hazard Index greater than one (1).

As recommended by the SJVAPCD, the latest approved California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) methodology was utilized as the TAC screening methodology. According to the CAPCOA Guidance Document titled “Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects,” there are two types of land use projects that have the potential to cause long-term public health risk impacts. These project types are as follows:
• Type A: Land use Projects with toxic emissions that impact receptors, and • Type B: Land use Project that will place receptors in the vicinity of existing toxics sources.

In this Guidance document, Type A projects examples are (project impacts receptors):
• combustion related power plants,
• gasoline dispensing facilities,
• asphalt batch plants,
• warehouse distribution centers,
• quarry operations, and
• other stationary sources that emit toxic substances.

Odor
The intensity of an odor source’s operations and its proximity to sensitive receptors influences the potential significance of odor emissions. Specific land uses that are considered sources of undesirable odors include landfills, transfer stations, composting facilities, sewage treatment plants, wastewater pump stations, asphalt batch plants, and rendering plants. The SJVAPCD has identified these common types of facilities that have been known to produce odors in the SJVAB and has prepared screening levels for potential odor sources ranging from one to two miles of distance from the odor-producing facility to sensitive receptors. Odor impacts would be considered significant if the Project has the potential to frequently expose members of the public to objectionable odors.

Ambient Air Quality
The SJVAPCD applies the following guidance in determining whether an ambient air quality analysis should be performed: when assessing the significance of Project-related impacts on air quality, it should be noted that the impacts may be significant when on-site emission increases from construction activities or operational activities exceed the 100 pounds per day screening level of any criteria pollutant after implementation of all enforceable mitigation measures. Under such circumstances, the SJVAPCD recommends that an ambient air quality analysis be performed.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 35 Small Project Analysis Level
The SPAL identifies pre-quantified emissions and determined values related to project type, size, and number of vehicle trips. According to the SPAL, projects that fit specified descriptions are deemed to have a less than significant impact on air quality and as such are excluded from quantifying criteria pollutant emissions for CEQA purposes. The SPAL threshold criteria for residential projects is shown in Table 4-2.

Table 4-2 SPAL Thresholds for Residential Projects
Land Use Type Size and Unit
Average Daily One-Way Trips for
all fleet types (Except HHDT)
Average Daily One-way for HHDT
Trips only (50-mile trip length)
Single Family 155 dwelling unit 800 15
Apartment, Low Rise 224 dwelling unit 800 15
Apartment, Mid Rise 225 dwelling unit 800 15
Apartment, High Rise 340 dwelling unit 800 15
Condominiums/Townhouse 352 dwelling unit 800 15
Porterville 2030 General Plan
The Porterville 2030 General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element established policies and actions related to air quality, as listed below.

Guiding Policy OSC-G-9 Improve and protect Porterville’s air quality by making air quality a priority in land use and transportation planning and in development review.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-58 Continue to assess air quality impacts through environmental review and require developers to implement best management practices to reduce air pollutant emissions associated with the construction and operation of development projects.

The City will use the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts for determining and mitigating project air quality impacts and related thresholds of significance for use in environmental documents. The City shall cooperate with the SJVAPCD in the review of development proposals.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-59 Require preparation of a Health Risk Assessment for any development subject to the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Act.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-60 Require dust control measures as a condition of approval for subdivision maps, site plans, and all grading permits.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-65 When asbestos has been identified in the preliminary soils report, require all new development and public works projects to comply with all provisions of State and regional ATCM regulations for control of airborne asbestos emissions relating to construction, road maintenance, and grading activities.

4.3.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. Air Quality Plans (AQPs) are designed to achieve and maintain compliance with ambient air quality standards. These plans involve a detailed analysis of factors influencing air quality within a specific air basin, including growth projections, emission sources, pollutant formation processes, and existing and

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 36 planned emission controls. The goal of an AQP is to demonstrate how, through a combination of regulations, programs, and other measures, the air basin will attain and maintain the air quality standards.

The applicable AQP for the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) is the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI). The GAMAQI indicates that projects that do not exceed SJVAPCD regional criteria pollutant emissions quantitative thresholds identified in the GAMAQI would not conflict with or obstruct the applicable AQP.

The GAMAQI contains the Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL) screening tool that pre-quantifies emissions and significance thresholds below which it is reasonable to conclude that a project would not exceed applicable thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants. Projects below these SPAL thresholds are presumed to have a less than significant impact on air quality and are considered consistent with the AQP. As demonstrated below, the proposed Project would not have any significant effects relating to air quality pursuant to SPAL. The Project is below all thresholds and therefore, the Project is assumed to result in air quality impacts that are below the identified thresholds of significance. Therefore, the proposed Project would not be considered to obstruct implementation of the applicable AQP or be in conflict with the applicable AQP and a less than significant impact would occur.

Table 4-3 SPAL Significance Thresholds
SPAL Threshold Proposed Project Below Threshold?
Size/Unit 155 dwelling units 32 dwelling units Yes
Average Daily One-way
Trips for All Fleet Types
(Except Heavy-Heavy Duty
Trucks (HHDT))
800 301.76 Yes
Average Daily One-way for
HHDT trips only (50-mile
trip length)
15 0 Yes
Note: Trip generation and VMT are further described in Section 4.17. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less than Significant Impact. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) is currently designated as non-attainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 under both federal and state ambient air quality standards. This means that existing concentrations of these pollutants frequently exceed established health-based standards, posing a risk to public health, especially for sensitive populations. Because the Project’s emissions are below the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL) thresholds (criterion a)), the emissions are presumed to have a less than significant impact on air quality and are excluded from further quantification for CEQA purposes. The SPAL thresholds are designed to identify projects that, individually or cumulatively, would not contribute significantly to existing air quality violations. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative increases in these non-attainment pollutants would be considered less than significant and would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors, such as schools, parks, playgrounds, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling units are more susceptible to the adverse effects of air pollution. The

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 37 nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are single-family residences located adjacent to the site, to the east and west. As discussed previously, Project emissions are below the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL) thresholds for both construction and operation. Projects below these thresholds are presumed to have a less than significant impact on air quality and are not required to perform further analysis. Therefore, the Project’s potential to expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations would be considered less than significant.

Furthermore, the Project proposes residential development. Residential development typically does not generate substantial toxic emissions (e.g., Type A uses defined by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) guidelines). While construction activities would generate temporary emissions, primarily from diesel equipment exhaust, these emissions would be limited to the construction period. Moreover, construction activities would be required to comply with all applicable SJVAPCD rules and regulations, including but not limited to Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions), Rule 2010 (Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review), Rule 4402 (Nuisance), Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings), and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations). Compliance with these regulations will further minimize potential impacts to sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations are considered less than significant. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Less than Significant Impact. Certain land uses, such as landfills, transfer stations, composting facilities, sewage treatment plants, wastewater pump stations, asphalt batch plants, and rendering plants, are known to generate objectionable odors. This Project, which facilitates residential development, does not involve any of these odorgenerating uses. Therefore, it is unlikely to produce odors that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. Furthermore, a review of the surrounding area indicates no major odor-generating sources (e.g., sanitary landfill, transfer station, composting facility, food processing facility) in proximity to the Project site. While temporary odors associated with diesel fuel and equipment exhaust may be present during construction activities, these odors will be short-lived and limited to the construction phase. For these reasons, potential odor impacts associated with the Project would be less than significant.

4.3.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 38

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any 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 U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations
or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 39

4.4.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently vacant with no structures or improvements. The existing biotic conditions and resources of the Project site can be defined primarily as ruderal and are highly disturbed due to annual disking. There are multiple trees on the Project site: two (2) are located along the western edge of the property along the drainage ditch running from the basin to the Poplar Ditch and three (3) located along the Poplar Ditch.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife – Special-Status Species Database The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) operates an “Information for Planning and Consultation” (IPaC) database, which is a Project planning tool for the environmental review process that provides general information on the location of special-status species that are “known” or “expected” to occur (note: the database does not provide occurrences; refer to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Natural Diversity Database below). 6 Specifically, the database identifies 9 endangered species, 1 bald & golden eagle, and 14 migratory birds that are potentially affected by activities on the Project Site. The list of species is provided in Appendix B.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife – Critical Habitat Report
Once a species is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, NOAA Fisheries is required to determine whether there are areas that meet the definition of Critical Habitat. Per NOAA Fisheries, Critical Habitat is defined as:
• Specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing that contain physical or biological features essential to conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection; and
• Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species if the agency determines that the area itself is essential for conservation. 7
The process of Critical Habitat designation is complex and involves the consideration of scientific data, public and peer review, economic, national security, and other relevant impacts. According to the Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species Report updated February 25, 2025, the Project Site and its immediate vicinity (0.5-mile radius from the site) are not located within a federally designated Critical Habitat. 8 The closest federally designated Critical Habitat is located approximately 3.9 miles northeast of the Project Site for California condor (Gymnogyps californianus).

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – National Wetlands Inventory The USFWS provides a National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) with detailed information on the abundance, characteristics, and distribution of U.S. wetlands. A search of the NWI shows one wetland feature, the Poplar Ditch, 6 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Information and Planning Consultation Online System. Accessed on July 18, 2025, https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
7 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Critical Habitat. Accessed on July 18, 2025, https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/critical-habitat#definition-of-critical-habitat 8 U.S. Fish & Wildlife. (2024). ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System - USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report (updated February 25, 2025). Accessed on July 18, 2025, https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 40 run through the Project Site. 9 According to the NWI, the Poplar Ditch is classified as an R4SBCx riverine system (R), with an intermittent subsystem which contains flowing water only part of the year (4), that is within the Streambed (SB) class, is seasonally flooded (C), and was excavated by humans (x).

Environmental Protection Agency – WATERS Geoviewer
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) WATERS GeoViewer provides a GeoPlatform based web mapping application of water features by location. According to the WATERS GeoViewer, there are no water features located within the Project site.
10 California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Natural Diversity Database The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) operates the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), which is an inventory of the status and locations of rare plants and animals in California along with reported occurrences of such species. 11 The Project Site is located within the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Porterville 7.5-minute quadrangle map (Quad). A five (5)-mile radius from the Project site extends into the Success Dam, Ducor, and Fountain Springs Quads. According to the CNDDB, there are 28 special-status species that have been observed and reported in the Porterville, Success Dam, Ducor, and Fountain Springs Quads. A list of occurrences within these Quads is provided in Appendix B.

The CNDDB identifies no special status species located within the Project site. Figure 4-2 shows the CNDDBidentified occurrences of animal and plant species within the five (5)-mile radius of the Project site. Table 4-4 lists all federally or state-listed special-status species CNDDB-known occurrences within the five (5)-mile radius of the Project Site, organized by distance to the site. Vernal pool fairy shrimp occurrences, which are some of the closest, occur along State Route 65 to the south of the Project site. Several occurrences are listed as extirpated or possibly extirpated, meaning that the habitat has been destroyed or that the element has been searched but not seen for many years. Table 4-5 provides an analysis of essential habitats and the potential for the existence of the specialstatus species to exist on the Project site. 9 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed July 18, 2025, https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html
10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. WATERS GeoViewer 2.0. Accessed July 18, 2025, https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=074cfede236341b6a1e03779c2bd0692 11 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Natural Diversity Database. Accessed July 18, 2025, https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 41 Table 4-4 Special-Status Species Occurrences within 5-mile radius of Project Site Species (Common Name) Date Federal Status State Status Distance to site Vernal pool fairy shrimp 2002/07/22 Threatened None 0.41 miles south Morrison’s blister beetle 1939/05/01 None None 0.58 miles east Northern California legless lizard 1940/04/02 None None 1.02 miles northeast American Badger XXXX/XX/XX None None 1.24 miles southwest Vernal pool fairy shrimp 2002/07/22 Threatened None 1.49 miles south San Joaquin Kit Fox 1975/07/XX Endangered Threatened 1.51 miles south Crotch’s bumblebee 1963/06/13 None Candidate Endangered 1.57 northeast Striped adobe-lily 1927/03/13 None Threatened 1.57 miles northeast Valley elderberry longhorn beetle 1991/04/21 Threatened None 2.31 miles east San Joaquin Kit Fox 1989/04/09 Endangered Threatened 2.36 miles southwest San Joaquin Kit Fox 1975/07/XX Endangered Threatened 2.54 miles southeast San Joaquin Kit Fox 1973/XX/XX Endangered Threatened 2.58 miles northeast Northern claypan vernal pool 1980/04/26 None None 3.22 miles southeast San Joaquin Kit Fox 1975/07/XX Endangered Threatened 3.26 miles southwest Northern California legless lizard 2017/04/23 None None 3.35 miles east San Joaquin Kit Fox 1975/07/XX Endangered Threatened 3.44 miles west Swainson’s Hawk 2017/07/09 None Threatened 3.58 miles northwest San Joaquin Woollythreads 1881/03/XX Endangered None 3.68 miles south San Joaquin Kit Fox 1992/04/21 Endangered Threatened 3.78 miles southwest San Joaquin Kit Fox 1990/03/22 Endangered Threatened 3.87 miles northeast Townsend’s big-eared bat 1988/07/27 None None 3.96 miles northeast San Joaquin Kit Fox 1975/07/XX Endangered Threatened 3.91 miles south California Condor 1976/09/17 Endangered Endangered 3.99 miles northeast San Joaquin Adobe sunburst 1990/04/152 Threatened Endangered 4.04 miles northeast San Joaquin Adobe sunburst 1990/04/08 Threatened Endangered 4.08 miles east Madera leptosiphon 1935/03/28 None None 4.08 miles east Vernal pool fairy shrimp 2002/02/07 Threatened None 4.27 miles south San Joaquin Adobe sunburst 2016/03/18 Threatened Endangered 4.36 miles north Striped adobe lily 2007/03/01 None Threatened 4.43 miles north Springville Clarkia 2002/04/16 Threatened Endangered 4.51 miles north Northern California legless lizard 2002/04/27 None None 4.51 miles east San Joaquin Adobe sunburst 1988/04/09 Threatened Endangered 4.82 miles north San Joaqiun Kit Fox 1975/07/XX Endangered Threatened 4.99 miles southwest Extirpated or possible extirpated occurrences are not shown on the table.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 42 Figure 4-2 CNDDB Occurrences within 5-miles of the Project Site

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 43 Table 4-5 Essential Habitats and Potential Existence of Special-Status Species on Site Common Name/Type Habitat Potential Occurrence in the Project Site American Badger
Most abundant in drier open stages of
most shrub, forest, and herbaceous
habitats, with friable soils.

Potentially Present. Project site is vacant,
with herbaceous habitat and friable soils.

Active denning may be limited by annual
disking and site disturbance.

California Condor
Require vast expanses of open
savannah, grasslands, and foothill
chaparral in mountain ranges of
moderate altitude.

Absent. Found in mountain ranges and
large, undisturbed natural areas. The
Project site is in an urbanized area and does
not contain suitable mountain or expansive
foraging habitat for condors.

Swainsons hawk
Breeds in grasslands with scattered
trees, juniper-sage flats, riparian
areas, savannahs, and agricultural or
ranch lands with groves or lines of
trees.

Potentially Present. Nests in mature trees
and forages in open grasslands and
agricultural fields. There are mature trees
within and adjacent to the Project site
(along the ditches).

Crotch’s bumblebee Coastal California east to the Sierracascade crest and south into Mexico.

Potentially Present. Project site is vacant,
with ruderal herbaceous vegetation that
may provide suitable foraging resources;
nesting is less likely in disked areas.

Madera leptosiphon Cismontane woodland, lower
montane coniferous forest.

Likely Absent. Commonly located in
woodland areas within the Sierra Nevada
mountains. The Project site is not located
within a woodland area.

Morrison’s blister beetle Inhabitant of the southern central valley of California.

Likely Absent. Prefers sand dune/desert
scrub habitat. The Project site does not
provide any suitable sand dune or desert
scrub habitat.

Northern California legless lizard Sandy or loose loamy soils under sparse vegetation.

Potentially Present. The Project site
comprises sandy/loose loamy soils with
sparse vegetation, particularly in less
disturbed areas along the drainage ditches
where some leaf litter or debris may
accumulate.

San Joaquin Adobe sunburst Valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland.

Likely Absent. Present in grassland and oak
woodland habitat, with preference for
heavy adobe soils. The Project site does not
contain any heavy adobe soils. Additionally,
the Project site is disced annually.

San Joaquin Kit Fox
Annual grasslands or grassy open
stages with scattered shrubby
vegetation. Need loose-textured
sandy soils for burrowing, and
suitable prey base.

Potentially Present. The Project site
comprises vacant grassland with shrubby
vegetation and loose, sandy soils which
would provide suitable habitat.

San Joaquin Wollythreads Chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grassland.

Likely Absent The Project site is a vacant,
grassland; however, the Project site is
disced annually for vegetation control
which would preclude the establishment
and persistence of this species.

Springville Clarkia Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
valley and foothill grassland.

Likely Absent The Project site is a vacant,
grassland; however, the Project site is
disced annually for vegetation control

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 44 which would preclude the establishment
and persistence of this species.

Striped adobe-lily Cismontane woodland, valley and
foothill grassland.

Likely Absent The Project site is a vacant,
grassland; however, the Project site is
disced annually for vegetation control
which would preclude the establishment
and persistence of this species.

Townsend’s big eared bat
Throughout California in a wide
variety of habitats. Most common in
mesic sites.

Likely Absent. The Project site is a vacant,
grassland that provides little potential
roosting sites (e.g., caves, mines, large
buildings).

Valley elderberry longhorn beetle
Occurs only in the central valley of
California, in association with blue
elderberry (sambucus mexicana).

Potentially Present. Often found near
riparian habitat with host plant. The Project
site includes some riparian habitat (Poplar
Ditch and western ditch) with the potential
to host Blue Elderberry plants.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp
Endemic to the grasslands of the
central valley, central coast
mountains, and south coast
mountains, in astatic rain-filled pools.

Potentially Present. The Project site is a
vacant grassland, with an adjacent
agricultural ditch, with the potential for rain
to accumulate in scattered pools.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 45 California Fish and Game Code
Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code specifically protect native birds and raptors.

Mitigation for avoidance of impacts to nesting birds is typically necessary to comply with these Sections of the Fish and Game Code in CEQA. 12
Section 3503: It is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.

Section 3503.5: It is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birdsof-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.

Section 3513: It is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the Migratory Treaty Act.

Porterville 2030 General Plan
According to the Porterville 2030 General Plan, the Project Site is within an area with known or high potential habitat for the striped adobe lily. The General Plan established goals and policies related to biological resources in the Open Space & Conservation Element, as listed below: 13 Goal OSC-G-7 Protect habitat for special status species, designated under State and federal law.

Implementing Policy OSC-I-27 Protect and enhance the natural habitat features of the Tule River and open space corridors within the Planning Area.

Implementing Policy OSC-I-28 Require protection of sensitive habitat areas and special status species in new development site designs in the following order: 1) avoidance; 2) onsite mitigation, 3) offsite mitigation, and 4) purchase of mitigation credits.

Implementing Policy OSC-I-29 Require assessments of biological resources prior to approval of any development within 300 feet of any creeks, sensitive habitat areas, or areas of potential sensitive status species.

The term “special status” species includes species classified as rare and endangered. These priorities are consistent with the California Department of Fish and Game guidelines. When habitat preservation on-site is not feasible (i.e., preserved parcels would be too small to be of any value), then off-site mitigation should occur.

Implementing Policy OSC-I-32 Identify and protect wildlife movement corridors that serve critical habitats to minimize wildlife-urban conflicts.
12 The California Biologist's Handbook. California Fish and Game Code. Accessed on July 24, 2025, https://biologistshandbook.com/regulations/state-regulations/state-fish-and-gamecode/#:~:text=Section%203503,any%20regulation%20made%20pursuant%20thereto.%E2%80%9D 13 City of Porterville. City of Porterville 2030 General Plan: Open Space & Conservation. Accessed July 24, 2025, https://cms9files.revize.com/PortervilleCA/Document_Center/Department/Community%20Development/General%20Plan% 20Update/Chapter6OpenSpaceandConservation_000.pdf

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 46 Implementing Policy OSC-I-34 Continue to require street tree planting in new development and support the City’s tree planting fund.

Implementing Policy OSC-I-35 Consult with all responsible agencies about wetland and vernal pool habitat potentially affected by development.

This consultation will occur as part of the environmental review process.

Implementing Policy OSC-I-36 Establish a “no net loss” policy for wetlands and vernal pools, including credits for land banking and off-site mitigation, and maintain a protection zone around wetlands, riparian corridors, and identified habit areas where development shall not occur, except as part of a parkway enhancement program (e.g., trails and bikeways).

Protection zones will be determined on case-by-case based on biological studies and field assessment.

The City Code of Porterville, California
The Porterville Municipal Code (PMC) establishes regulations for the removal of trees, plants, and shrubs, as described below.

Section 7-48: REMOVAL OF TREES; NOTICE REQUIRED: In the event that the moving of any building for which a permit shall have been granted pursuant to this article makes it necessary to trim, move, remove or replant any tree, plant or shrub belonging to or under the control of the city, the person to whom such permit has been granted, or his authorized representative, shall notify the director of parks and leisure services at least forty eight (48) hours prior to the time that the moving of such building will necessitate the removal of such obstructions.

Section 7-49: REMOVAL OF TREES; AUTHORIZATION: The person to whom such permit is granted as required in this article for the removal of buildings shall not, at the expiration of such time of notice or at any time, trim, move, remove, replant or otherwise disturb such trees, plants or shrubs; and such work shall be done only by the authorized workmen of the city unless otherwise approved and so ordered by the director of parks and leisure services.

Section 7-50: REMOVAL OF TREES; PAYMENT OF COSTS: The person to whom such permit is granted as required in this article for the removal of buildings shall pay to the city any and all costs or expense for the trimming, moving, removing or replanting of any trees, plants or shrubs or of any damage thereto.

4.4.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any 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 Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. To assess the potential presence of special-status species, queries were conducted using the CDFW CNDDB and the USFWS IPaC databases. These databases provide information on the status and locations of rare plants and animals. As identified in the Environmental Setting, the queries identified potential special-status species within or near the Project site. No critical habitat exists within or directly adjacent to the site, as designated by federal agencies. The CNDDB Bios mapping (Figure 4-2), along with Table 4-5, summarize the query results and characterize the site's habitat.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 47 The analysis in Table 4-5 identified several special-status wildlife species with the potential to occur on the site, primarily due to the presence of suitable habitat. These include Swainsons Hawk and other protected birds, American Badger, Northern California Legless Lizard, San Joaquin Kit Fox, Crotch’s Bumble Bee, Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle, and Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp. To ensure that the Project does not have a substantial adverse effect on these identified species, either directly or through habitat modifications, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7. These measures address potential impacts through a combination of pre-construction surveys, avoidance, minimization, and other measures to avoid take.

Through incorporation of mitigation measures, potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated and the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (Protected Birds including Swainson’s Hawk): To mitigate potential impacts on protected birds, including Swainsons Hawk, and to avoid “take” as defined by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code, the following measures will be implemented. 1) Avoidance of Nesting Season: If feasible, all ground-disturbing activities (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) and vegetation removal will occur outside the typical nesting season for migratory birds in the San Joaquin Valley (generally February 1 through August 31). 2) Pre-Construction Survey (If Work During Nesting Season): If ground disturbance or vegetation removal must be initiated or continue during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds, including special-status species such as Swainson's Hawk, within the Project footprint and a suitable buffer (e.g., 500 feet for raptors like Swainson's Hawk, 250 feet for other protected birds, or as determined by the biologist based on species and site conditions). The survey will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of any ground disturbance or vegetation removal within the Project footprint. The survey results will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, who will then report to the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. If no active nests are detected, no further species-specific mitigation for nesting birds is required.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Active Nests Found): If active nests are found in or near the construction zone/area, the qualified biologist will establish and implement an appropriate species-specific non-disturbance buffer (as recommended by CDFW). This buffer will be clearly delineated, and no construction activities will occur within this buffer until the qualified biologist determines that the nesting effort has concluded (e.g., young have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest) and the nest is no longer active. The biologist will prepare a plan detailing the avoidance, monitoring, and minimization actions, and the results of these efforts will be reported by the biologist to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Project proponent, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 48 denning season (typically February through July) when young may be present. Construction activities will avoid filling or altering known or potential badger dens.
2) Pre-Construction Survey (If Work During Denning Season): A qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for American badgers and their dens within the Project footprint and a suitable buffer (e.g., 50 feet) at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance. The survey results will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. If no badgers or active dens are detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required. 3) Minimize Impacts (If Badgers/Dens Found): If American badgers or their active dens are found and complete avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and/or mitigation actions to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan may include establishing buffer zones around active dens (e.g., 50-foot non-disturbance buffer), installing exclusion fencing, passively relocating to suitable, protected habitat, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, CDFW, and the Project proponent in accordance with CDFW guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the CDFW and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3 (Northern California Legless Lizard): To mitigate potential impacts on the Northern California legless lizard and avoid “take” under state law, the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Survey: A qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance in suitable legless lizard habitat (e.g., areas with loose sandy soils, leaf litter, or dense vegetation cover) to identify the presence/absence of legless lizards. The survey may involve hand-raking through loose soil and leaf litter. The results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

If no legless lizards are detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required. 2) Avoidance: If feasible, ground disturbance (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) in suitable legless lizard habitat will be minimized. Construction activities will avoid filling or altering known or potential legless lizard habitat where feasible. 3) Minimize Impacts (If Legless Lizards Found): If legless lizards are found and complete avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and/or mitigation actions to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan may include establishing exclusion fencing, salvaging and relocating to suitable, protected habitat, monitoring, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, CDFW, and the Project proponent in accordance with CDFW guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-4 (San Joaquin Kit Fox): To mitigate potential impacts on the San Joaquin kit fox and avoid “take” under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and California Endangered Species Act (CESA), the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Survey: Prior to ground disturbance, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for San Joaquin kit fox and their dens within the Project footprint and a suitable buffer (e.g., 200-500 feet, as per agency guidelines) at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance. This survey will strictly follow current U.S.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 49 Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. If presence is not detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required, but adherence to standard avoidance measures (e.g., pre-activity surveys, speed limits) may still be required by agencies. 2) Avoidance of Pupping Season: If feasible, ground disturbance (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) in suitable San Joaquin kit fox habitat (e.g., arid grasslands, scrublands, and areas with potential dens) will be scheduled outside their primary pupping season (typically February through May) to avoid impacts to vulnerable young. Construction activities will avoid filling or altering known or potential kit fox dens.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Kit Foxes/Dens Found): If San Joaquin kit foxes or their dens (natal, pupping, or known active dens) are found and complete avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and mitigation actions, including compensatory mitigation, to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan will be developed in consultation with and approved by USFWS and CDFW. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the USFWS, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.
4) Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP): Prior to any ground disturbance, all construction personnel will attend a WEAP conducted by a qualified biologist. The program will include a detailed description of the San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat, legal protection, and the critical importance of avoiding "take." It will also outline specific measures to be implemented during construction, such as speed limits, trash management, and reporting procedures for observations of kit foxes or dens. 5) Designated Biologist: A qualified biologist will be available during all ground-disturbing activities to ensure compliance with mitigation measures and agency conditions, and to monitor for the presence of San Joaquin kit fox.
6) Compensatory Mitigation: If impacts to San Joaquin kit fox habitat cannot be avoided and are authorized by USFWS and CDFW, compensatory mitigation (e.g., purchase of conservation easements or credits at an approved conservation bank) will be required to offset habitat loss. The amount of compensatory mitigation will be determined in consultation with the agencies.

Mitigation Measure BIO-5 (Crotch’s Bumble Bee): To mitigate potential impacts on the Crotch’s bumble bee and avoid “take” under CESA, the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Survey: Prior to ground disturbance, a qualified biologist or entomologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey no more than 30 days prior to ground disturbance to identify sensitive bumble bee species and potential foraging or nesting habitat. If presence is not detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required.
2) Avoidance of Peak Activity Periods: To the extent feasible, large-scale vegetation removal or heavy ground disturbance in areas identified as existing or potential bumble bee foraging or nesting habitat will be scheduled outside of peak bumble bee foraging and nesting periods (typically spring through fall) to avoid direct harm to active bees and nests.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Bumble Bees/Habitat Found): If sensitive bumble bee species or active nests are found, or if complete avoidance of foraging or nesting habitat is not feasible, the qualified biologist or entomologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and/or mitigation actions to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan may include establishing buffers,

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 50 enhancing landscaping with native, pollinator-friendly flowering plants that provide continuous bloom throughout the year, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, CDFW, and the Project proponent in accordance with CDFW guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist and submitted to the CDFW and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-6 (Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle): To mitigate potential impacts on the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle and avoid “take” under the federal ESA, the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Survey: Prior to ground disturbance, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey no more than 30 days prior to ground disturbance of elderberry shrubs within the Project area to identify potential VELB exit holes. If presence is not detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required. 2) Avoidance: Prior to any ground disturbance or vegetation removal, a qualified biologist will identify and map all elderberry shrubs within the Project area. All identified elderberry shrubs, especially those with potential VELB habitat (stems ≥1.0 inch in diameter at ground level), will be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. A nondisturbance buffer of at least 20 feet (or as otherwise specified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - USFWS) will be established around all elderberry shrubs. This buffer will be clearly delineated with fencing and signage, and no ground disturbance, vehicle access, or material storage will occur within this zone. No pesticides or herbicides will be used within 100 feet of any elderberry shrub. 3) Minimize Impacts (If Avoidance Not Feasible): If complete avoidance of elderberry shrubs or their designated buffer is not feasible, impacts will be minimized, and compensatory mitigation will be implemented in consultation with and approval from the USFWS to avoid "take." Measures may include transplantation, propagation, compensatory habitat acquisition/enhancement, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, USFWS, and the Project proponent in accordance with USFWS guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be documented by the biologist and submitted to the USFWS and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7 (Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp): To mitigate potential impacts on the Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and avoid “take” under the federal ESA, the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Wet Season Surveys: Prior to any ground disturbance that could impact potential vernal pool habitat, a protocol-level wet season survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist during the appropriate inundation periods (typically December through April) to determine the presence or absence of vernal pool fairy shrimp. These surveys will follow current USFWS guidelines. If presence is not detected, no further mitigation is required.
2) Avoidance: Prior to any ground disturbance, a qualified biologist will identify and delineate all vernal pools and other suitable ephemeral wetland habitats within the Project area. All identified vernal pools and suitable ephemeral wetland habitats will be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. A non-disturbance buffer (e.g., 250 feet or as specified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - USFWS) will be established around all such features.

This buffer will be clearly delineated with fencing and signage, and no ground disturbance, vehicle access, or material storage will occur within this zone. No activities that could alter the hydrology of vernal pools (e.g., changes in drainage patterns, increased runoff, introduction of pollutants) will be permitted. 4) Minimize Impacts (If Avoidance Not Feasible): If impacts to vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat are unavoidable (and presence is confirmed or assumed based on surveys), minimization and/or compensatory mitigation will be implemented in consultation with and approval from the USFWS to avoid "take." Measures may include reducing the footprint of impact, implementing erosion control measures, ensuring no pollutants enter the habitat,

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 51 compensatory mitigation etc. The results of efforts will be documented by the biologist and submitted to the USFWS and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. According to the General Plan, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, there are no known riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities formally identified on the Project site or within the immediate vicinity (i.e., within a 0.5-mile radius) of the Project. However, the site contains a portion of Poplar Ditch to the south and an additional drainage ditch that runs along the western edge of the property, along South Wisconsin Street, which allows the basin to the north of the Project site to drain into Poplar Ditch. There is the possibility that these ditches could function as a type of riparian habitat or a sensitive natural community if they contain riparian characteristics like vegetation (e.g., elderberry shrubs) or vernal pool-like habitat.

Incorporation of Mitigation Measures BIO-6 (Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle) and BIO-7 (Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp), along with other applicable biological mitigation measures (BIO-1 through BIO-5), would reduce potential impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities to less than significant levels. These measures achieve this through pre-construction surveys to identify sensitive features, avoidance of identified habitats where feasible, and minimization or compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. A search of the NWI shows one wetland feature, the Poplar Ditch, run through the Project Site. 14 According to the NWI, the Poplar Ditch is classified as an R4SBCx riverine system (R), with an intermittent subsystem which contains flowing water only part of the year (4), that is within the Streambed (SB) class, is seasonally flooded (C), and was excavated by humans (x). Further, as discussed in the analysis for criteria a) and b), the site contains a portion of Poplar Ditch to the south and an additional drainage ditch along the western edge of the property. These features, particularly if they exhibit characteristics such as seasonal inundation and suitable soils, could potentially function as ephemeral wetland habitats, including vernal pool-like features. To ensure that the Project does not have a substantial adverse effect on any potential state or federally protected wetlands, particularly ephemeral features such as vernal pools, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure BIO-7 (Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp). Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
d) Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
14 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed July 18, 2025, https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 52 Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Wildlife movement corridors are linear habitats that function to connect two (2) or more areas of significant wildlife habitat. These corridors may function on a local level as links between small habitat patches (e.g., streams in urban settings) or may provide critical connections between regionally significant habitats (e.g., deer movement corridors). Wildlife corridors typically include vegetation and topography that facilitate the movements of wild animals from one area of suitable habitat to another, to fulfill foraging, breeding, and territorial needs. These corridors often provide cover and protection from predators that may be lacking in surrounding habitats. Wildlife corridors generally include riparian zones and similar linear expanses of contiguous habitat.

The Project Site, characterized primarily by non-native herbaceous land cover and subject to ongoing human disturbance (disking, agricultural operations, vehicular traffic), offers limited habitat value for large-scale wildlife movement. However, the site does contain a portion of Poplar Ditch to the south and an additional drainage ditch along the western edge of the property (along South Wisconsin Street), which allows drainage from a basin north of the Project site into Poplar Ditch. While these ditches are within a heavily impacted setting, linear features such as these, particularly if they support some vegetation, can potentially provide localized movement pathways or limited foraging opportunities for common wildlife species adapted to urbanized environments. Furthermore, these ditches could potentially function as a type of riparian habitat or a sensitive natural community if they contain riparian characteristics like elderberry shrubs or vernal pool-like habitat capable of supporting sensitive species.

Despite the overall low habitat value for extensive wildlife movement, the existing mature trees on-site and adjacent to the site, as well as vegetation within the ditches and ruderal areas, could provide suitable nesting habitat for native birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code.

Migratory birds common to the region could establish nests on or near the Project site during their breeding season (typically February 1 through August 31 in the San Joaquin Valley). Construction activities, including vegetation removal, grading, excavation, and heavy equipment operation, occurring during this sensitive period could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, direct nest destruction, or disturbance leading to nest abandonment. Such actions constitute a 'take' under both the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code.

With the incorporation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (Protected Birds), Mitigation Measure BIO-6 (Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle), and Mitigation Measure BIO-7 (Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp), these potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 addresses potential impacts to nesting birds.

Mitigation Measure BIO-6 provides measures for identification, avoidance, and if necessary, minimization or compensation for impacts to elderberry shrubs, which are key components of riparian habitat and essential for the VELB. Mitigation Measure BIO-7 addresses the potential for vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat within the ditches through pre-construction surveys, avoidance, and compensatory mitigation. Therefore, with these mitigation measures incorporated, the Project would not substantially interfere with wildlife movement or result in significant impacts to sensitive natural communities or nesting birds. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less than Significant Impact. The General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element outlines policies related to the conservation of biological resources, as detailed in the Environmental Setting. As identified in the analysis for

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 53 criterion a), queries of databases identified the potential for special-status species and sensitive habitats (including potential riparian characteristics within Poplar Ditch and other drainage features) within or near the Project site.

To ensure the Project's consistency with local policies and ordinances protecting these biological resources, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-7. These measures require pre-construction surveys, avoidance, and minimization/compensatory mitigation for potential impacts to protected birds, American badger, Northern California legless lizard, San Joaquin kit fox, Crotch's bumble bee, Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle, and Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp. The implementation of these measures ensures that potential impacts to biological resources identified in local plans are appropriately addressed and mitigated.

Furthermore, the Porterville Municipal Code (PMC) sets forth provisions regarding the removal of trees, which constitute a local ordinance protecting biological resources. The Project would be subject to these standards, requiring adherence to any applicable permitting, replacement, or protection requirements for trees. Compliance with the tree preservation provisions, along with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO7, would ensure that the Project does not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Porterville is located within the geographic scope of certain habitat conservation plans and recovery efforts, including the Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley and the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (VELB) Habitat Conservation Plan.

While the Project site is not identified within a specific conservation area or preserve designated for the long-term conservation of habitats or special-status species under these plans, the previous analysis above identified the potential for special-status species and their habitats to occur on or near the Project site, including species covered by these plans (e.g., VELB, San Joaquin Kit Fox, Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp).

To ensure the Project's consistency with the provisions and conservation goals of these adopted plans and recovery efforts, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measures BIO-4 (San Joaquin Kit Fox), BIO-6 (Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle), and BIO-7 (Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp). By incorporation these mitigation measures, the Project would avoid substantial adverse effects on species and habitats that are the focus of these conservation plans.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict or interfere with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

4.4.3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (Protected Birds including Swainson’s Hawk): To mitigate potential impacts on protected birds, including Swainsons Hawk, and to avoid “take” as defined by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code, the following measures will be implemented. 1) Avoidance of Nesting Season: If feasible, all ground-disturbing activities (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) and vegetation removal will occur outside the typical nesting season for migratory birds in the San Joaquin Valley (generally February 1 through August 31).

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 54 2) Pre-Construction Survey (If Work During Nesting Season): If ground disturbance or vegetation removal must be initiated or continue during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds, including special-status species such as Swainson's Hawk, within the Project footprint and a suitable buffer (e.g., 500 feet for raptors like Swainson's Hawk, 250 feet for other protected birds, or as determined by the biologist based on species and site conditions). The survey will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of any ground disturbance or vegetation removal within the Project footprint. The survey results will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, who will then report to the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. If no active nests are detected, no further species-specific mitigation for nesting birds is required.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Active Nests Found): If active nests are found in or near the construction zone/area, the qualified biologist will establish and implement an appropriate species-specific non-disturbance buffer (as recommended by CDFW). This buffer will be clearly delineated, and no construction activities will occur within this buffer until the qualified biologist determines that the nesting effort has concluded (e.g., young have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest) and the nest is no longer active. The biologist will prepare a plan detailing the avoidance, monitoring, and minimization actions, and the results of these efforts will be reported by the biologist to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Project proponent, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (American Badger): To mitigate potential impacts on the American badger and avoid “take” under state law, the following measures will be implemented. 1) Avoidance of Denning Season: If feasible, ground disturbance (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) in suitable and identified American badger habitat (e.g., grasslands, shrublands with friable soils, or areas with known burrow complexes) will be scheduled outside their primary denning season (typically February through July) when young may be present. Construction activities will avoid filling or altering known or potential badger dens.
2) Pre-Construction Survey (If Work During Denning Season): A qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for American badgers and their dens within the Project footprint and a suitable buffer (e.g., 50 feet) at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance. The survey results will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. If no badgers or active dens are detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required. 3) Minimize Impacts (If Badgers/Dens Found): If American badgers or their active dens are found and complete avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and/or mitigation actions to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan may include establishing buffer zones around active dens (e.g., 50-foot non-disturbance buffer), installing exclusion fencing, passively relocating to suitable, protected habitat, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, CDFW, and the Project proponent in accordance with CDFW guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the CDFW and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 55 1) Pre-Construction Survey: A qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance in suitable legless lizard habitat (e.g., areas with loose sandy soils, leaf litter, or dense vegetation cover) to identify the presence/absence of legless lizards. The survey may involve hand-raking through loose soil and leaf litter. The results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) protocols. The survey results will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, USFWS, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. If presence is not detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required, but adherence to standard avoidance measures (e.g., pre-activity surveys, speed limits) may still be required by agencies. 2) Avoidance of Pupping Season: If feasible, ground disturbance (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) in suitable San Joaquin kit fox habitat (e.g., arid grasslands, scrublands, and areas with potential dens) will be scheduled outside their primary pupping season (typically February through May) to avoid impacts to vulnerable young. Construction activities will avoid filling or altering known or potential kit fox dens.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Kit Foxes/Dens Found): If San Joaquin kit foxes or their dens (natal, pupping, or known active dens) are found and complete avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and mitigation actions, including compensatory mitigation, to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan will be developed in consultation with and approved by USFWS and CDFW. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the USFWS, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.
4) Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP): Prior to any ground disturbance, all construction personnel will attend a WEAP conducted by a qualified biologist. The program will include a detailed description of the San

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 56 Joaquin kit fox and its habitat, legal protection, and the critical importance of avoiding "take." It will also outline specific measures to be implemented during construction, such as speed limits, trash management, and reporting procedures for observations of kit foxes or dens. 5) Designated Biologist: A qualified biologist will be available during all ground-disturbing activities to ensure compliance with mitigation measures and agency conditions, and to monitor for the presence of San Joaquin kit fox.
6) Compensatory Mitigation: If impacts to San Joaquin kit fox habitat cannot be avoided and are authorized by USFWS and CDFW, compensatory mitigation (e.g., purchase of conservation easements or credits at an approved conservation bank) will be required to offset habitat loss. The amount of compensatory mitigation will be determined in consultation with the agencies.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 57 and no ground disturbance, vehicle access, or material storage will occur within this zone. No pesticides or herbicides will be used within 100 feet of any elderberry shrub. 3) Minimize Impacts (If Avoidance Not Feasible): If complete avoidance of elderberry shrubs or their designated buffer is not feasible, impacts will be minimized, and compensatory mitigation will be implemented in consultation with and approval from the USFWS to avoid "take." Measures may include transplantation, propagation, compensatory habitat acquisition/enhancement, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, USFWS, and the Project proponent in accordance with USFWS guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be documented by the biologist and submitted to the USFWS and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

This buffer will be clearly delineated with fencing and signage, and no ground disturbance, vehicle access, or material storage will occur within this zone. No activities that could alter the hydrology of vernal pools (e.g., changes in drainage patterns, increased runoff, introduction of pollutants) will be permitted. 3) Minimize Impacts (If Avoidance Not Feasible): If impacts to vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat are unavoidable (and presence is confirmed or assumed based on surveys), minimization and/or compensatory mitigation will be implemented in consultation with and approval from the USFWS to avoid "take." Measures may include reducing the footprint of impact, implementing erosion control measures, ensuring no pollutants enter the habitat, compensatory mitigation etc. The results of efforts will be documented by the biologist and submitted to the USFWS and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 58

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical
resource as defined in Section
15064.5?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section
15064.5?

c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?

4.5.1 Environmental Setting
Generally, the term ‘cultural resources’ describes property types such as prehistoric and historical archaeological sites, buildings, bridges, roadways, and tribal cultural resources. As defined by CEQA, cultural resources are considered “historical resources” that meet criteria in Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. If a Lead Agency determines that a Project may have a significant effect on a historical resource, then the Project is determined to have a significant impact on the environment. No further environmental review is required if a cultural resource is not found to be a historical resource.

California Historical Resource Information System Record Search The Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) was requested to conduct a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Record Search for the Project Site and surrounding “Cultural Resource Project Area” (0.5-mile radius from perimeter of Project Site). Results of the CHRIS Record Search were provided on June 23, 2025 (Record Search File Number: 25-257). Full results are provided in Appendix C.

The CHRIS Record Searches generally review file information based on results of Class III pedestrian reconnaissance surveys of project sites conducted by qualified individuals or consultant firms which are required to be submitted, along with official state forms properly completed for each identified resource, to the Regional Archaeological Information Center. Guidelines for the format and content of all types of archaeological reports have been developed by the California Office of Historic Preservation, and reports will be reviewed by the regional information centers to determine whether they meet those requirements.

The results of the SJVIC CHRIS Record Search indicate:
a) There has been no previous cultural resource study completed within the Project Site. b) There have been six (6) cultural resource studies conducted within one-half mile radius of the Project Site. c) There is one (1) recorded cultural resource within the Project site, P-54-002208, the Poplar Ditch. d) There are no recorded cultural resources within one-half mile radius of the Project Site, and it is not known if any exist.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 59 e) There are no recorded cultural resources within the Project site or radius that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Historical Interest, California Inventory of Historic Resources, or the California State Historic Landmarks.

Further, the SJVIC provided the following comments and recommendations:
(1) Because there has not been a cultural resources study conducted within the Project site, it is not known if any cultural resources exist. As such, it is recommended that, prior to any ground disturbance activities, a qualified, professional consultant conduct a field survey to determine if cultural resources are present. (2) Contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a list of Native American individuals/organizations that can assist with information regarding traditional, cultural, and religious heritage values that may not be included in the CHRIS Inventory. Consult NAHC’s "Sacred Lands Inventory" file to determine what sacred resources, if any, exist within this Project Site and the way in which these resources might be managed.

California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
A consultation list of tribes with traditional lands or cultural places located within Tulare County was requested and received from the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on June 16, 2025. The listed tribes include Kitanemuk & Yowlumne Tejon Indians, Table Mountain Rancheria, Tule River Indian Tribe, and Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band. The NAHC also conducted a Sacred Lands File (SLF) check which received negative results. Correspondence is provided in Appendix C.

AB 52 and SB 18 Tribal Consultation
The City of Porterville sent formal tribal consultation notices for the proposed Project pursuant to AB 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) on August 5, 2025. Letters were sent to the tribes identified above. The request for consultation period for AB 52 ended on September 4, 2025. One response was received from Table Mountain Rancheria dated August 14, 2025, stating that the Project site is beyond their area of interest. No other responses were received.

Porterville 2030 General Plan
According to the Porterville 2030 General Plan, there are three (3) National Historic Register resources, including Zalud House, U.S. Post Office - Porterville Main, and First Congregational Church, and two (2) State Historic Register resource, including Tule River Stage Station and First Tule River Reservation, within the city limits. None of the resources are within or adjacent to the Project Site.

The Porterville 2030 General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element identifies the following policies related to historic, archeological, and paleontological resources.

Guiding Policy OSC-G-11 Identify and protect archaeological, paleontological, and historic resources.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-71 Update the City’s inventory of historic resources to determine sites or buildings of federal, State, or local historic significance.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-72 Develop an agreement with Native American representatives for consultation in the cases where new development may result in disturbance to Native American sites.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-73 Require that new development analyze and avoid any potential impacts to archaeological, paleontological, and historic resources by:

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 60 • Requiring a records review for development proposed in areas that are considered archaeologically sensitive, including hillsides and near the Tule River; • Studying the potential effects of development and construction (as required by CEQA); • Developing, where appropriate, mitigation measures to minimize potential impacts; and • Implementing appropriate measures to avoid the identified impacts.

In the event that historical or archaeological resources are accidentally discovered during construction, the City will require that grading activity in the immediate area cease. A qualified archaeologist will then be required to make an immediate evaluation and recommend avoidance measures or appropriate mitigation.

4.5.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, a historical resource is any building, structure, object, prehistoric or historic archaeological site, or district that is listed in, or eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources or listed in a local historical resources inventory. It can also be any other resource that the lead agency determines to be historically significant.

A review of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records was conducted by the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) for the Project site and its immediate vicinity. The search, which included a review of Class III pedestrian reconnaissance surveys, archival data, and other records, identified one (1) recorded cultural resource within the Project site, P-54-002208, the Poplar Ditch. The search did not identify any recorded cultural resources within one-half mile radius of the site. Lastly, the search did not identify any recorded cultural resources within the Project site or radius that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Historical Interest, California Inventory of Historic Resources, or the California State Historic Landmarks.

Tribal consultation notices pursuant to AB 52 were mailed to tribes identified by the NAHC as having traditional lands or cultural places within Tulare County, including Kitanemuk & Yowlumne Tejon Indians, Table Mountain Rancheria, Tule River Indian Tribe, and Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band. Notices to the listed tribes were sent on August 5, 2025. Consultation ended on September 4, 2025. No consultation was requested. In addition, the NAHC Sacred Lands File check was negative. A negative SLF check means that the NAHC did not find any records of Native American cultural resources, such as sacred sites, traditional cultural properties, or burial grounds, within the area requested for the search. While there are no records of Native American cultural resources on the Project site, it is possible that sites exist that have not been formally documented or reported to the NAHC.

As a new development involving ground-disturbing activities, there is potential for encountering unanticipated cultural resources, which may cause an adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1. This measure, which is designed to protect potential, unanticipated cultural resources, directly addresses the concerns raised in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines regarding impacts to archaeological resources, including tribal cultural resources and human remains. Thus, if such resources were discovered, implementation of the required

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 61 mitigation measures would reduce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: In order to avoid the potential for impacts to historic and prehistoric archaeological resources, the following measures shall be implemented in conjunction with the construction of each phase of the Project:

If previously unknown historical, archeological, cultural, or paleontological resources are encountered before or during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archeologist, historical resources specialist, or paleontologist, shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. Notification of discovery shall be provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

The qualified archeologist, historical resources specialist, or paleontologist shall make recommendations to the project proponent on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and City’s policies and procedures related to historical, cultural, and paleontological resources.

Notification of the measures shall be provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the project proponent, who shall notify the City of Porterville Community Development Department. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, preservation in-place, recordation, additional archeological resting, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds.

No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the City of Porterville Community Development Department approves the measures to protect these resources. Any historical, archeological, cultural, or paleontological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Under the CEQA Guidelines, specifically Section 15064.5, an archaeological resource is defined as any material evidence of past human life or activities. This encompasses a broad range of physical remains including prehistoric archeological sites, historic archeological sites, and traditional cultural properties. A "substantial adverse change" generally means that the project would destroy, damage, or alter the resource in a way that diminishes its historical, cultural, or scientific value.

As discussed under criterion a), a CHRIS record search, tribal consultation, and a Sacred Lands File check were conducted for the Project site and surrounding area. The possibility of encountering previously unknown archaeological resources, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, during ground-disturbing activities cannot be entirely discounted.

To address this possibility, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1. This measure, which is designed to protect potential, unanticipated cultural resources, directly addresses the concerns raised in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines regarding impacts to archaeological resources, including tribal cultural resources and human

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 62 remains. Thus, if such resources were discovered, implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact. While no evidence suggests the presence of human remains on the Project site, the possibility of encountering previously unknown burials during ground-disturbing activities cannot be entirely discounted. Should human remains be discovered during construction, all work in the immediate vicinity would be required to cease, and the County Coroner would be notified immediately, as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the Coroner determines the remains are of Native American origin, the NAHC would be contacted pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In accordance with CCR Section 15064.5(e), consultation with the NAHC and any Most Likely Descendant (MLD) would be conducted to determine the appropriate treatment and disposition of the remains. Adherence to these regulations, which are designed to protect human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries, would ensure that any potential impacts are less than significant.

4.5.3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: In order to avoid the potential for impacts to historic and prehistoric archaeological resources, the following measures shall be implemented in conjunction with the construction of each phase of the Project:

Notification of the measures shall be provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 63

4.6 ENERGY
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during Project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
X

4.6.1 Environmental Setting
Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of energy implications in project decisions, focusing on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary energy consumption (Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3)). A project is deemed inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary if it:
• Violates existing energy standards.
• Negatively impacts local and regional energy supplies, requiring additional capacity. • Negatively affects peak and base period electricity and other energy demands. • Adversely affects energy resources.

To assess a project's energy impacts and determine significance, Appendix F outlines the following criteria:

1. Energy Requirements and Efficiency: Quantify the project's energy requirements and use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for each stage (construction, operation, maintenance, and removal). Consider the energy intensiveness of materials, where relevant.

2. Impact on Energy Supplies and Capacity: Analyze the project's effects on local and regional energy supplies and the need for additional capacity.

3. Impact on Peak and Base Period Demands: Evaluate the project's influence on peak and base period demands for electricity and other energy forms.

4. Compliance with Energy Standards: Determine the project's compliance with existing energy efficiency standards.

5. Impact on Energy Resources: Assess the project's effects on overall energy resources.

6. Transportation Energy Use: Analyze the project's projected transportation energy use requirements and its incorporation of efficient transportation alternatives.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 64 Building Energy Efficiency Standards – Title 24
The California Energy Commission updates the Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Parts 6 and 11) every three years as part of the California Code of Regulations. The standards were established in 1978 in an effort to reduce the state’s energy consumption. They apply for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings and relate to various energy efficiencies including but not limited to ventilation, air conditioning, and lighting. The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), Part 11, Title 24, California Code of Regulations, was developed in 2007 to meet the state goals for reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions pursuant to AB32. CALGreen covers five (5) categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material and resource efficiency, and indoor environmental quality. 15 The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards went into effect on January 1, 2023. Additionally, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) oversees air pollution control efforts, regulations, and programs that contribute to reduction of energy consumption. Compliance with these energy efficiency regulations and programs ensures that development will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy sources.

California Energy Action Plan
The Energy Action Plan (EAP) for California was approved in 2003 and updated in 2008. The California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) approved the Energy Action Plan (EAP) for California in 2003, with an update in 2008. The 2008 EAP established goals and next steps to integrate and coordinate energy efficiency demand and response programs and actions. 16
Methodology
CalEEMod is a statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from land use projects. The model quantifies direct emissions from construction and operation (including vehicle use), as well as indirect emissions, such as emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. The model also identifies mitigation measures to reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions.

4.6.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation? Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes 32 single-family lots. Energy would be consumed through Project construction and operations. Energy outputs for short-term construction and long-term operations were estimated using CalEEMod (Appendix A). Traffic impacts related to vehicle trips were considered through a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis contained in Section 4.17. Results are summarized in Table 4-6. Based on the data, the 15 California Department of General Services. (2020). 2019 California Green Building Standards Code. Accessed on July 25, 2025, https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CGBC2019P3
16 State of California. (2008). Energy Action Plan 2008 Update. Accessed on July 25, 2025, https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/word_pdf/REPORT/28715.pdf

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 65 energy demand associated with the proposed Project would be less than one (1) percent of Tulare County’s total demand (Criterion 1).

Table 4-6 Project Energy Consumption
Energy Type1
Project
Annual Energy Consumption
Tulare County
Annual Energy Consumption
Project Percentage of
County Consumption
Electricity2 0.284367 GWh 4,957.696254 GWh 0.0057361%
Natural Gas2 1,168.352 MMBTu 16,462,910.9 MMBTu 0.0071090% Notes:

1. Southern California Edison (SCE) would serve the site for electricity.

2. Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) would serve the site for natural gas.

3. Energy consumption data for Tulare County (2022) is provided by the California Energy Commission, “Electricity Consumption by County” accessed on July 24, 2025, http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx and “Gas Consumption by County” accessed on July 24, 2025, https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx
Construction
Construction would be short-term and temporary. There are no unusual project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities. Construction activities would include removal/demolition of all on-site trees and existing structures/improvements, typical site preparation, grading, paving, architectural coating, and trenching – all of which would require the transportation of building materials and equipment. Therefore, the primary source of energy for construction activities would be diesel and gasoline (i.e., petroleum fuels). All construction equipment shall conform to current emissions standards and related fuel efficiencies including applicable CARB regulations (Airborne Toxic Control Measure), California Code of Regulations (Title 13, Motor Vehicles), and Title 24 standards.

Compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the short-term, temporary construction activities would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources consistent with Criterion 4.

Operations
Operations would involve heating, cooling, equipment, and vehicle trips. Energy consumption related to operations would be associated with natural gas, electricity, and fuel. As for new construction, the Project would also be required to meet all mandatory requirements for residential buildings as outlined in the 2022 Energy Code.

Mandatory requirements apply to building envelopes, ventilation and indoor air quality, space conditioning systems, water heating systems, outdoor and indoor lighting, electric power distribution, covered process for pools, solar ready buildings, and electric ready buildings. Compliance would be verified through the building permit process. Therefore, the Project would meet mandatory state building energy codes, which are designed to reduce wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy sources, consistent with Criterion 4.

Energy consumption and peak demand for the state are forecasted in Volume IV – California Energy Demand Forecast of the CEC’s Integrated Energy Policy Report. As shown in Figure 10 and Figure 4 of the Volume IV Report, the CEC forecasts a 1.3 to 2.3 percent annual average growth rate for electricity and a 0.1 to 0.9 percent annual average growth rate for natural gas between 2021 and 2030. The Project’s anticipated operational energy consumption for electricity and natural gas are shown in Table 4-6 The anticipated consumption of electricity and natural gas would represent 0.0057 percent and 0.0071 percent based on Countywide usage, which would be

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 66 significantly below CEC’s forecast. Therefore, the Project would not require additional energy capacity or supplies in accordance with Criterion 2. In addition, as a residential development, energy consumption can be expected to peak in the day similar to other residential developments. Through compliance with energy conservation requirements under the 2022 Energy Code, the Project would not result in unique or more intensive peak or base period electricity demand in accordance with Criterion 3.

Furthermore, Southern California Edison, the city’s electricity provider, is subject to the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) which requires investor-owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020 to 60 percent of total procurement by 2030. The increase in reliance of renewable resources further ensures that the Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy sources, consistent with Criterion 5.

Development of the Project site would also result in fuel consumption through vehicle trips. The Project would generate an estimated 301 average daily trips, which is below significance thresholds for VMT. Therefore, energy usage associated with vehicle trips for the proposed Project would be minimal in comparison to the gasoline and diesel fuel consumption for the County. In addition, the Project does not propose any unusual features that would result in excessive long-term operational fuel consumption (Criterion 2). Further, annual energy use related to vehicles is expected to decrease over time as a result of vehicle fuel efficiency standards.

Therefore, the Project would not cause wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of building energy during Project operation, or preempt future energy development or future energy conservation. A less than significant impact would occur.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed under criterion a), the construction and operations of the Project would be subject to compliance with applicable energy efficiency regulations including CALGreen, Title 24, and CARB.

Additionally, the General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element established policies to reduce and conserve energy use in existing and new development, including adopting incentives for green building standards and ensuring City code allow for green building techniques. Since the General Plan energy conservation policies are implemented at the city level, the Project would not conflict with said policies. In addition, state law ensures construction vehicle idling will be limited. Therefore, through compliance, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct any state or local plan for energy efficiency and a less than significant impact would occur as a result of the Project.

4.6.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 67

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or Indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:

i. Rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist
for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

X
ii. Strong seismic ground
shaking? X
iii. Seismic-related ground
failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv. Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the Project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
X

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 68

4.7.1 Environmental Setting
The City of Porterville is located along the western slope of a northwest-trending belt of rocks comprising the Sierra Nevada and within the southern portion of the Cascade Range. The City is within the Sierra Nevada geomorphic province, which is primarily composed of cretaceous granitic plutons and remnants of Paleozoic and Mesozoic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks, and Cenozoic volcan and sedimentary rocks. The City’s Planning Area elevation ranges between 400 and 800 feet, with the eastern portion that is within the Sierra Nevada foothills reaching almost 1,800 feet. Geographically, the city, inclusive of the Project Site, has stable geological formation and is in a seismically inactive region. 17 A brief discussion of the likelihood of seismic activities occurring in the City’s Planning Area, inclusive of the Project Site, is provided below. The discussion is based on the 2023 Tulare County Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) as well as the Porterville 2030 General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR).18
Faulting
There are no known active faults in the City’s Planning Area.19No Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zoning has been established for the City’s Planning Area. The nearest active faults to the Planning Area are the Owens Valley fault group, 40 miles to the east, and White Wolf fault, 56 miles to the south.20Due to the distance from an active fault, there is low potential for ground rupture in the City.

Ground Shaking
The City of Porterville is in Seismic Risk Zone III, which is a zone expected to experience moderate effects from earthquakes. Major historical earthquakes, including the 1906 San Francisco, 1952 Kern County, and 1983 Coalinga, were felt by residents and caused minor to moderate property damage in the city. According to the HMP’s hazards ranking, ground shaking is of low significance in the City.

Liquefaction
Liquefaction primarily occurs in areas of recently deposited sands and silts and in areas of high groundwater levels (where the water table is 30 feet below the surface). Susceptible areas include sloughs and marshes that have been filled in and developed over. In addition to necessary soil conditions, liquefaction is induced by intense and prolonged ground shaking, usually above a ground acceleration of 0.3g before liquefaction occurs within sandy soil with relative densities typical of the San Joaquin alluvial deposits. Based on historic aerial imagery and search of the National Wetlands Inventory (Section 4.10), the Project site does not include former or current waters (streams, drainages, wetlands) that have been drained, filled, and developed. The Project site does, however, contain two water features that are currently uncovered. Firstly, the Poplar Ditch runs through the southern portion of the 17 City of Porterville. (2007). Draft Environmental Impact Report 2023 General Plan (SCH No. 2006011033). 18 Tulare County Office of Emergency Services. (2023). Tulare County Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Accessed on June 27, 2025, https://tularecounty.ca.gov/rma/rma-documents/planning-documents/tulare-county-2023- multi-jurisdictional-local-hazard-mitigation-plan-mjlhmp/ 19 According to the California Department of Conservation, “An active fault, for the purposes of the Alquist-Priolo Act, is one that has ruptured in the last 11,000 years.”
20 California Department of Conservation. “CGS Seismic Hazard Program: Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazard Zones.” Accessed on June 27, 2025, https://gis.data.ca.gov/maps/ee92a5f9f4ee4ec5aa731d3245ed9f53/explore?location=37.213952%2C117.946341%2C7.19

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 69 Property. No development is proposed within 20 feet of the ditch. Secondly, there is a drainage ditch along the western edge of the property that runs from the storm water basin located just north of the Project site to the Poplar Ditch. Additionally, the city is far from faults and consists of stable geological formation. As such, the city is in an area with low susceptibility to liquefaction.

Erosion
Wind and flowing water are the primary agents of erosion in the San Joaquin Valley. The primary types of erosion identified by the HMP are erosion and slumping of soils that can occur along bluffs along the Kaweah, Kern, and Tule Rivers.

Ground Subsidence
Ground subsidence is the settling or sinking of surface soil deposits with little or no horizontal motion. Soils with high silt or clay content are subject to subsidence. According to the HMP, the city is not exposed to earthquakeinduced landslide risk.

Subsurface Soils
A search of the Web Soil Survey by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service indicates that the Project Site comprises the two (2) following soil types. Figure 4-3 shows the location of these soils.21 153 - San Emigdia loam: slopes 0-2 percent, well drained. The depth to the water table is more than 80 inches with no flooding or ponding. The San Emigdio loam soil type accounts for 60.2% of the Project site. 164 - Tujunga sand: slopes 0-5 percent, somewhat excessively drained. The depth to the water table is more than 80 inches with no ponding or flooding. The Tujunga sand soil type accounts for 39.8% of the Project site.

California Building Code
The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 is assigned to the California Building Standards Commission, which, by law, is responsible for coordinating all building standards. The California Building Code incorporates by reference the International Building Code with necessary California amendments. About one-third of the text within the California Building Standards Code has been tailored for California earthquake conditions. These standards are applicable to all new buildings and are required to provide the necessary safety from earthquake related effects emanating from fault activity.

Porterville 2030 General Plan
The Porterville 2030 General Plan includes policies relevant to natural hazards in the Public Health and Safety Element since minimizing risks from geologic and seismic hazards, as listed below.

Guiding Policy PHS-G-1 Minimize risks of property damage and personal injury posed by geologic and seismic hazards.
21 United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. “Web Soil Survey.” Accessed on June 27, 2025, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 70 Implementation Policy PHS-I-1 Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include provisions for a geologic hazards abatement district for hillside areas to ensure that geologic hazards are properly mitigated by developers or avoided prior to, or during, development.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-2 Maintain and enforce appropriate building standards and codes to avoid and/or reduce risks associated with geologic constraints and to ensure that all new construction is designed to meet current safety regulations.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-3 Provide information and incentives for property owners to rehabilitate existing buildings using construction techniques to protect against seismic hazards.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-4 Support continued investigation by State agencies of geologic conditions within the City’s Planning Area to promote public awareness of potential geologic and seismic hazards.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-5 Require, as part of the preliminary soil report, a construction dust management plan when it has been determined that soils contain naturally-occurring asbestos.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-6 If asbestos is present require construction work be done when soil moisture is sufficient to adequately compact the tread and prevent visible dust, which may contain airborne asbestos emissions.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 71 Figure 4-3 Soils Map

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 72

4.7.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

No Impact. The Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is there any other evidence of a known fault on or adjacent to the site. Therefore, the risk of fault rupture is considered negligible, and no impact would occur.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project Site within Seismic Risk Zone III, which is a zone expected to experience moderate effects from earthquakes. The Project would be required to comply with the current seismic design and construction standards of the California Building Code (CBC). These standards incorporate numerous provisions specifically designed to mitigate the effects of strong ground shaking, including requirements for reinforced foundations, shear walls, and ductile connections, for example. In addition, according to the General Plan Implementation Policy PHS-I-2, the Project would be reviewed to ensure compliance with appropriate building standards and codes to avoid and/or reduce risks associated with geologic constraints and to ensure that all new construction is designed to meet current safety regulations. Compliance with the CBC and General Plan would significantly reduce the potential for structural damage and collapse, thereby minimizing the risk of loss, injury, or death associated with ground shaking. Therefore, while the potential for strong ground shaking exists in the region, adherence to the CBC's stringent seismic standards and General Plan policies would reduce the risk of substantial adverse effects, including loss, injury, or death, to a less than significant level. Impacts would be less than significant. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. The city of Porterville is characterized by a low potential for seismic-related ground failure. There are no known active earthquake faults within the city, and no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones have been established for the area. The nearest active faults are 40 to 56 miles away, resulting in low potential for ground rupture at the Project site. Further, the city is in Seismic Risk Zone III which anticipates moderate seismic effects; however, the overall hazard ranking for ground shaking in the city is considered to be of low significance.

Regarding liquefaction, liquefaction primarily occurs in loose, saturated granular soils like sands and silty sands with a high groundwater table and sufficient seismic shaking. While the Project site contains Tujunga sand (39.8%) and San Emigdio loam (60.2%), both soils have a deep water table, extending more than 80 inches below the surface.

This deep water table significantly reduces their susceptibility to liquefaction. Furthermore, the Project site is not located in areas of former or current wetlands that have been drained, filled, and developed, which are typically more prone to liquefaction.

Although the General Plan and HMP identify moderate liquefaction risks near the Tule River, the Project site is approximately one (1) mile south of the river, removing it from these higher-risk areas. Additionally, the dominant

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 73 San Emigdio loam soil type is a well-drained loam, which is generally less susceptible to liquefaction that silts or sands. The Project site exhibits no known geologic hazards or unstable soil conditions. Therefore, the overall hazard ranking for liquefaction is considered to be low.

All future development on the Project site would be required to comply with provisions of the CBC which incorporate specific amendments for California's earthquake conditions. Additionally, the Project would adhere to the City's grading and drainage standards, and any specific requirements addressing liquefaction or other seismic hazards as determined during the design and permitting phases. Therefore, compliance with the CBC’s seismic design standards and adherence to the City’s grading and drainage requirements would reduce the risk of seismicrelated ground failure, including liquefaction, to a less than significant level. Impacts would be less than significant. iv. Landslides?
Less than Significant Impact. Landslides, encompassing rockfalls, slope failures, and mud/debris flows, are primarily triggered by a combination of factors, including steep slopes, unstable geological formations, inadequate drainage, and sometimes vegetation removal. The Project site's flat topography eliminates the most significant of these risk factors. In addition, the site consists of stable, native soils and is not located near any rivers, creeks, or other features that would increase the risk of landslides. Therefore, the potential for landslides at the Project site is considered negligible. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. Soil erosion and topsoil loss could occur due to both natural processes (wind, water) and human activities, such as construction. The Project would involve typical site preparation activities like grading and trenching, which have the potential to cause short-term soil disturbance and erosion during construction.

Water use during construction could also contribute to this potential. Because the Project site is larger than one (1) acre, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required to be developed and implemented by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). The SWPPP would include a detailed assessment of potential erosion risks associated with construction activities and would specify a range of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control erosion and sediment runoff. BMPs would be implemented throughout the construction process to minimize soil erosion and topsoil loss. In addition to short-term construction-related erosion, the Project's design would also incorporate measures to prevent ongoing erosion after construction is complete. These measures include permanent landscaping and engineered drainage systems. Therefore, through the implementation of a comprehensive SWPPP with appropriate BMPs during construction, and the incorporation of long-term erosion control measures in the Project design, the potential for substantial soil erosion or topsoil loss will be minimized to a less than significant level. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Less than Significant Impact. Due to the site’s flat topography, stable, native soils and distance to rivers, creeks, or other features that would increase the risk of landslide, the potential for landslides is considered negligible.

Lateral spreading is typically associated with liquefaction in loose, saturated sands. While the site contains sandy soils, the soil is well-drained, which minimizes the potential for prolonged saturation, a key factor in liquefaction.

Additionally, coarse sands generally have a low fines content (silt and clay), which further reduces susceptibility.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 74 The depth to the water table is also relatively deep (more than 80 inches), which lessens the likelihood of saturation necessary for liquefaction. Historical aerial imagery and the National Wetlands Inventory also indicate no evidence of filled former or current water bodies (streams, drainages, wetlands) on the Project site, which are often associated with increased liquefaction risk. Therefore, the potential for lateral spreading is considered low.

Subsidence is often associated with areas of groundwater withdrawal or oil/gas extraction. There is no history of such activity on or near the Project site, and the soil type lacks the high silt or clay content that makes soils susceptible to significant subsidence. The risk of subsidence is therefore considered low.

As discussed previously, the potential for liquefaction is considered low due to the well-drained soils, relatively deep (more than 80 inches) depth to water table, and lack of evidence of filled former or current water bodies (streams, drainage, wetlands) which are often associated with increased liquefaction risk. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with the CBC, which includes stringent seismic design and construction standards to mitigate the effects of ground shaking and potential liquefaction, such as requirements for foundation design in liquefiable soils and soil stabilization techniques. Further, the Project would be required to adhere to the City of Porterville’s grading and drainage standards, which would further minimize the risk of saturation and instability.

Therefore, compliance with the CBC’s seismic design standards and adherence to the City’s grading and drainage requirements would reduce the risk of seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, to a less than significant level.

Soil collapse can occur in areas with expansive clays or highly compressible. The soils on the Project site are not expansive clays and have been shown to have adequate bearing capacity. The risk of collapse is therefore considered low.

Therefore, considering the site’s soil characteristics, flat topography, and compliance with the CBC and grading and drainage requirements, the potential for unstable soil conditions or geologic hazards is less than significant. Impacts would be less than significant.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) classifies soils based on their expansion potential, typically using parameters such as the plasticity index or expansion index. Soils with a high clay content and a high plasticity index are classified as expansive, as they exhibit significant shrink-swell behavior. The Project site is primarily comprised of Tujunga sand and San Emigdio loam. Tujunga sand is characterized by granular materials with very low to no plasticity. San Emigdio loam is a soil mixture containing sand, silt, and a relatively small amount of clay; because its characterized as well drained, there is low potential for water retention that would lead to significant swelling. Therefore, based on its general characteristics, these soils are not expected to be expansive.

Impacts would be less than significant.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. The Project would be required to connect to the municipal sewer system for wastewater disposal.

Therefore, no permanent septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be installed, and no impact would occur.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 75 f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. There are no known paleontological resources or unique geological features known to the City on the Project site or in the Project Area. Nevertheless, there is some possibility that a non-visible, buried site may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which would constitute a significant impact. However, Mitigation Measure CUL-1 requires that if unknown paleontological resources are discovered during construction activities, work would cease until a qualified paleontologist determined the appropriate course of action. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact.

4.7.3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: In order to avoid the potential for impacts to historic and prehistoric archaeological resources, the following measures shall be implemented in conjunction with the construction of each phase of the Project:

Notification of the measures shall be provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 76

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X

4.8.1 Environmental Setting
In assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions, Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a lead agency may consider the following:
• The extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the environmental setting;
• Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project;
• 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 greenhouse gas emissions.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan and guidance from the SJVAPCD are discussed below and are utilized as thresholds of significance. 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan
The CARB 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan is the adopted statewide plan for reduction and mitigation of GHGs to implement Assembly Bill (AB) 1279. AB 1279 was issued on August 12, 2022, to require California to achieve “net zero greenhouse gas emissions” as soon as possible and to further reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions thereafter.

It sets a statewide goal to reduce emissions 85% below 1990 levels no later than 2045.

Consequently, the Scoping Plan involves several measures for cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions, including continuing existing programs such as Renewable Portfolio Standard, Advanced Clean Cars, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, etc., and achieving new mandates to decarbonize several sectors. Along with reducing emissions, environmental justice policies are included to address the ongoing air quality disparities.

Appendix D of the 2022 Scoping Plan include recommendations to build momentum for local government actions to align with State goals, including through CEQA review. The Appendix outlines the priority GHG reduction

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 77 strategies for local governments, including transportation electrification, VMT reduction, and building decarbonization. 22
SJVAPCD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
The SJVAPCD’s Guidance for Valley Land Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Impacts for New Projects Under CEQA (2009) provides screening criteria for climate change analyses, as well as draft guidance for the determination of significance. 23,24 These criteria are used to evaluate whether a project would result in a significant climate change impact (see below). Projects that meet one of these criteria would have less than significant impact on the global climate.
• Does the project comply with an adopted statewide, regional, or local plan for reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions? If no, then:
• Does the project achieve 29% GHG reductions by using approved Best Performance Standards (BPS)? If no, then • Does the project achieve AB 32 targeted 29% GHG emission reductions compared with Business As Usual (BAU)?
Assembly Bill (AB) 32 was enacted by the California State legislature in 2006 with the aim to reduce GHG emissions to levels of 1990 by 2020. Recommended actions to achieve these aims were adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in 2008 (i.e., the Climate Change Scoping Plan). However, the 29% GHG emission reductions compared to BAU threshold is outdated since it is aimed to meet AB 32’s 2020 goals, thus this threshold would not be used for analysis.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
SJVAPCD adopted Guidance for Valley Land‐use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA and the policy District Policy—Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency in 2009. It recognized that project-specific emissions are cumulative and could be considered cumulatively considerable without mitigation. SJVAPCD suggested that the requirement to reduce GHG emissions for all projects is the best method to address this cumulative impact.

The SJVAPCD requires quantification of GHG emissions for all projects which the lead agency has determined that an EIR is required. Although an EIR is not required for the Project, the GHG emissions are quantified below. Shortterm construction and long-term operational GHG emissions for project buildout were estimated using CalEEModTM (version 2022.1.1.28). (See Appendix A). CalEEMod is a statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify GHG emissions from land use projects. The model quantifies direct GHG emissions from construction and operation (including vehicle use), as well as indirect GHG emissions, such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting 22 California Air Resources Board. (2022). 2022 Scoping Plan Appendix D. Accessed on June 30, 2025, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/2022-sp-appendix-d-local-actions.pdf 23 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. (2009). Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA. Accessed June 30, 2025, http://www.valleyair.org/Programs/CCAP/12-17- 09/3%20CCAP%20-%20FINAL%20LU%20Guidance%20-%20Dec%2017%202009.pdf. 24 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. (2000). Environmental Review Guidelines: Procedures for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. Accessed June 30, 2025, http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/CEQA%20Rules/ERG%20Adopted%20_August%202000_.pdf

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 78 and/or removal, and water use. Emissions are expressed in annual metric tons of CO2 equivalent units of measure (i.e., MTCO2e), based on the global warming potential of the individual pollutants.

4.8.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. The 2024 CEQA Guidelines do not establish a quantitative threshold of significance for GHG impacts, leaving lead agencies the discretion to establish such thresholds for their respective jurisdictions. The City of Porterville does not have an adopted climate action plan (CAP) that establishes thresholds for GHG emissions. Since the SJVAPCD and the City of Porterville do not have established GHG significance emissions thresholds, the Project is assessed based on its consistency with the CARB’s latest adopted Scoping Plan, including the Project’s compliance with relevant Scoping Plan measures, in addition to the latest RTP/SCS for the region.

Of note, the Scoping Plan is consistent with AB 1276 GHG reduction targets toward achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85% below 1990 levels by 2045. Therefore, consistency with CARB’s Scoping Plan would also demonstrate consistency with carbon neutrality requirements of AB 1279. This analysis provides a qualitative assessment of the Project’s compliance with the applicable plans, policies, and regulations for the purpose of reducing GHGs to determine whether the project would have a significant impact on the environment relative to GHGs.

Short-term construction and long-term operational GHG emissions for project buildout were estimated using CalEEModTM (version 2022.1.1.28). See Appendix A for output files. The Project’s estimated construction and operation-related GHG emissions are provided for the purposes of disclosure.

Construction Emissions
In regard to construction, the SJVAPCD does not recommend assessing pollution associated with construction, as pollution-related construction will be temporary. These construction GHG emissions are a one-time release. As such, it can be anticipated that these construction emissions would not generate a significant contribution to global climate change over the lifetime of the Project. The overall annual unmitigated construction GHG emissions associated with buildout of the Project is 418 MT CO2e based on the CalEEMod run.

Operational Emissions
Regarding the long-term operational related GHG emissions, the estimated operational emissions for buildout of the Project incorporates the potential area source and vehicle emissions, and emissions associated with utility and water usage, and wastewater and solid waste generation. The annual unmitigated operational GHG emissions associated with buildout of the Project is 171 MT CO2e based on the CalEEMod run.

Further, the Project would not exceed the thresholds of significance for construction or operational emissions as discussed in Section 4.3. Additionally, as discussed in more detail below, the Project would be generally consistent with the applicable goals and policies related to GHG reduction measures, including CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan and SJVAPCD guidelines, and the Porterville 2030 General Plan goals and policies that aim to reduce air emissions and improve air quality, which reduces GHG emissions as a result. Cumulatively, these emissions would not generate a

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 79 significant contribution to global climate change over the lifetime of the proposed Project. As such, it can be determined that the Project would not occur at a scale or scope with potential to contribute substantially or cumulatively to the generation of GHG emissions and therefore the impact would be less than significant. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than Significant Impact. The compatibility of the Project with the 2022 Scoping Plan and the Porterville 2030 General Plan.

Consistency with the 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan
Based on the evaluation shown in Table 4-7, the Project is consistent with the reduction measures identified in the 2022 Scoping Plan. The reduction measures are derived from the 2022 Scoping Plan Table 1 – Priority GHG Reduction Strategies, which provides three (3) priority areas to assist jurisdictions with developing local climate action plans.

Table 4-7 Scoping Plan Priority GHG Reduction Strategies Consistency Analysis Priority Areas Priority GHG Reduction Strategies Consistency/Applicability Determination Transportation
Electrification
Convert local government fleets to ZEVs and
provide EV charging at public sites.

Not Applicable. The Project proposes residential
units and is thus not intended to be accessible
to the public.

Create a jurisdiction-specific ZEV ecosystem to
support deployment of ZEVs statewide (such as
building standards that exceed state building
codes, permit streamlining, infrastructure siting,
consumer education, preferential parking
policies, and ZEV readiness plans).

Not Applicable. This is a city-wide strategy thus
is not applicable to the Project.

VMT Reduction

Reduce or eliminate minimum parking
standards.

Not Applicable. This is a city-wide strategy thus
is not applicable to the Project.

Implement Complete Streets policies and
investments, consistent with General Glan
Circulation Element requirements.

Not Applicable. Road frontages and internal
roads proposed within the subdivision are
designed to include curb, gutter, and sidewalks.

Increase access to public transit by increasing
density of development near transit, improving
transit service by increasing service frequency,
creating bus priority lanes, reducing or
eliminating fares, microtransit, etc.

Consistent. The nearest public transit stop is
more than one (1) mile east of the Project site
at Porterville College. The Project would
develop a vacant site, planned for residential
uses, with residential uses, thereby increasing
the density of development within the Project
area.

Increase public access to clean mobility options
by planning for and investing in electric shuttles,
bike share, car share, and walking.

Consistent. The Project proposes pedestrian
facilities (i.e., sidewalks) within the site and
connecting them to adjacent properties.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 80 Implement parking pricing or transportation
demand management pricing strategies.

Not Applicable. The Project proposes residential
development; thus, parking spaces and garages
are provided at no additional cost for residents.

Amend zoning or development codes to enable
mixed-use, walkable, transit-oriented, and
compact infill development (such as increasing
the allowable density of a neighborhood)
Not Applicable. This is a city-wide strategy thus
is not applicable to the Project.

Preserve natural and working lands by
implementing land use policies that guide
development toward infill areas and do not
convert “greenfield” land to urban uses (e.g.,
green belts, strategic conservation easements)
Consistent. The Project site is within an infill
area (i.e., surrounded by urban and built-up
land) and is planned for urbanized uses.

Additionally, the General Plan contains policies
intended to provide safeguards for agricultural
lands and encourage the retention of
agriculture and open space areas around the
City. As such, while the Project would convert
“greenfield” land to urban uses, the site is an
infill site, and the conversion is compliant with
the General Plan.

Building
Decarbonization
Adopt all-electric new construction reach codes
for residential and commercial uses.

Not Applicable. This is a city-wide strategy thus
is not applicable to the Project.

Adopt policies and incentive programs to
implement energy efficiency retrofits for
existing buildings, such as weatherization,
lighting upgrades, and replacing energyintensive appliances and equipment with more efficient systems (such as Energy Star-rated
equipment and equipment controllers).

Not Applicable. This is a city-wide strategy thus
is not applicable to the Project. In addition, the
Project does not include retrofits for existing
buildings.

Adopt policies and incentive programs to
electrify all appliances and equipment in existing
buildings such as appliance rebates, existing
building reach codes, or time of sale
electrification ordinances
Not Applicable. This is a city-wide strategy thus
is not applicable to the Project. In addition, the
Project does not include retrofits for existing
buildings.

Facilitate deployment of renewable energy
production and distribution and energy storage
on privately owned land uses (e.g., permit
streamlining, information sharing)
Not Applicable. This is a city-wide strategy thus
is not applicable to the Project.

Deploy renewable energy production and
energy storage directly in new public projects
and on existing public facilities (e.g., solar
photovoltaic systems on rooftops of municipal
buildings and on canopies in public parking lots,
battery storage systems in municipal buildings)
Not Applicable. This is a city-wide strategy
pertaining to public facilities. The Project is a
private development.

Consistency with the Porterville 2030 General Plan

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 81 The Porterville 2030 General Plan established several policies to reduce air emissions, as listed below. These policies are mostly implemented at the city level. The Project would be subject to energy efficient regulations including CalGreen, Title 24, and CARB, as discussed in Section 4.6. As such, the Project would be generally consistent with the policies identified in the General Plan.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-59 Require preparation of a Health Risk Assessment for any development subject to the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Act.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-69 Establish regulations to allow flexibility in site planning, solar orientation, roof design, and landscaping to decrease summer cooling and winter heating needs.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-70 Ensure City codes allow for environmentally acceptable alternative forms of energy production and green building techniques.

In conclusion, the Project contains features that would reduce GHG emissions in compliance with CARB 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan and the Porterville 2030 General Plan. As such, the Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs, and therefore the impact would be less than significant.

4.8.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 82

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
X
e) For a Project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the Project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or
working in the Project Area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires?
X

4.9.1 Environmental Setting
For the purposes of this section, the term “hazardous materials” refers to "injurious substances," which include flammable liquids and gases, poisons, corrosives, explosives, oxidizers, radioactive materials, and medical supplies and waste. These materials are either generated or used by various commercial and industrial activities. Hazardous

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 83 wastes are injurious substances that have been or will be disposed. Potential hazards arise from the transport of hazardous materials, including leakage and accidents involving transporting vehicles. There also are hazards associated with the use and storage of these materials and wastes. Hazardous materials are grouped into the following four categories based on their properties:
• Toxic: causes human health effect
• Ignitable: has the ability to burn
• Corrosive: causes severe burns or damage to materials • Reactive: causes explosions or generates toxic gases
“Hazardous wastes” are defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 25141(b) as wastes that: “…because of their quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, [may either] cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed.” A hazardous waste is any hazardous material that is discarded, abandoned, or slated to be recycled. If improperly handled, hazardous materials and hazardous waste can result in public health hazards if released into the soil or groundwater or through airborne releases in vapors, fumes, or dust. Soil and groundwater having concentrations of hazardous constituents higher than specific regulatory levels must be handled and disposed of as hazardous waste when excavated or pumped from an aquifer. The California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Sections 66261.20‐24 contains technical descriptions of toxic characteristics that could cause soil or groundwater to be classified as hazardous waste.

Hazardous waste generators may include industries, businesses, public and private institutions, and households.

Federal, state, and local agencies maintain comprehensive databases that identify the location of facilities using large quantities of hazardous materials, as well as facilities generating hazardous waste. Some of these facilities use certain classes of hazardous materials that require risk management plans to protect surrounding land uses. The release of hazardous materials would be subject to existing federal, State, and local regulations and is similar to the transport, use, and disposal of hazard materials.

Regulatory Setting
The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), established in 1991, plays a key role in environmental protection. CalEPA oversees the Unified Program, implemented locally by Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPAs), which consolidates six environmental programs to regulate the handling of hazardous waste and materials. In Tulare County, the Environmental Health Department (TCEHD) serves as the local CUPA. 25 The TCEHD has several responsibilities related to hazardous materials and waste, including:
• Inspecting facilities that handle hazardous materials, generate or treat hazardous waste, or operate underground or aboveground storage tanks (including petroleum tanks). • Overseeing facilities subject to the California Accidental Release Program. 25 San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department. Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Accessed on July 25, 2025, https://www.sjgov.org/department/envhealth/programs/certified-unified-program-agency-(cupa)

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 84 • Enforcing the Hazardous Waste Control Act through its Hazardous Waste Generator Program. • Issuing permits to businesses that handle hazardous materials or waste above specific quantity thresholds (55 gallons, 500 pounds, or 200 cubic feet of compressed gas, whichever is greater).

Businesses that meet these quantity thresholds are required to develop and implement a Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP). The HMMP must include a detailed inventory of hazardous materials and waste, and outline emergency response procedures for incidents involving these substances.

The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is a key California agency responsible for regulating hazardous waste, conducting inspections, providing emergency response for hazardous materials incidents, protecting water resources from contamination, and overseeing waste removal. The DTSC operates under the authority of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the California Health and Safety Code, implementing regulations found in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22, Division 4.5.

Government Code Section 65962.5 mandates that the DTSC compile and annually update a comprehensive list of hazardous waste sites in California. This list, known as the Cortese List, includes:

1. Hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action (HSC Section 25187.5).

2. Land designated as hazardous waste property or border zone property (HSC Division 20, Chapter 6.5, Article 11, commencing with Section 25220).

3. Information on hazardous waste disposals on public land (HSC Section 25242).

4. Sites listed pursuant to HSC Section 25356.

5. Sites included in the Abandoned Site Assessment Program.

The DTSC distributes the Cortese List to all cities and counties in California. CCR Title 22 stipulates that soils excavated from a site containing hazardous materials are considered hazardous waste and must be handled accordingly. Cleanup requirements for contaminated soil are determined on a case-by-case basis by the relevant jurisdiction.

Record Search
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund National Priorities List (NPL)26, California Department of Toxic Substance Control’s EnviroStor database 28F 27 , and the State Water Resources Control Board’s
GeoTracker database29F
28 include hazardous release and contamination sites. A search of each database was conducted on June 30, 2025. The searches revealed no hazardous material release sites on or adjacent to the Project Site. The nearest site is the site of the former Beckman Instruments (Porterville Plant) located at 167 W Poplar Avenue, approximately 0.8 miles northeast of the Project site. The Beckman site was previously listed on the 26 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Superfund National Priorities List. Accessed June 30, 2025, 2https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=33cebcdfdd1b4c3a8b51d416956c41f1 27California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Envirostor. Accessed June 30, 2025, https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/
28 California State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. Accessed June 30, 2025, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 85 EPA’s NPL, but was delisted on March 22, 2022, after it was determined that all appropriate response actions have been completed.
29 The Beckman site is still listed as an active cleanup site under DTSC’s Envirostor database.

Porterville 2030 General Plan
The Porterville 2030 General Plan Public Health and Safety Element includes policies to protect soils, surface water, and groundwater from contamination from hazardous materials, as listed below.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-17 Require remediation and cleanup of sites contaminated with hazardous substances.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-19 Ensure that all specified hazardous facilities conform to the Tulare County Hazardous Waste Management Plan.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-20 Prohibit specified hazardous waste residual repositories and onsite facilities utilizing incineration methods unless the facility demonstrates that it will produce insignificant levels of emissions.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-23 Require applicants of projects in areas of known or suspected hazardous materials occurrences such as petroleum hydrocarbon contamination, CAM 17 metals, USTs, location of asbestos rocks and other such contamination to perform comprehensive soil and groundwater contamination assessments in accordance with regulatory agency testing standards, and if contamination exceeds regulatory action levels, require the project applicant to undertake remediation procedures prior to grading and development under the supervision of appropriate agencies, such as Tulare County Department of Environmental Heath, Department of Toxic Substances Control, or Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Implementation Policy C-I-28 Designate specific truck routes to provide for the safe movement of goods and hazardous materials throughout the City, ensure that adequate pavement depth, lane widths, and turn radii are maintained on the designated truck routes, and prohibit commercial trucks from non-truck routes except for deliveries.

The General Plan also includes policies to reduce the potential impact on adopted emergency response plans and emergency evacuation plans, as listed below.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-29 Maintain and periodically update the City’s Emergency Management Plan. This plan will be updated as necessary in consultation with City departments, community leaders, the school districts, Sierra View District Hospital, SCE, and relevant regional and State agencies.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-30 Initiate periodic public information programs that explain the City’s emergency preparedness programs and evacuation routes and encourage each household to be self-sufficient for 72 hours after a manmade or natural disaster.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-31 Maintain multi-jurisdictional communication systems and cooperation for emergency training, planning and management.
29 United States Environmental Protection Agency. National Priorities List Deletion Final Action. Accessed June 30, 2025, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-03-22/pdf/2022-05556.pdf

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 86 Implementation Policy PHS-I-32 Work with owners and operators of critical use facilities to ensure that they can provide alternate sources of electricity, water, and sewerage in the event that regular utilities are interrupted in a disaster.

Public utilities are lifeline services for Emergency Command Centers, police and fire departments, and hospitals.

Keeping them open and operative is especially crucial in the 72 hours after a major disaster.

Implementation Policy C-I-3 Provide for greater street connectivity by:
• Incorporating in subdivision regulations requirements for a minimum number of access points to existing local or collector streets for each development;
• Encouraging roundabouts over signals, where feasible and appropriate; • Requiring the bicycle and pedestrian connections from cul-de-sacs to nearby public areas and main streets; and • Requiring new residential communities on undeveloped land planned for urban uses to provide stubs for future connections to the edge of the property line. Where stubs exist on adjacent properties, new streets within the development should connect to these stubs.

Emergency Operations Plan
The City adopted an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) in 2004, pursuant California Government Code Section 8550- 8668, California Emergency Services Act, which requires all cities to prepare and maintain an emergency plan for natural and manmade emergencies. The EOP works in conjunction with the Tulare County Emergency Operations Plan and the State Emergency Plan. In addition, the City’s Fire Department includes specific procedures for emergency response to incidents involving hazardous materials and waste.

4.9.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes residential development, and the hazardous materials associated with its operation would be typical of residential uses, such as household cleaning supplies, landscaping chemicals, and HVAC refrigerants. While these materials are potentially hazardous, the quantities involved are generally small and do not pose a significant risk to the public or the environment under normal conditions of use and storage.

Certain appliances and electronics used by residents may contain hazardous components (e.g., refrigerants, oils).

However, the handling and disposal of these components are strictly regulated by the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and Clean Air Act (CAA), the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, for transport regulations, as implemented in California by Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), and the California Building Code and Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City of Porterville.

Compliance with these regulations would ensure that the use, storage, and disposal of such items within the residences do not create a significant hazard.

During Project construction, the use of fuels, lubricants, and other potentially hazardous materials associated with construction equipment is anticipated. These potential impacts will be short-term and temporary and would be reduced through compliance with a comprehensive set of regulations, including EPA's oil spill prevention and

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 87 preparedness regulations (e.g., Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure plans), California Office of Emergency Services regulations related to hazardous materials accident prevention, California Department of Toxic Substances Control permitting and regulations for hazardous waste generation and handling, Tulare County's environmental health regulations related to hazardous materials, and standard equipment operating practices and best management practices (BMPs) as specified in operator manuals and construction management plans.

Therefore, because the hazardous materials associated with the Project's operation are typical of residential uses and are subject to extensive federal and state regulations, and because construction-related hazardous materials would be managed according to a comprehensive regulatory framework, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

Impacts would be less than significant.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than Significant Impact. The Project's operational activities would involve only small quantities of hazardous materials typical of residential use (e.g., household cleaning supplies, landscaping chemicals). Given the limited quantities and nature of these materials, the risk of a significant hazard to the public or the environment from reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions is considered low. Construction activities would involve the temporary use of limited quantities of potentially hazardous materials, such as fuels, lubricants, and cleaning solvents. Standard construction safety practices and BMPs would be implemented through compliance with local, state, and federal regulations to prevent spills and releases. Given the limited quantities and temporary nature of these materials, the risk of a significant hazard to the public or the environment from reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions during construction is considered low. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Less than Significant Impact. There are no schools within one-quarter mile of the Project Site. The nearest school to the Project Site is Pioneer Middle School and Vandalia Elementary School located approximately 1.3 miles to the east of the site. As described under criteria a) and b) above, the Project is not anticipated to emit hazard emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or waste that would pose a risk or threat to the schools or surrounding area. Impacts would be less than significant.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site has been checked against the hazardous materials site lists compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, commonly known as the Cortese List. This check included a review of the following databases: National Priorities List (NPL), EnviroStor (DTSC's database of hazardous waste sites), and GeoTracker (SWRCB's database of leaking underground storage tanks and other sites). The Project site is not located on any site included in the Cortese List. Therefore, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to its location on a listed hazardous materials site. Impacts are less than significant.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 88 e) For a Project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area?
No Impact. The Project site is located approximately 1.5 miles northeast of the Porterville Municipal Airport, within the airport influence area and Traffic Pattern Zone (Zone 6) as identified in the applicable airport land use plan (ALUP), the Tulare County Comprehensive ALUP. The ALUP’s compatibility table (ALUP Table 3-1) identifies singlefamily residential uses as a compatible use within Zone 6. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the ALUP and would not pose a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area. No impact would occur. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not involve any new or altered infrastructure associated with evacuation, emergency response, and emergency access routes within the City of Porterville or Tulare County.

Construction may require lane closure; however, these activities would be short-term and access would be maintained through standard traffic control. Following construction, these roadways would continue to provide access to the site. Furthermore, the Project would be subject to compliance with applicable standards for on-site emergency access including turn radii and fire access. Therefore, through compliance, the Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and impacts would be less than significant.
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located on a relatively flat, highly disturbed property with minimal slope. The site is not situated in a wildland or a Cal Fire-designated Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). Furthermore, the site is within an “area of local responsibility.” The flat terrain, lack of wildland vegetation, absence of prevailing winds that would exacerbate fire risk, and location outside a FHSZ reduces wildfire risk and the potential to expose people or structures to wildland fires. In addition, the development itself would be constructed in compliance with the CBC and local fire safety regulations, including the Wildland Urban Interface Codes and Standards of the CBC Chapter 7A, which include measures to minimize fire risk. The transition from a vacant site to a developed site with impervious surfaces (e.g., pavement, roofs) would also reduce the potential for wildfire to spread compared to existing conditions. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.

4.9.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 89

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
Project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in
a manner which would:

i. Result in a substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off-site; X
ii. Substantially increase the rate
or amount of surface runoff in
a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off-site:

X
iii. Create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide
substantial additional sources
of polluted runoff; or
X
iv. Impede or redirect flood
flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due to
Project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 90

4.10.1 Environmental Setting
The Project is in Porterville’s city limits and would be required to connect to the City’s water and stormwater services. The City’s water and stormwater services are described as follows.

Water
The City of Porterville Public Works Department maintains and operates the City’s water system. The City’s water system consists of approximately 276 miles of distribution pipeline ranging from four (4)-inches to 18-inches in diameter, 36 active municipal wells, and seven (7) hillside reservoirs with a total of 11,350,000 gallons of capacity.

According to the 2020 UWMP, the City provides potable water services to approximately 17,063 metered connections and supplies 3,647 million gallons (MG) within its service area as of 2020. 30 Porterville meets its demand for domestic water entirely from groundwater sources, which is recharged from the Tule Basin Aquifer, which gets water from the Tule River. Rainfall also contributes to groundwater recharge at an annual average rainfall of 11.63 inches. The City does not receive raw or potable water, either by import or purchase, to supply their municipal distribution system. Although the City doesn’t purchase water to service their system, the City has acquired water rights for approximately 900 acre feet annually from the Pioneer Ditch Company and Porter Slough Ditch Company.

The Porterville 2030 General Plan establishes a goal of reducing groundwater pumping to match the aquifer safe yield. Additionally, the General Plan aims to reduce per capita demand by ten percent. The General Plan includes the following goals and policies in its Open Space and Conservation Element and Public Utilities Element to promote water quality and conservation, as listed below.

Guiding Policy OSC-G-8: Ensure adequate water quality and supply for the entire Porterville community.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-37: Establish watershed protection standards and review procedures in the Zoning Ordinance to protect groundwater resources.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-40: Support the identification of degraded surface water and groundwater resources and promote restoration where appropriate.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-45: Work with the Regional Water Quality Control Board to ensure that all point source pollutants are adequately mitigated (as part of the CEQA review and project approval process) and monitored to ensure long-term compliance.

Guiding Policy PU-G-1: Ensure an adequate supply of fresh water to serve existing and future needs of the City.

Guiding Policy PU-G-2: Promote the conservation of water within Porterville.

Implementation Policy PU-I-3: Periodically review and update development impact fees, water connection charges, and monthly service charges to ensure that adequate funds are collected to operate and maintain existing facilities and to construct new facilities.

Implementation Policy PU-I-4: Support efforts to expand surface water supply and storage that benefits the City. 30 City of Porterville. (2022). 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Accessed July 3, 2025, https://cms9files.revize.com/PortervilleCA/Draft%202020%20Urban%20Water%20Management%20Plan.pdf

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 91 Implementation Policy PU-I-5: Require that necessary water supply infrastructure and storage facilities are in place coincident with new development, and approve development plans only when a dependable and adequate water supply to serve the development is assured.

Implementation Policy PU-I-7: Continue to require water meters in all new development.

Implementation Policy PU-I-8: Require that agricultural water rights be assigned to the City when agricultural land is annexed to the City for urban development, consistent with this General Plan.

Implementation Policy PU-I-9: Work cooperatively toward a program of conjunctive surface water use with local water purveyors and irrigation districts to retain surface water rights and supply following annexation and urban development so as to protect against aquifer overdrafts and water quality degradation.

Implementation Policy PU-I-10: Encourage private sector use of alternative water sources to achieve a water balance, including reclaimed water for irrigation and landscaping purposes.

Implementation Policy PU-I-11: Promote the continued use of surface water for agriculture to reduce groundwater table reductions.

Implementation Policy PU-I-12: Establish a comprehensive program for water conservation.

Implementation Policy PU-I-13: Undertake a program to retrofit public buildings with water conservation features.

Stormwater
The City’s Public Works Department manages drainage facilities on City-owned property such as public right-of-way or public easements. Drainage on private property or within privately held easements are typically managed by the underlying property owner. The stormwater system consists of a system of natural water channels, drains, and ponding basins located throughout the City. The system operates by conveying captured runoff to recharge basins or directly to flood channels throughout the City. The City owns approximately 38 stormwater basins that provide groundwater recharge and are currently sized to accept floodwater and surface water recharge.

4.10.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project's construction activities, including grading, excavation, and loading, could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. Potential stormwater pollutants may originate from construction materials, equipment maintenance, and earthmoving. Project operations could also generate potential pollutants, such as fertilizers and pesticides from landscaping, pet waste, vehicle fluids from driveways and parking areas, and household chemicals. However, a required SWPPP, compliant with the Construction General Permit, and City approved grading/drainage plans would significantly minimize these risks. The SWPPP will assess sediment risk and incorporate BMPs for erosion, sediment, tracking, and waste management. Implementing the SWPPP would minimize soil erosion and topsoil loss, preventing violations of waste discharge requirements and substantial degradation of surface or groundwater quality. Furthermore, Project runoff would be managed by the City, complying with the Storm Drainage Master Plan and approved grading/drainage plans. Therefore, adherence

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 92 to existing regulations, including the Construction General Permit, BMPs, and the Storm Drainage Master Plan, ensures that potential water quality and waste discharge impacts would be less than significant. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Less than Significant Impact. The City’s long-term water resource planning for existing and future demand is addressed in the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The City’s sole source of water supply is the underlying groundwater basin, the east side of the Tule Subbasin. The City currently has 36 active wells throughout the community that pump directly into the water distribution system and surrounding above ground water storage tanks. As population and development within the City increases, the UWMP planned 3 new wells to be installed, 12 new wells to be added to the water system in 2040, and the implementation of a surface water exchange program to increase water supply.

The City’s existing and projected potable water demands by land use type are shown in Table 4-8 per the 2020 UWMP. Single-family users make up the largest demand for potable water, accounting for 56% of potable water use citywide in 2020. According to the UWMP, the City’s per capita water usage is expected to increase with population growth and favorable hydrologic conditions. However, while the City utilizes 179 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) as a conservative approach to projecting water demand, the actual water consumption was only 133 gpcd in 2020 and 130 gpcd in 2015.

Table 4-8 City of Porterville Existing and Projected Potable Water Demands by Use Type, 2020 - 2040 Use Type 2020 * 2025 2030 2035 2040
Single Family Residential 2,025 3,182 3,607 4,074 4,621 Multi-Family Residential 390 612 694 784 889
Commercial and Institutional 448 704 798 901 1,022
Industrial 10 16 18 20 23
Landscape 223 351 398 449 509
Losses 403 232 263 297 337
Other 148 634 719 811 920
Total 3,647 5,731 6,497 7,337 8,322
Source: City of Porterville, 2020 UWMP, Table 4.1 Retail: Demands for Potable and Non-Potable Water-Actual, Table

4.2 Retail: Use for Potable and Non-Potable Water-Projected *actual use.

To determine the estimated water use for the Project, the UWMP calculation methods were used. According to the UWMP, the average household size in Porterville is 4.39 people per household. Applying a 4.39 average would equal approximately 140 people (4.39 people per household x 32 units = 140 people). At 179 gpcd, the Project would require approximately 9.1MG per year of potable water per year (140 residents x 179 gpcd x 365 days = 9,146,900 gallons of potable water per year) or 28.07 acre/feet per year (AFY) (9,146,900 gallons per year / 325,851 gallons =

28.07 acre/feet). Development of the Project site as proposed would account for a less than one percent increase above the City’s 2020 water demand of 3,647 AFY in 2020. In addition, the minimal increase in demand would not exceed available groundwater supplies during a normal year water supply estimate of 5,655 AFY. Therefore, the Project would be accommodated by existing groundwater supplies and impacts would be less than significant.

In addition, development of the Project Site would increase impervious surfaces which could increase stormwater runoff and reduce groundwater recharge. According to the UWMP, the City maintains stormwater facilities that convey captured runoff to retention/recharge basins or directly to flood channels that run throughout the City.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 93 Runoff resulting from the Project would be managed in compliance with the Storm Water Management Program in addition to approved grading and drainage plans. Thus, compliance would ensure potential impacts related to groundwater recharge are less than significant.

Furthermore, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to the City’s water conservation efforts (e.g., compliance with California Plumbing Code, efficient appliances, efficient landscaping, etc.) should not negatively impact water supply or impede water management. In particular, the Project would be built accordance with all mandatory outdoor water use requirements as outlined in the applicable California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11, Section 4.304 – Outdoor Water Use and verified through the building permit process. As a residential development that would contain landscaping pursuant to PMC regulations, the Project shall comply with the updated Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 2.7, Division 2), as implemented and enforced through the building permit process.

Therefore, through compliance, the potential for the Project to substantially decrease groundwater supplies is limited and impacts would be less than significant.

Overall, based on the information collected from the UWMP and the City of Porterville, the proposed Project would not generate significant water demand. As a result, it can be presumed that the existing and planned water distribution system and supplies should be adequate to serve the Project, and the Project would thereby not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge or impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

In addition, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to the City’s water supply planning efforts (i.e., compliance with California Plumbing Code, efficient appliances, efficient landscaping, etc.) should not negatively impact the City’s water provision. Lastly, compliance with approved grading and drainage plans would ensure impacts to groundwater recharge are less than significant. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Less than Significant Impact. While construction activities on the primarily undeveloped site could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation, the Project would implement erosion controls and BMPs as required by the SWPPP. These BMPs, such as covering/binding soil surfaces and using barriers like straw bales and sandbags, would minimize soil detachment and transportation. Post-construction, the increase in impervious surfaces could increase the runoff volume. However, this is balanced by a significant reduction in exposed soil, which minimizes long-term erosion and siltation potential. Furthermore, the Project will maintain the existing site drainage pattern in accordance with an approved grading and drainage plan. Therefore, compliance with these requirements will prevent substantial alteration of the drainage pattern that could lead to substantial erosion or siltation, resulting in a less than significant impact.
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would disturb vegetation and soil, potentially altering the Project site's natural hydrology and increasing runoff volume and velocity, which could increase the risk of flooding.

However, compliance with the SWPPP, approved grading and drainage plan, and implementation of BMPs would

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 94 control and direct runoff. These measures would reduce potential for increased runoff leading to on- or off-site flooding during construction, resulting in a less than significant impact. iii. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would temporarily disturb vegetation and soil, altering the Project site's natural hydrology. However, compliance with the SWPPP, approved grading and drainage plan, and BMP implementation would control and direct runoff, reducing construction-related impacts on runoff volume and pollution, and preventing exceedance of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Post-construction, the increase in impervious surfaces would increase runoff. However, compliance with approved grading and drainage plans would reduce the potential for substantial additional polluted runoff or runoff exceeding the capacity of existing or planned drainage systems. Therefore, both construction and operational impacts are considered less than significant.
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than Significant Impact. While the Project would increase impervious surfaces, it would be required to maintain the existing site drainage pattern through City-reviewed and approved project-specific grading and drainage plans.

This compliance would minimize or eliminate the potential to impede or redirect flood flows, resulting in a less than significant impact.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to Project inundation? Less than Significant Impact. As shown in Figure 4-4, most of the Project site is in FEMA Flood Zone X, a minimal flood hazard area with a 0.2% annual chance of flooding and a 1% annual chance flood with shallow depths or small drainage areas. A portion of the site is within Zone A, which is a special flood hazard area with a 1% annual chance of flooding. As shown in Figure 2-5, a majority of lots will be within Zone X; and no development is proposed adjacent to the Poplar Ditch. Due to the special flood hazard area, the Project would be required to comply with the City’s Flood Damage Prevention Code which establishes regulations related to flood control for flood prone areas. Further, drainage of potential waters on the site would be planned through Project-specific grading and drainage plans that would be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the issuance of building permits.

Therefore, water would not remain on the site that could cause a flood hazard. In addition, the Project site is not in a tsunami or seiche zone (i.e., standing waves on rivers, reservoirs, ponds, and lakes), therefore the risk of inundation is unlikely. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 95 Figure 4-4 Flood Zone Map

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 96 e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than Significant Impact. A revised groundwater sustainability plan was adopted for the Tule Groundwater Subbasin in July of 2024 by the Eastern Tule Groundwater Sustainability Agency (ETGSA), of which the City of Porterville is a member. 31 The goal of the Tule subbasin and ETGSA is to ensure that the subbasin maintains a reliable water supply for current and future beneficial uses without experiencing undesirable results through 2040. The proposed Project is required to comply with the adopted plan to meet the 2040 sustainability deadline for the basin. During the preparation of the City’s 2020 UWMP, the City coordinated with the Eastern Tule Groundwater Sustainability Agency, Porterville Irrigation District, and County of Tulare to ensure that the city’s UWMP is in compliance with the goals of these agencies. As such, compliance with the City’s 2020 UWMP would ensure that the Project does not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the ETGSA plan. In addition, the City has largely attained the balanced use of groundwater supplies well ahead of the legislative requirement of 2040, thus making the City compliant with the Eastern Tule Groundwater Sustainability Plan goals. As mentioned above, impacts to groundwater supplies from the proposed Project will not be beyond those analyzed in the General Plan, PEIR, or UWMP. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

4.10.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
31 Eastern Tule Groundwater Sustainability Agency (2024). Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Accessed July 25, 2025, https://easterntulegsa.com/gsp/

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 97 Figure 4-5 Flood Zone Map

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 98

4.11 LAND USE PLANNING
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community? X
b) 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?
X

4.11.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is within Porterville city limits and is located north of the Poplar Ditch between S Wisconsin Street and S Indiana Street. The Project site is currently vacant with no on-site improvements (i.e., road, curb, gutter, sidewalk). The Project site is surrounded to the north by a ponding basin, to the east by the Royal Oaks single-family subdivision, and to the south and west by rural residences.

The Project site has a City of Porterville General Plan Land Use designation of Low Density Residential (LDR).

According to the General Plan, the purpose of the LDR designation is to accommodate “typical single-family subdivisions” with a maximum density of 6.0 units per gross acre.

The Project site is currently within the City’s RS-2 Low Density Residential zone district. According to the Porterville Development Ordinance (PDO; Chapter 21 of the Porterville Municipal Code, or PMC), the purpose of the RS-2 district is 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.”

4.11.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
Less than Significant Impact. The physical division of an established community typically involves the construction of a barrier, such as a highway or railroad tracks, or the removal of a crucial access point, thereby impairing community connectivity. This Project, a single-family residential development on a vacant site, does not involve any such division. It will not construct a dividing feature, nor will it remove an essential access route. Instead, the Project would be designed in accordance with the General Plan, PMC, and other applicable standards to ensure a cohesive site and circulation plan that integrates with the surrounding community. Therefore, this Project would not physically divide an established community, and the impact is less than significant.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 99 b) 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? Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes a 32-lot residential development with the approval of the associated tentative subdivision map and conditional use permit. No land use or zoning changes are required.

Generally, policy conflicts are environmental impacts when they would result in direct physical impacts or where those conflicts relate to avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts. As such, associated physical environmental impacts are discussed in this document under specific topical sections, such as Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. The Project includes a conditional use permit to allow for reduced lot sizes, which according to the PMC, may be approved with a Conditional Use Permit when the City Council finds that the lot size and configuration are consistent with the General Plan and will not adversely affect adjoining uses. A discussion of general plan land use policies that are applicable to the Project are included in Table 4-9. As discussed, the Project is generally consistent with the proposed general plan land use designation.

Table 4-9 Discussion on Land Use Policies in the General Plan for Residential Development General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Guiding Policy L-G-6 Provide for residential development with strong community identities, appropriate and
compatible scales of development, identifiable centers
and edges and well-defined public spaces for recreation and civic activities.

Consistent. The Project proposes a residential
development with would create a cohesive
neighborhood with proposed open space to provide
public space for recreation.

Guiding Policy LU-G-9 Provide sufficient land with
appropriate parcel sizes to support a full range of housing types and prices.

Consistent. The Project proposes 32 lots with sizes
ranging from 5,046 square feet to 8,242 square feet
that would provide a range of home sizes and prices.

Guiding Policy LU-I-18 Protect existing residential
neighborhoods from the encroachment of incompatible
activities and land uses, and environmental hazards.

Consistent. The Project Site is generally surrounded
by existing single-family residential development.

The Project also proposes a residential
development, which is compatible with the existing
character of the area.

Implementation Policy LU-I-11 Only allow gated
communities in very low density, planned development
areas, and Resort Residential areas.

Consistent. The Project does not propose a gated
community.

Implementation Policy LU-I-12 Require residential
development on slopes over six percent to comply with
the Hillside Development Ordinance.

This ordinance establishes a Hillside Development zoning district with standards and review procedures tailored to the City’s needs and expectation for hillside development.

Not Applicable. The Project site is not within the
Hillside Development zoning district.

Implementation Policy LU-I-13 Discourage residential
development within the Airport Safety Zone. If residential development is approved in the County within the Airport Safety Zone, it must comply with Tulare County Airport
Land Use Commission’s land-use compatibility standards
and density restrictions.

Consistent. The Project site is within the airport
influence area of the Porterville Municipal Airport
and is within Traffic Pattern Zone (Zone 6);
therefore, the project is subject to compliance with
Tulare County Airport Land Use Commission’s landuse compatibility standards and density restrictions.

As discussed in Section 4.9, single-family residential
uses are deemed compatible in the Tulare County

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 100 Airport Land Use Commission, and therefore the
Project is consistent.

Implementation Policy LU-I-15 Adopt community design
standards for new residential development.

These could include but are not limited to:
• Maximum block length;
• Maximum ratio of block length to width;
• Limited use of dead-end streets;
• Orientation of residential building; and
• Required connectivity
Exceptions may be provided for infill sites and projects in the Hillside Development Zone.

Consistent. The Project is generally consistent since
there are no dead-end streets, structures would be
oriented towards internal roadways, and
connectivity is provided to street frontages via two
(2) access points. The maximum block length and
ratio of block length and width are reviewed by the
Planning, Engineering, and Fire Departments to
ensure that they do not pose a hazard to the
community.

Implementation Policy LU-I-16 Require that all new
subdivisions preserve natural, cultural, and biological resources, including stands of large trees and rock
outcroppings, to the maximum extent feasible.

Consistent. A discussion of the Project’s impacts on
cultural and biological resources are discussed in
Section 4.4 and Section 4.5.

Further, through the entitlement process, the Projectwould be reviewed for compliance with applicable regulations inclusive of those adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. Overall, the entitlement process would ensure that the Project complies with the General Plan, PMC, and any other applicable policies and regulations. As such, a less than significant impact would occur.

4.11.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 101

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X

4.12.1 Environmental Setting
Mineral resources include commercially viable oil and gas deposits, and nonfuel mineral resources deposits.

Nonfuel mineral resources include metals such as gold, silver, iron, and copper; industrial metals such as boron compounds, rare-earth elements, clays, limestone, gypsum, salt, and dimension stone; and construction aggregate, including sand, gravel, and crushed stone. California is the largest producer of sand and gravel in the nation.

The California Geological Survey (CGS) classifies and designates areas within California that contain or potentially contain significant mineral resources. Lands are classified into Aggregate and Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs), which identify known or inferred significant mineral resources. According to the California Department of Conservation, CGS’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Mineral Lands Classification (MLC) data portal, the Mineral Land Classification Map in 1997 shows that the Project is not within a mineral resource zone. 32 The Geologic Energy Management Division’s (CalGEM) online mapping application, Well Finder, presents California’s oil and gas industry information, including the location of oil/gas wells, geothermal wells, gas/oil facilities (i.e., tank, vessel, sump), underground gas storage, as well as the boundaries of CalGEM-recognized oil/gas fields. According to Well Finder, the Project Site is not within a CalGEM-recognized oil/gas field. 33 Porterville 2030 General Plan
According to the Porterville 2030 General Plan, the most economically significant mineral resources in Tulare County are sand, gravel, and crushed stone. These sources are usually alluvial deposits found in riverbeds and floodplains, and hard rock quarries. There are currently three (3) active construction grade sand and gravel mining sites in the City’s Planning Area along the Tule River. The General Plan established the following policies to protect mineral resources in the City’s Planning Area.
32 California Department of Conservation. (1997). Mineral Lands Classification. Accessed on July 3, 2025, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=mlc 33 California Department of Conservation Geologic Energy Management Division. Well Finder. Accessed on July 3, 2025, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 102 Guiding Policy OSC-G-6 Protect significant mineral resources.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-24 Require all mining and sand extraction operations to mitigate completely environmental impacts, including operations affecting water quality, habitat preservation, aesthetics and bridge undermining, and to submit reclamation and ultimate use plans for City approval prior to initiating operations.

Implementation Policy OSC-I-25 Work with Tulare County to ensure that reclamation and ultimate use plans for mining operations land are consistent with the General Plan.

4.12.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. There are no identified mineral deposits of significance or active mine operations on the Project Site.

Therefore, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Therefore, no impact would occur. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No Impact. There are no identified mineral deposits of significance or active mine operations on the Project site. As a result, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Further, the site is not delineated in the General Plan, a Specific Plan, or other land use plan as a locally important mineral resource recovery site, thus it would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource. Therefore, no impact would occur.

4.12.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 103

4.13 NOISE
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the
Project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
X
c) For a Project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the Project expose
people residing or working in the
Project area to excessive noise levels?
X

4.13.1 Environmental Setting
In general, there are two (2) types of noise sources: 1) mobile sources and 2) stationary sources. Mobile source noises are typically associated with transportation including automobiles, trucks, trains, and aircraft. Stationary sounds are sources that do not move such as machinery or construction sites. Stationary sources can also include events, recreational uses, amplified systems, automotive repair facilities, building mechanical systems, and landscape maintenance. These sources can vary based on factors such as site conditions, equipment operated, and specific activities conducted. Noises generated are also directional but can vary based on site and operational characteristics.

Nosie-related impacts typically affect sensitive receptors, and land uses such as residential, schools, churches, nursing homes, hospitals, and open space/recreation areas. Commercial, farmland, and industrial areas are not considered noise sensitive and generally have higher tolerances for exterior and interior noise levels. Noise levels for noise-sensitive receptors will vary depending on location, distance from the source, shielding by terrain and structures, and ground attenuation rates.

Porterville 2030 General Plan
The Porterville 2030 General Plan Noise Element sets noise compatibility standards for transportation noise sources in terms of the Day‐Night Average Level (Ldn). The Ldn is the time‐weighted average noise level for a 24‐hour day with a penalty of 10 dB added to noise levels occurring during the nighttime hours (10:00 p.m.‐7:00 a.m.).

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 104 The Noise Element establishes a land use compatibility criterion of 60 dB Ldn for exterior noise levels in outdoor activity areas of residential developments. Outdoor activity areas generally include backyards of single‐family residences and outdoor common use areas as well as individual patios or decks of multi‐family developments. The intent of the exterior noise level requirement is to provide an acceptable noise environment for outdoor activities and recreation.

The Noise Element also provides land use compatibility guidelines for community noise exposure levels. Figure 4-6 (Table 9‐1 in the General Plan Nosie Element) summarizes land use compatibility guidelines for various noise exposure levels within the community. An exterior noise level up to 60 dB Ldn is considered “Normally Acceptable” and an exterior noise level between 60 dB Ldn and 70 dB Ldn is considered “Conditionally Acceptable” for residential land uses within the City of Porterville. Exterior noise levels above 70 dB Ldn are generally considered unacceptable for residential land uses.

Figure 4-6 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 105 The City Code of Porterville, California
The PMC, Chapter 18, Article IX, provides standards for noise levels, as discussed below.

Section 18-90.4 – Exterior Noise Standards provides thresholds of the creation of noise when measured at any affected residence, school, hospital, church or public library, as listed in Table 4-10. Additionally, each noise level shall be further reduced by five (5) dBA for pure tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.

Table 4-10 Exterior Noise Level Standards, dBA
Category
Daytime
7:00 A.M. To 10:00 P.M.

Nighttime
10:00 P.M. To 7:00 A.M.

Hourly Leq 50 45
Maximum sound level (LMAX) 70 65
Section 18-90.5 – Residential Interior Noise Standards provides thresholds of noise measured inside a dwelling unit.

The maximum sound level allowed is 55 dBA LMAX during the daytime and 45 dBA LMAX during the nighttime. Similarly, each noise level shall be further reduced by five (5) dBA for pure tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.

Section 18-90.6 – Noise Source Exemptions provides a list of activities exempted from the provisions of Article IX.

Some activities associated with Project construction and residential activities are listed below:

B. Noises resulting from any authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call or acting in time of emergency.

E. Any mechanical device, apparatus or equipment used, related to, or connected with emergency activities or emergency work.

F. Noise sources associated with construction, whether private or public, within five hundred feet (500') of the uses mentioned in subsection 18-90.4 of this article, provided such activities do not take place before six o'clock (6:00) A.M. or after nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. on any day except Saturday or Sunday, or before seven o'clock (7:00) A.M. or after five o'clock (5:00) P.M. on Saturday or Sunday.

G. Noise sources associated with the maintenance of residential property provided such activities take place between the hours of six o'clock (6:00) A.M. and nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. on any day except Saturday or Sunday, or between the hours of seven o'clock (7:00) A.M. and nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. on Saturday or Sunday.

I. Noise sources associated with the collection of waste or garbage.

Existing Ambient Noise Environment
The Project Site’s existing noise environment is impacted by various noise sources. According to the General Plan Noise Element, the Project site is located within the Projected 2030 55dB CNEL noise contour created by State Route 65 (0.15 miles west) and State Route 190 (0.4 miles north). Additionally, as previously discussed, the Project site is largely surrounded by residential uses. Associated noise from residential uses includes vehicles and typical neighborhood noise (i.e. talking, car doors shutting, dogs barking, etc.), which are usually minimized by trees and landscaping. While the Project site is located within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) of the Porterville Municipal

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 106 Airport, it is not within the Airport’s community noise equivalent level (CNEL) noise contour. Other sources of noise include the vehicular traffic on S Indiana Street, which is a primary access point for the Royal Oaks subdivision adjacent to the Project.

Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibrance Guidance Manual Some additional vibration guidance is provided by the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. The Manual provides guidance for determining annoyance potential criteria and damage potential threshold criteria. These criteria are provided below in Table 4-11 (Acoustical Analysis Table III) and Table 4-10 (Acoustical Analysis Table IV), and are presented in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV) in inches per second (in/sec).

Table 4-11 Guideline Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria (Acoustical Analysis Table III)

Human Response
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Barely Perceptible 0.04 0.01
Distinctly Perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly Perceptible 0.90 0.10
Severe 2.0 0.4
Source: Caltrans
Table 4-12 Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria (Acoustical Analysis Table IV)

Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile, historic buildings, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10
Historic and some old buildings 0.50 0.25
Older residential structures 0.50 0.30
New residential structures 1.0 0.50
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.0 0.50
Source: Caltrans

4.13.2 Impact Assessment
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards?
Less than Significant Impact. Noise generating activities of the Project would include traffic noise and stationerysource noise, such as operations and construction as described below. It is not anticipated that the Project would generate substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards, given the type of development proposed (i.e., residential).

Traffic Noise Exposure
Mobile source noises are typically associated with transportation including automobiles, trains, and aircraft.

Sensitive land uses include residential, schools, churches, nursing homes, hospitals, and open space-recreation

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 107 areas. Commercial, farmland, and industrial areas are not considered noise sensitive and generally have higher tolerances for exterior and interior noise levels. The nearest sensitive land uses are single-family residences to the west and east of the Project Site. The primary source of exterior, on-going noise from buildout of the Project would be from vehicles traveling to and from the site. Future build-out of the Project site would generate an increase in traffic on roadways in the Project vicinity. However, the number of new trips (i.e., 301 ADTs) associated with buildout of the Project site is not likely to increase the ambient noise levels by a significant amount as the area is active with vehicles. Additionally, increased traffic noise levels on adjacent roadways due to buildout of the Project is expected to be minimal since the trips generated do not include trucks. Accordingly, it is expected that the traffic noise levels will increase minimally and will not have a significant impact. Impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Noise Exposure
The proposed residential use is expected to generate typical neighborhood noise (i.e. talking, car doors shutting, dogs barking, etc.). These noises are expected to be minimal due to the relatively low number of units proposed (i.e., 32 units), and will not introduce a new significant source of noise that isn’t already occurring in the area. In addition, household machinery sounds (e.g., HVAC systems, refrigerators, etc.) will be confined within the interior of the buildings. As such, it is expected that the operational noise generated by the Project will be minimal and most likely not cause significant impact to existing uses. Impacts would be less than significant.

Construction Noise Exposure
Construction noise will result from construction activities through the use of construction equipment for grading the site and building the proposed structures. Construction phases would include demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coating, and paving. Of all construction phases, it is anticipated that grading would produce the loudest noise.

Construction noise was estimated using the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) Version 1.0. For the purpose of this noise assessment, general construction equipment, including air compressors, mixers, cranes, forklifts, generator sets, graders, pavers, paving equipment, rollers, dozers, tractors, and welders, are included in the construction noise modeling. According to existing and anticipated land use within and around the Project Site, the baseline and receptors that are analyzed in the RCNM are shown in Table 4-13.

Table 4-13 Receptors and Baseline Analyzed in the RCNM
Location Land Use Total dB Lmax * Total dB Leq **
50 feet to the west Residential 89.5 88.3
* Total Lmax is the value for the loudest piece of equipment. ** This number estimates noise when all equipment is used at the same time.

Short-term construction noises include traffic noise generated from transporting construction equipment and materials and construction worker commuting. These activities would raise noise levels near the site. According to modeling of the FHWA RCNM Version 1.0, construction noise generated from the offroad equipment is estimated to be 88.3 dB Leq if all equipment was used at the same time. Ambient noise from construction activities would cease upon completion of construction.

Although the nearby residential uses would experience elevated noise levels from construction, these activities would be temporary and would generally take place in accordance with PMC Section 18-90.6, which regulates permissible hours of construction between the hours of 6:00 am and 9:00 pm on weekdays and 7:00 am and 9:00

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 108 pm on weekends. According to the FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook, noise exceeding 90 Lmax in the daytime (7 am to 6 pm) and 85 Lmax in the evening (6 pm to 10 pm) is considered significant. It is not expected that the construction of the Project would exceed the construction noise thresholds of the FHWA since 1) not all construction equipment is expected to be used at the same time and 2) trees between the site and nearby residences, as well as windows and walls of the residences would provide noise reduction.

Overall, Project construction is not expected to result in a significant impact because the noise would be regulated by the PMC. Noise would thereby be generated during daylight hours and not during evening or more noisesensitive time periods; and the increase in noise would cease upon complete build-out of the Project. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur.

Although the Project would result in increased ambient noise levels at the Project Site, compliance with the General Plan policies and PMC requirements would result in the Project’s compliance with applicable standards. Overall, the Project would result in a less than significant impact in regard to noise. b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. Ground borne vibration may result from operations and/or construction, depending on the use of equipment (e.g., pile drivers, bulldozers, jackhammers, etc.), distance to affected structures, and soil type. Depending on the method, equipment-generated vibrations could spread through the ground and affect nearby buildings. The dominant sources of man‐made vibration are sonic booms, blasting, pile driving, pavement breaking, demolition, diesel locomotives, and rail‐car coupling. None of these activities are anticipated to occur with construction or operation of the proposed Project.

The existing single-family residences located 50 feet west of the site were built in 1972 and can be categorized as “older residential structures.” Typical vibration levels at distances of 50 feet are summarized by Table 4-14. Most of these levels are barely perceptible at 50 feet according to the vibration annoyance potential thresholds shown in Table 4-11 and Table 4-12. The vibration levels are also not expected to cause damage to the nearest sensitive use, older residential structures located 50 feet from the Project Site, according to the damage potential thresholds shown in Table 4-12. .

Table 4-14 Typical Vibration Levels During Construction Equipment
PPV (in/sec)
At 25 feet At 50 feet At 100 feet At 300 feet
Bulldozer (Large) 0.089 0.0415 0.011 0.006
Bulldozer (Small) 0.003 0.0014 0.0004 0.00019
Loaded Truck 0.076 0.0355 0.01 0.005
Jackhammer 0.035 0.0163 0.005 0.002
Vibratory Roller 0.210 0.098 0.03 0.013
Caisson Drilling 0.089 0.0415 0.01 0.006
Source: California Department of Transportation
As a result, it is not expected that construction activities would exceed any significant threshold levels for annoyance or damage. Additionally, operational activities related to residential uses are non-perceptible (i.e., vibration from HVAC, refrigerators, etc.) thus would not create any vibration impacts. As such, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 109 c) For a Project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The Project site is located approximately 1.5 miles northeast of the Porterville Municipal Airport, within the airport influence area. Per the General Plan Noise Element, the Project site is not within the airport noise contour and is more than one (1) mile east of the closest noise contour of the airport. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. No impact would occur.

4.13.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 110

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X

4.14.1 Environmental Setting
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires a CEQA document discuss the ways in which the proposed Project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The CEQA Guidelines provide an example of a major expansion of a wastewater treatment plant that may allow for more construction within the service area. The CEQA Guidelines also note that the evaluation of growth inducement should consider the characteristics of a Project that may encourage or facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment. Direct and Indirect Growth Inducement consists of activities that directly facilitate population growth, such as construction of new dwelling units. A key consideration in evaluating growth inducement is whether the activity in question constitutes “planned growth.” Porterville 2030 General Plan
Development under the 2030 General Plan is discussed in the Introduction chapter of the General Plan. Full development under the General Plan is referred to as “buildout.” The total housing units expected under General Plan buildout is 34,250 units, with a buildout population of 107,300.

Porterville 2023-2031 Housing Element
Recent trends in population and housing for the City of Porterville discussed in the 2023-2031 Housing Element.

According to the Housing Element, the City’s population per the American Community Survey 2016-2020 5-Year Estimates is 62,623, with 18,654 housing units.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 111

4.14.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes the development of a 32-lot single-family residential development. The Project would also include off-site improvements (e.g., curb, gutter, sidewalk) and connections to existing utilities (e.g., water, sewer, power, stormwater drainage). These improvements are limited in scope and would connect to and improve the existing street and utility network. No further extension of roads or other infrastructure that could cause unplanned population growth would occur.

Based on an average household size of 4.39 per the 2020 UWMP (See Section 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality), 32 units could generate approximately 140 new residents, thereby increasing the city’s population from 62,623 to 62,763. The 32 units would also increase the total number of housing units from 18,654 to 18,686. Overall, the population and housing units generated by the proposed Project would be within the General Plan buildout.

Therefore, the Project's contribution to population growth is minimal and would not induce substantial unplanned population growth, either directly or indirectly. Impacts are considered less than significant. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Less than Significant Impact. There are no residential buildings currently onsite. Therefore, the Project would not displace any existing people or housing and would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Impacts would be less than significant.

4.14.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 112

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new
or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance
objectives for any of the public
services:

i. Fire protection? X
ii. Police protection? X
iii. Schools? X
iv. Parks? X
v. Other public facilities? X

4.15.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within Porterville city limits and would be subject to fees for the construction, acquisition, and improvements for public services and facilities. Public services and facilities are further described below.

Fire Protection Services
Fire protection services in the City are provided by the Porterville Fire Department (PFD). The PFD operates a total of three (3) fire stations that serve the city, with Fire Station 73 closest to the Project Site at 980 S Jaye Street, Porterville, CA 93257. Fire Station 73 is located approximately 0.5 miles northeast of the Project Site. The total staffing for PFD includes 61 personnel, 53 sworn firefighters, 1 Fire Marshall, 4 code enforcement officers, and 3 administrative staff. In 2024, PFD responded to 6,280 calls for service and 456 calls for fires. The response time goal for fire protection and emergency services is to provide service within five (5) minutes and twenty (20) seconds of the dispatch 90% of the time.34
Porterville 2030 General Plan
The General Plan Public Health & Safety Element includes the following goals and policies to ensure reductions in the potential for fire hazards and fire demand:
34 Porterville Fire Department (2024). 2024 Annual Report. Accessed on July 7, 2025. https://cms9files.revize.com/PortervilleCA/departments/Fire/2024%20Annual%20Report.pdf

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 113 Guiding Policy PHS-G-3 Protect Porterville’s residents and businesses from potential fire hazards.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-13 Maintain automatic and/or mutual aid agreements with surrounding jurisdictions for fire protection.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-14 Enforce weed abatement programs and building and fire code requirements to assure adequate fire protection.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-15 Develop and expand existing public fire safety and emergency life support education programs in order to promote public awareness of fire hazards and emergency procedures.

Implementation Policy PHS-I-16 Establish fire hazard standards and review procedures at least equivalent to State requirements to protect new development on or adjacent to the hillsides.

The Subdivision Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance standards will require new development on the urban fringe to incorporate fuel breaks, fuel reduction and buffer zones to minimize potential fire losses.

Further, projects are subject to review by the PFD and to regulations and standards such as the California Uniform Fire Code (UFC), which includes regulations on construction, maintenance and building use. The UFC addresses fire department access, fire hydrants, sprinklers, fire alarm system, etc., for new buildings.

Police Protection Services
Police protection services in the City are provided by the Porterville Police Department (PPD). The PPD is located at 350 North D Street, Porterville, CA 93257, which is approximately 2.0 miles northeast of the Project Site. According to the General Plan, there are 57 peace sworn officers, and 22 civilian staff members employed, which provides a ratio of approximately 1.3 officers per thousand residents. According to the PPD, a ratio of 1.2 police officers per thousand residents would support adequate law enforcement efforts at buildout of the General Plan.

Schools
Educational services within the City of Porterville are provided by Porterville Unified School District, Burton School District, and Tulare County Office of Education (TCOE). The three (3) school districts operate 28 public schools within the City’s Planning Area. The Project Site is located within the Porterville Unified School District (PUSD), which includes 10 elementary schools, four (4) middle schools, eight (8) high schools, adult school, preschool programs, and a community day school. The nearest school is Pioneer Middle School and Vandalia Elementary School located approximately 1.3 miles to the east of the site.

The Porterville 2030 General Plan projected the generation of 13,069 new students at buildout of the General Plan, resulting in a total of 30,814 students, which would produce a demand of 12 new elementary schools, two (2) new middle schools, and three (3) new high schools. Funding for schools and school facilities impacts is outlined in Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995 et. seq. (State statutes) which govern the amount of fees that can be levied against new development. These fees are used to construct new or expanded school facilities. Payment of fees authorized by the statute is deemed “full and complete mitigation.” A School District Developer Fee would be assessed for development based on the rates in place at the time payment is due.

Parks and Recreation
Park and recreation facilities are overseen by the City of Porterville Parks & Leisure Services Department. According to the General Plan, there are 15 planned and existing parks within the City, totaling 295 acres of parkland, which

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 114 provides a parkland to population ratio of 4.7 acres of parkland per thousand people in 2020. This meets the 1975 Quimby Act, which requires a minimum of three (3) acres per thousand residents. However, it does not meet the City’s park standard for neighborhood and community parks, which requires five (5) acres per thousand residents.

This could be provided through in-lieu fees that would be used for any capacity-building park and recreation facility improvements.

Porterville 2030 General Plan
The General Plan Parks, Schools, and Community Facilities Element also established policies for parks and recreational facilities, as listed below.

Guiding Policy PSCF-G-1 Establish and maintain a high-quality, enjoyable, and attractive public park system for the entire community.

Guiding Policy PSCF-G-2 Provide park and recreation facilities within close proximity to residents they are intended to serve.

Implementation Policy PSCF-I-5 Require developers for new neighborhoods to agree to the establishment of, or annexation into, a Park Maintenance District in new neighborhoods.

Implementation Policy PSCF-I-8 Provide lighted facilities for active community recreation areas in order to extend usability, whenever possible.

Address compatibility with surrounding uses and use energy-efficient lighting design with limited glare and spillover.

Implementation Policy PSCF-I-9 Design park and recreation facilities to be as flexible as possible, so that they may adapt to changes in the population served and in the recreation programs offered.

Changing neighborhood demographics can lead to different user requirements over the life of a park. By having flexible park facilities, this will enable the park to adapt to the changing needs of the adjacent neighborhood.

Implementation Policy PSCF-I-10 Place neighborhood and community parks at the core of new neighborhoods and co-locate parks and school sites where possible, as depicted on the General Plan Land Use Diagram.

Implementation Policy PSCF-I-11 Combine use of park, recreation, and open space lands with drainage facilities and school facilities, where feasible.

Implementation Policy PSCF-I-14 Develop a safe and efficient trail network throughout the City that links parks and other key City destinations.

4.15.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire protection?

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 115 Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is currently served by the Porterville Fire Department (PFD). PFD Fire Station 73 is located approximately 0.5 miles east of the Project Site. The Project’s proximity to the existing fire station would support adequate service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for fire protection services. Additionally, through the entitlement and building permit process, the Project would be required to comply with the CBC and Uniform Fire Code to ensure fire safety elements are incorporated into Project design.

Proposed interior streets would be required to provide appropriate widths and turning radii to safely accommodate emergency response and the transport of emergency/public safety vehicles. The Project would also be designed to meet City requirements regarding water flow, water storage requirements, hydrant spacing, infrastructure sizing, and emergency access. Through compliance, impacts would be less than significant. ii. Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project Site would be served by the Porterville Police Department (PPD). The PPD is located at 350 North D Street, Porterville, CA 93257, which is approximately 2 miles northeast of the Project Site.

The Project’s proximity to the existing station would support adequate service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for police protection services. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would not result in the need for new or altered facilities that could have an environmental impact and a less than significant impact would occur.
iii. Schools?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project Site is within the Porterville Unified School District (PUSD). The nearest schools are Pioneer Middle School and Vandalia Elementary School located approximately 1.3 miles to the east of the site. Since residential development is proposed, the Project would introduce residents to the area and therefore could generate new students that would increase the school districts’ enrollment. To offset impacts of the development, a School District Developer Fee would be assessed for the Project based on the rates in place at the time payment is due. As stated in Government Code Section 65995 et seq., payment of a school impact fee is deemed full and complete mitigation for potential impacts to schools caused by development. Therefore, payment of the assessed School District Developer Fee would reduce impacts related to new school facilities resulting from implementation of the Project and impacts would be less than significant. iv. Parks?
Less than Significant Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from residential development. The Project proposes residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could increase the demand for and use of existing public parks or other recreational facilities. The City aims to maintain a standard of five (5) acres of combined park and open space land per 1,000 residents. The Project proposes approximately 9,241 square feet of open space including a 10-foot-wide walking trail. The Project would also be required to pay in-lieu fees to mitigate any potential remaining impacts to the City’s existing park and recreation facilities generated by the incremental population increase. The combination of dedication of land and payment of in-lieu fees would reduce any impacts resulting from increased residential demand for park and recreational facilities so as to not cause substantial physical deterioration of the public facilities. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 116 v. Other public facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would introduce new residents to the area, which could incrementally increase demand for various public facilities such as courts, libraries, and hospitals. However, the Project’s contribution to this increased demand is not expected to result in a substantial need for new or physically altered public facilities. The City and surrounding region are served by existing courts, libraries, and hospitals. These facilities are designed to accommodate a certain level of population growth, and the Project’s contribution to that growth (i.e., 140 residents) is relatively small in the context of the overall service area. While the Project would add new residents, the increase in demand for these public services is expected to be incremental and within the capacity of existing facilities. The Project’s impact on these services would be dispersed among the broader population served by these facilities. If such facilities are proposed for future expansion, the expansion would be subject to CEQA and further environmental review. The Project may also contribute impact fees that support the provision of public services, helping to ensure that service levels are maintained as the city grows. Impacts would be less than significant.

4.15.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 117

4.16 RECREATION
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
X
b) Does the Project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
X

4.16.1 Environmental Setting
See Section 4.15. Public Facilities.

4.16.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less than Significant Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from residential development. The Project proposes residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could increase the demand for and use of existing public parks or other recreational facilities. The City aims to maintain a standard of five (5) acres of combined park and open space land per 1,000 residents. The Project proposes approximately 9,241 square feet of open space including a 10-foot-wide walking trail. The Project would also be required to pay in-lieu fees to mitigate any potential remaining impacts to the City’s existing park and recreation facilities generated by the incremental population increase. The combination of dedication of land and payment of in-lieu fees would reduce any impacts from increased demand for park and recreational facilities to not cause substantial physical deterioration of the public facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes approximately 9,241 square feet of open space including a 10- foot-wide walking trail on site that would provide open space and recreational opportunities for residents. The Project would not require the construction or expansion of off-site recreational facilities. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur.

4.16.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 118

4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X

4.17.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently vacant with no structures or on-site improvements (i.e., roads, curb, gutter, sidewalk).

The Project site has street frontage along S Wisconsin Street on the western edge and along S Indiana Street along the eastern edge. South Indiana Street is designated as a Major Arterial (4 Lanes) in the Porterville 2030 General Plan Circulation Network.
2022 Regional Active Transportation Plan for the Tulare County Region The 2022 Regional Active Transportation Plan (RATP) for the Tulare County Region, approved April 18, 2022, was prepared as a response to recognition of the benefits of active transportation and a more diverse transportation for the county. The objective of the RATP is 1) provide a foundation for the pedestrian and bicycle component of the Tulare County Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), and 2) identify highpriority projects to better compete for federal, state, and regional funding. 35 The RATP provides assessment and identifies priority projects for the county as well as cities within the County, including the City of Porterville.

According to the RATP, 1.7% of commuters walked to work and 0.5% of commuters biked to work in the City of Porterville. Traffic collisions in the City includes 27 pedestrian victims (1 killed, 4 severely injured) and 24 bicyclist victims (0 killed, 1 severely injured) in 2019. The roads with the highest numbers of collisions in the City are Henderson Avenue, Morton Avenue, Olive Avenue, Putnam Avenue and Westfield Avenue. Priority projects in the City of Porterville include:
35 Tulare County Association of Governments. (2022). 2022 Regional Active Transportation Plan for the Tulare County Region.

Accessed July 7, 2025, https://tularecog.org/sites/tcag/assets/File/TCAG%202022%20RATP_.pdf

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 119

1. Morton Avenue crosswalk warning lights

2. Orange Avenue crosswalk warning lights

3. Main Street crosswalk warning lights

4. Tule River Parkway multi-use trail, Phase IV

5. Porterville citywide bikeway network

6. Putnam and Elderwood Pedestrian Corridor

7. Butterfield Stage Corridor
Porterville 2030 General Plan
The Circulation Element of the Porterville 2030 General Plan established policies to maintain the operations of existing roadway systems as new development occurs. These policies aim to prevent negative impacts caused by new developments and ensure that adequate transportation system is provided. The following goals and policies are generally applicable to the proposed Project.

Implementing Policy C-I-2 Require all new developments to provide right-of-way and improvements consistent with the General Plan street designations and City street section standards.

Implementing Policy C-I-3 Provide for greater street connectivity by:
• Incorporating in subdivision regulations requirements for a minimum number of access points to existing local or collector streets for each development;
• Encouraging roundabouts over signals, where feasible and appropriate; • Requiring the bicycle and pedestrian connections from cul-de-sacs to nearby public areas and main streets; and
• Requiring new residential communities on undeveloped land planned for urban uses to provide stubs for future connections to the edge of the property line. Where stubs exist on adjacent properties, new streets within the development should connect to these stubs.

Implementing Policy C-I-5 Install traffic calming devices, such as signage and bulbs, as needed and appropriate in existing neighborhoods.

Implementing Policy C-I-6 Require the installation of landscaping in center medians and at major intersections to minimize summer heat and enhance the character of the streetscapes.

For small-lot subdivisions (with an average lot size of 6,000 square feet or less), the planter strip for a local street may be omitted if:
• A five-foot sidewalk is provided on both sides of the street and trees are provided in the front yards of private lots parallel with the sidewalk at the minimum frequency required for street trees; and/or • Street trees are provided in landscaped bulb-outs into the parking lane at intersections.

Alternatively, where a planter strip is provided along a local street, the front setback for buildings may be reduced an additional two feet from the normally required setback.

Implementing Policy C-I-7 Require street tree planting as part of an urban forestry program.

Guiding Policy C-G-6 Maintain acceptable levels of service and ensure that future development and the circulation system are in balance.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 120 Implementing Policy C-I-8 Develop and manage the roadway system to obtain LOS D or better during the peak hour for all major roadways and intersections in the City. This policy does not extend to residential streets (i.e., streets with direct driveway access to homes) or state highways and their intersections, where Caltrans policies apply.

Exceptions to LOS D policy may be allowed by the City Council in areas such as downtown and at highway interchanges, where allowing a lower LOS would result in clear public benefits.

No new development will be approved unless it can be shown that required level of service can be maintained on the affected roadways or there are specific benefits that justify accepting a lower level of service.

Implementing Policy C-I-9 Develop and manage local residential streets (i.e., streets with direct driveway access to homes) to limit average daily vehicle traffic volumes to 2,500 or less and 85th percentile speeds to 25 miles per hour or less.

Neighborhood traffic control measures to be considered include: regulatory devices, such as right-of-way controls, speed limits, and parking regulations; as well as geometric fixtures such as roundabouts, semi-diverters, and diagonal diverters.

Implementing Policy C-I-10 Require traffic impact studies for all General Plan amendments that will generate more than 100 peak hour trips.

Exceptions may be granted where traffic studies have been completed for adjacent development. The City’s new traffic model developed for the 2030 General Plan will facilitate this analysis.

Guiding Policy C-G-7 Ensure that new development pays its fair share of the costs of transportation facilities.

Implementing Policy C-I-12 Continue to require that new development pay a fair share of the costs of street and other traffic and local transportation improvements based on traffic generated and impacts on traffic service levels.

Implementing Policy C-I-14 Require new development that will have an impact on regional transportation facilities to pay a regional transportation impact fee.

Implementing Policy C-I-16 Ensure that new development is designed to make transit a viable choice for residents.

Design options include:
• Have neighborhood focal points with sheltered bus stops; • Locate medium-high density development whenever feasible near streets served by transit; and • Link neighborhoods to bus stops by continuous sidewalks or pedestrian paths.

The General Plan Circulation Element also planned bikeway networks within the City. Within the vicinity of the Project Site, there are no existing or proposed bicycle facilities.

Implementing Policy C-I-17 Establish bicycle lanes, bike routes and bike paths consistent with the General Plan.

Implementing Policy C-I-19 Increase bicycle safety by:
• Sweeping and repairing bicycle lanes and paths on a regular basis; • Ensuring that bikeways are delineated and signed in accordance with Caltrans’ standards, and lighting is provided, where needed;
• Providing bicycle paths or lanes on bridges and overpasses;

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 121 • Ensuring that all new and improved streets have bicycle-safe drainage grates and are free of hazards such as uneven pavement and gravel;
• Provide adequate signage and markings warning vehicular traffic of the existence of merging or crossing bicycle traffic where bike routes and paths make transitions into or across roadways; and • Work with the school districts to promote classes on bicycle safety in the schools.

Implementing Policy C-I-20 Give bikes equal treatment in terms of provisions for safety and comfort on arterials and collectors as motor vehicles.

Implementing Policy C-I-21 Develop a series of continuous walkways within new office parks, commercial districts, and residential neighborhoods so they connect to one another.

SB 743 Technical Advisory
In April 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) issued the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) (revised December 2018) to provide technical recommendations regarding VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures for a variety of land use Project types.

The Technical Advisory includes screening thresholds for agencies to use in order to identify when a Project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. • Screening Thresholds for Small Project. Absent substantial evidence indicating that a Project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, Projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to cause a lessthan significant transportation impact. This threshold is based on a CEQA categorical exemption for existing facilities, including additions to existing structures of up to 10,00 square feet, so long as the Project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to allow for maximum planned development and the Project is not in an environmentally sensitive area.
• Map-Based Screening Threshold for Residential and Office Projects. Residential and office Projects that locate in areas with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with VMT data, for example from a travel survey or a travel demand model, can illustrate areas that are currently below threshold VMT. Because new development in such locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps can be used to screen out residential and office Projects from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis. • Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact Near Transit Thresholds. Proposed CEQA Guideline Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1), states that lead agencies generally should presume that certain Projects (including residential, retail, and office Projects, as well as Projects that are a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high quality transit corridor will have a less-thansignificant impact on VMT. This presumption would not apply, however, if Project-specific or location-specific information indicates that the Project will still generate significant levels of VMT. • Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development. Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT.

Therefore, a Project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis for the lead agency to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 122 According to the Technical Advisory, lead agencies, using more location-specific information, may develop their own more specific thresholds, which may include other land use types. The City of Porterville has not developed their own specific thresholds; however, the City does use Tulare County’s Guidelines.

County of Tulare SB 743 Guidelines
In June of 2020, the County of Tulare published their own specific thresholds and guidelines related to VMT and SB 743 titled “County of Tulare SB 743 Guidelines,” which were adopted by the City of Porterville on September 21, 2021. The Guidelines are based on statewide guidance provided by OPR, but include clarifications and details tailored for and specific to local conditions in Tulare County. The Guidelines provide guidance for land development projects on screening criteria, VMT analysis, significance thresholds and potential mitigation.

The Guidelines outline screening criteria for projects that would have a less than significant transportation impact due to project size or project type. If a project meets at least one of the screening criteria, it would not require a detailed VMT analysis. The screening criteria most relevant to the proposed Project is “Small Projects.” For Tulare County, projects that generate less than 500 trips per day can be presumed to have a less than significant impact.

4.17.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would be required to comply with all project-level requirements implemented by a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Compliance is further discussed below. Overall, the Project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system. Impacts would be less than significant.

Roadway Facilities
The Project proposes an internal network of local streets with two (2) points of ingress/egress on Wisconsin Street and one (1) point of ingress/egress on South Indiana Street. All roadways within the proposed subdivision would be designed in accordance with City standards and would have curb, gutter, and sidewalk. In addition, Indiana Street and Wisconsin Street in proximity to the Project site would be improved to their ultimate rights-of-way, with curb, gutter, and sidewalk, in addition to landscaping. The Project would be required to submit public improvement plans for off-site improvements through the building permit process, for review and approval by the City to ensure improvements would be consistent with adopted standards, specifications, and approved street plans. Through compliance, the Project would result in improvements to the roadway network consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan as shown on the Circulation Diagram and described in the Circulation Element.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
There are no existing pedestrian or bicycle facilities along the street frontages in proximity to the Project Site. The General Plan Circulation Element does not identify any future facilities in this area. However, the Project would result in public street improvements along Indiana Street and Wisconsin Street, including concrete curb, gutter, sidewalk, and paving per City of Porterville Standard Plans and Specifications. Off-site improvements would be

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 123 verified and ensured through the Building Permit process. Provision of the pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be ensured through the Building Permit process. The Project would be consistent with the General Plan and thereby would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Transit Facilities
There are no existing or planned transit facilities adjacent to the Project Site as identified by the General Plan. The closest bus stop to the Project is more than one (1) mile east of the Project site at Porterville College. The Project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing transit facilities. b) Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes 32 single-family lots. Using the 11th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 32 single-family lots are expected to generate 301.76 average daily trips (ADTs) (9.43 average rate x 32 dwelling units = 301.76 ADTs). Per the Tulare County VMT Guidelines, projects that generate less than 500 trips per day can be presumed to have a less than significant impact.

Because the Project would generate less than 500 trips, it can be presumed to have a less than significant impact.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b) and impacts would be less than significant.
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project design does not contain any geometric design features that would create hazards. Implementation of the Project would not require the improvement and expansion of the roadway network serving the Project Site. two (2) points of ingress/egress on Wisconsin Street and one (1) point of ingress/egress on South Indiana Street. All roadways within the proposed subdivision would be designed in accordance with City standards and would have curb, gutter, and sidewalk. In addition, Indiana Street and Wisconsin Street in proximity of the Project site would be improved to their ultimate rights-of-way, with curb, gutter, and sidewalk, in addition to landscaping. The Project would be required to submit public improvement plans through the Building Permit process for review and approval by the City to ensure offsite improvements would be consistent with adopted City Standards, Specifications, and the approved street plans. Compliance with such standards, specifications, and plans would ensure that any traffic hazards are minimized. Lastly, the Project proposes a residential development of a site that is within an area comprising existing and planned residential uses. Therefore, the Project does not propose an incompatible use because it is consistent with the existing development in the area and is similar in nature to the surrounding uses. As a result, implementation of the Project would result in a less than significant impact related to hazards due to roadway design features or incompatible uses. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site would be accessible via the existing roadway network, with proposed ingress/egress on adjacent streets. The Project would not alter or impede any primary evacuation routes. While temporary lane closures may occur during construction, these would be managed through approved traffic control plans and encroachment permits to maintain emergency vehicle access. Post-construction, the Project would maintain adequate emergency access, including appropriate turning radii for emergency vehicles, clearly marked fire lanes, and sufficient hydrant access. The City's review and approval process would ensure compliance with all

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 124 applicable codes and regulations related to emergency access and evacuation. Therefore, the Project would not impair emergency response or evacuation plans, and the impact is considered less than significant.

4.17.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 125

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:

Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in PRC Section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that
is geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or
object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in PRC
Section 5020.1(k), or,
X
b) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider
the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

4.18.1 Environmental Setting
See Section 4.5. Cultural Resources.

4.18.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Public Resources Code Section 21074 defines a "tribal cultural resource" as a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or listed in a local register of historical resources. Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5020.1(k) further clarifies that a local register of historical resources is a list of properties officially designated as historically significant by a city or county through a local ordinance or resolution.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 126 As discussed in Section 4.5 Cultural Resources, a CHRIS record search, consultation with four (4) Native American tribes, and a Sacred Lands File check were conducted for the project site and surrounding area. These efforts, which specifically sought to identify known tribal cultural resources, did not identify any such resources within the Project boundaries. Therefore, the Project would not impact any known tribal cultural resources listed or eligible for listing in the California Register or a local register.

However, recognizing the possibility of encountering undiscovered tribal cultural resources during grounddisturbing activities, the Project would incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1. This measure would protect any inadvertently discovered cultural resources, including tribal cultural resources as defined in PRC Section 21074.

Specifically, this measure outlines a stop-work and assess procedure during the construction phases of the project including stop work, expert consultation, City notification, resource evaluation and protection, and long-term preservation to avoid or minimize potential impacts. This measure directly addresses potential impacts to undiscovered tribal cultural resources that might meet the criteria of PRC Section 21074.

Therefore, considering the negative findings of the record search and tribal consultation regarding known resources, and the implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 to address potential impacts to undiscovered resources, the Project is not anticipated to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. Potential impacts to unknown resources, if any, will be reduced to a less than significant level through the procedures outlined in Mitigation Measure CUL-1. Impacts would be less than significant. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5024.1 outlines criteria for determining the historical significance of a resource. While the Project site has not been formally designated as a historical resource by the City of Porterville under this section, undiscovered tribal cultural resources, potentially meeting the criteria of PRC 5024.1, could be encountered during ground-disturbing activities.

As discussed previously, a CHRIS record search, tribal consultation, and a Sacred Lands File check were conducted.

These efforts did not identify any known tribal cultural resources on the project site. However, the possibility of encountering undiscovered resources, potentially meeting the significance criteria of PRC Section 5024.1, remains.

To address this possibility, the Project would incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1. This measure would protect any inadvertently discovered cultural resources, including tribal cultural resources as defined in PRC Section 21074.

Therefore, considering the negative findings of the record search and tribal consultation regarding known resources, and the implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 to address potential impacts to undiscovered resources that might meet the criteria of PRC Section 5024.1, the Project is not anticipated to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. Potential impacts to unknown resources, if any, will be reduced to a less than significant level through incorporation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1. Impacts would be less than significant.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 127

4.18.3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: In order to avoid the potential for impacts to historic and prehistoric archaeological resources, the following measures shall be implemented in conjunction with the construction of each phase of the Project:

Notification of the measures shall be provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 128

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or storm
water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities,
the construction or relocation of which
could cause significant environmental
effect?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the Project and reasonably
foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider, which
serves or may serve the Project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
Project’s Projected demand in addition
to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state
or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
X

4.19.1 Environmental Setting
The Project Site is within Porterville city limits and thus would be required to connect to the city’s water, wastewater, and stormwater services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. Each utility system is described below.

Water
Water supply, usage, and services are described in Section 4.10.

Wastewater
The City of Porterville Public Works Department operates and maintains the City’s municipal wastewater facilities.

There are approximately 150 miles of sewer pipe with diameters between six (6) inches to 36 inches; the majority of the sewer pipe is 12-inch. The primary existing trunk line adjacent to the Project Site is located within Indiana

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 129 Street. This sewer system services the entire General Plan Planning Area, which includes approximately 75.2% of the City’s Urban Area Boundary and all of the City’s Urban Development Boundary. The remaining area that is within the Urban Area Boundary but outside the Urban Development Boundary is supported by on-site private septic systems. 36
The City’s wastewater is processed through the Porterville Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF), which has a capacity of eight million gallons per day. Due to the City’s flat topography, the sewer flows are conveyed via 18 different lift stations throughout the City.

Solid Waste
The City of Porterville Public Works department providessolid waste collection servicesfor residential, commercial, and industrial developments in the City. The City provides self-hauled waste services, and contracts with Pena's disposal for the transfer of recyclables and organic waste. The City hauls regular waste to the Woodville Landfill.

This landfill is permitted to receive a maximum of 1,070 Tons Per Day. The remaining capacity is 9,331,760 Cubic Yards. Teapot Dome Landfill is now closed.
37 Stormwater
Stormwater services are described in Section 4.10.

Natural Gas and Electricity
According to the Porterville 2030 General Plan, Southern California Edison is the electricity service provider. Power is provided through both overhead and undergrounded lines, with all new development required to underground power transmission lines. Natural gas is provided to residents through Southern California Gas Company.

Telecommunications
Telecommunications providers in the area incrementally expand and update their service systems in response to usage and demand. Upon request, the site would be connected to existing broadband infrastructure and subject to applicable connection and service fees.

4.19.2 Impact Assessment
Would the Project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would connect to existing municipal water mains in the adjacent roadways.

The existing mains would not require upsizing or relocation to facilitate the proposed development. The water system improvements for the Project would be designed and constructed in accordance with City standards and 36 2030 Porterville General Plan Public Utilities Element, Accessed July 7, 2025, http://www.ci.porterville.ca.us/depts/communitydevelopment/documents/Chapter8PublicUtilities_000.pdf 37 2030 Porterville General Plan Public Utilities Element, Accessed July 7, 2025, http://www.ci.porterville.ca.us/depts/communitydevelopment/documents/Chapter8PublicUtilities_000.pdf

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 130 requirements, as verified through the building permit process. As discussed in criterion b), the Project’s estimated water demand would be 28.07 AFY which would fall within the projected supplies for all normal years and dry years.

Further, the Project's adherence to regulatory requirements, implementation of water conservation measures, and payment of capacity and connection fees would ensure its water demand remains within acceptable limits, thus minimizing its impact on groundwater supplies and resulting in a less than significant impact.

The Project would also connect to existing municipal sanitary sewer mains in the adjacent roadways. The existing mains would not require upsizing or relocation to facilitate the proposed development. The sewer system improvements for the Project would be designed and constructed in accordance with City standards and requirements, as verified through the building permit process. As discussed in criterion c), the Project’s estimated wastewater demand would be 25,060 gpd. The estimated generation for the Project represents less than one (1) percent of Porterville’s allocated capacity and falls within the wastewater treatment facility’s existing capacity to treat the Project’s wastewater. Further, the Project’s would be required to pay sewer facilities development fees and connection fees, contributing to the funding of adequate sewer facilities. For these reasons, impacts would be less than significant.

The Project would connect to existing storm drain facilities in adjacent roadways. The Project would incorporate storm water drainage infrastructure designed in compliance with all applicable codes and standards to manage stormwater runoff effectively, as ensured through City reviewed and approved grading and drainage plans. As discussed in Section 4.10, the Project’s compliance with the SWPPP, approved grading and drainage plan, and implementation of BMPs would control and direct runoff. The existing facilities would not require relocation or expansion of new facilities to facilitate the proposed development. Impacts would be less than significant.

Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) would provide natural gas and Southern California Edison (SCE) would provide electricity, and a telecommunications provider would serve the site. The Project would relocate and underground the utilities on the site. The construction and operations of the Project would be subject to compliance with applicable energy efficiency regulations including CALGreen, Title 24, and CARB. No new expanded facilities would be required for electric, gas, or telecommunications facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Less than Significant Impact. Water supply reliability is assessed in the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) based on the characteristics of the City’s water supplies during various water year types, including Normal Year, Single Dry Year, and Multiple Dry Years (or Five-Consecutive-Year Drought). The supply, demand, and surplus for the three hydrologic conditions are shown in Table 4-15. As shown, water supply is assumed to be 100 percent reliable through the three (3) hydrologic conditions over the timeframe.

Table 4-15 City of Porterville Water Supply and Demand Comparison, Hydrologic Conditions, 2025 - 2040 2025 2030 2035 2040
Normal Year
Total Supply 8,542 8,834 9,166 9,539
Total Demand 5,731 6,497 7,337 8,322
Surplus 2,812 2,337 1,829 1,217
Single Dry Year
Total Supply 8,345 8,589 8,862 9,168
Total Demand 4,789 5,364 6,007 6,728

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 131 Surplus 3,556 3,225 2,855 2,440
Multiple Dry Year
Year 1
Total Supply 8,542 8,834 9,166 9,539
Total Demand 4,430 4,961 5,556 6,223
Surplus 4,113 3,873 3,610 3,316
Year 2
Total Supply 8,012 8,245 8,511 8,809
Total Demand 4,726 5,294 5,929 6,640
Surplus 3,285 2,952 2,582 2,168
Year 3
Total Supply 7,879 8,098 8,347 8,626
Total Demand 4,789 5,364 6,007 6,728
Surplus 3,090 2,734 2,340 1,898
Year 4
Total Supply 7,215 7,361 7,528 7,714
Total Demand 4,342 4,863 5,447 6,101
Surplus 2,873 2,498 2,081 1,613
Year 5
Total Supply 7,215 7,361 7,528 7,714
Total Demand 3,491 3,910 4,379 4,905
Surplus 3,724 3,451 3,148 2,809
Source: City of Porterville 2020 Urban Water Management Plan To determine the estimated water use for the Project, the UWMP calculation methods were used. According to the UWMP, the average household size in Porterville is 4.39 people per household. Applying a 4.39 average would equal approximately 140 people (4.39 people per household x 32 units = 140 people). At 179 gpcd, the Project would require approximately 9.1MG per year of potable water per year (140 residents x 179 gpcd x 365 days = 9,146,900 gallons of potable water per year) or 28.07 acre/feet per year (AFY) (9,146,900 gallons per year / 325,851 gallons =

28.07 acre/feet). Project demands would fall within the projected supplies for all normal years and dry years.

Therefore, the City would have sufficient water supplies to serve the Project and planned future demands, and impacts would be less than significant.

Furthermore, as discussed under Section 4.10, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to the City’s conservation efforts (e.g., compliance with California Plumbing Code, efficient appliances, efficient landscaping, etc.) should not negatively impact water supply or impede water management. In particular, the proposed Project would be required to be built accordance with all mandatory outdoor water use requirements as outlined in the applicable California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11, Section 4.304 – Outdoor Water Use and verified through the building permit process. As a residential development that would contain landscaping pursuant to SMC regulations, future development shall comply with the updated Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 2.7, Division 2), as implemented and enforced through the building permit process. Therefore, through compliance, the potential for the Project to substantially decrease groundwater supplies is limited and impacts would be less than significant.

Overall, based on the information collected from the UWMP, the Project would not generate significantly greater water demand that would substantially decrease groundwater supplies. Additionally, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to water conservation efforts as well as compliance with applicable

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 132 California Green Building Standards Code and MWELO would reduce water demand and reduce the potential for the Project to substantially decrease water supply available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity to serve the Project’s Projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less than Significant Impact. According to the 2020 UWMP, the City owns and operates a citywide wastewater collection and treatment system. The City’s existing sewer collection system consists of 2,728 manholes, 24 lift stations, 9,880 feet of force mains, and 48.4 miles of gravity sewer pipes. The City owns and operates the existing wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) under the current Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Order No. R5- 2008-304. The WWTF is located on the corner of N. Prospect Street and W. Morton Avenue near Veterans Park.

The WWTF was originally designed with a hydraulic capacity of approximately 1.8 mgd. It was upgraded to 4.0 mgd in 1978 and again in 1994 to 8.0 mgd. The City’s Waste Discharge Requirements Order restricts the monthly average daily discharge to 5.3 mgd. According to the City’s 2020 UWMP the City contributed a total of 1,712 MG (4.69 mgd) of wastewater flow into the WWTF.

Sanitary sewer service would be provided to the site by the City through connections in adjacent roadways. If wastewater generation accounts for approximately 100 percent of water use, maximum buildout of the Project site would result in an estimated wastewater generation of approximately 25,060 gpd. This would account for less than one percent of the WWTF capacity. Therefore, the wastewater treatment plant would have the capacity to meet the wastewater generated from maximum buildout of the site and the Project’s impacts on wastewater facilities would be less than significant.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less than Significant Impact. The Porterville 2030 General Plan Public Utilities Element contains Guiding Policy PUG-5 which requires the City to achieve and maintain the State’s solid waste management goals. Solid waste services are subject to the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), which requires each jurisdiction in California to divert at least 50% of its waste stream away from landfills either through waste reduction, recycling, or other means.

The City of Porterville provides solid waste, recycling, and composting services. The City disposes solid waste at the Teapot Dome Landfill (SWIS Number 55-AA-0004). This landfill is permitted to receive a maximum of 600 tons per day and has a remaining capacity of 998,468 cubic yards, with an estimated closure date that lapsed in 2004. As of 2022, Teapot Dome was no longer taking non-refuse disposal, nor is it open to the public. Once Teapot Dome reaches capacity, waste will be diverted to Woodville Landfill (SWIS Number 54-AA-0008). Woodville Landfill is

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 133 permitted to receive a maximum of 1,078 tons per day and has a remaining capacity of 7,093,145 cubic yards and is expected to cease operations in 2043.
38 Construction
CALGreen mandates locally permitted new residential building construction and demolition to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum 65% of the nonhazardous construction and demolition debris generated during the Project. Further, the recycling of construction and demolition materials is required for any City-issued building or demolition permit that generates at least eight cubic yards of material by volume. Therefore, the Project would be required to implement techniques to reduce and recycle waste during construction activities in accordance with mandatory requirements under CALGreen as implemented through the building permit process. Compliance would be ensured through the building permit process. Therefore, through compliance, solid waste generated through construction activities is not anticipated to generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, in excess of the capacity of the local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

Operations
The Project is anticipated to generate approximately 41.8 tons of solid waste per year as estimated by CalEEMod (Appendix A). The estimation accounts for compliance with AB 939. Solid waste generated through Project operations would account for less than 0.1 percent of the daily permitted throughput capacity of the landfill. As such, Project operations are not anticipated to generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, in excess of the capacity of the local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact. e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact. As described under criterion d), Project construction and operational activities that generate solid waste would be handled, transported, and disposed of in accordance with AB 939 and CALGreen regulations related to solid waste. Compliance would be ensured through the building permit process. Therefore, through compliance, the Project would comply with laws and regulations that would ensure impacts related to solid waste are reduced to less than significant levels.

4.19.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
38 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (2023). “SWIS Facility/Site Search.” Accessed on July 24, 2025, https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/Search

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 134

4.20 WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility or
lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose Project
occupants to pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result
in temporary or ongoing impacts to
the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X

4.20.1 Environmental Setting
According to the General Plan EIR, central Porterville is highly urbanized and is less susceptible to wildland fires.

The risk of wildland fires increases in the grasslands and other vegetation cover outside of the City’s urban core.

The area located in the northeast portion of the City’s Planning Area near Lake Success is considered to have a high to very high risk of fire since it is heavily vegetated. The Project Site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as moderate, high, or very high fire hazard severity zones as identified by CAL FIRE.39 Rather, the Project Site is within an “area of local responsibility” and in an area of low fire risk. As an area of local responsibility, the Porterville Fire Department is responsible for providing fire protection services (See Section 4.15). 39 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Accessed on July 7, 2025, https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/6a9cb66bb1824cd98756812af41292a0

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 135

4.20.2 Impact Assessment
If located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, Would the Project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site would be accessible via the existing roadway network, with proposed ingress/egress on Wisconsin Street and South Indiana Street. The Project would not alter or impede any primary excavation routes identified by the City’s adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. While construction activities may require temporary lane closures, these would be short-term and managed through approved traffic control plans and encroachment permits to ensure that emergency vehicle access is always maintained. Post-construction, the Project would maintain emergency access that support emergency response, such as adequate turning radii for emergency vehicles, clearly marked fire lanes, and sufficient hydrant access. The Project has been reviewed and conditioned by the City for compliance with all applicable codes and regulations, including those related to emergency access and evacuation, to ensure that the Project would not conflict with or impair emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose Project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located on a relatively flat, highly disturbed property with minimal slope. The site is not situated in a wildland or a Cal Fire-designated Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). Furthermore, the site is within an “area of local responsibility.” The flat terrain, lack of wildland vegetation, absence of prevailing winds that would exacerbate fire risk, and location outside a FHSZ reduces wildfire risk and the potential to expose occupants to significant pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or contribute to the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. In addition, the development itself would be constructed in compliance with the CBC and local fire safety regulations, which include measures to minimize fire risk, such as sprinkler systems and fire hydrants. The transition from a vacant site to a developed site with impervious surfaces (e.g., pavement, roofs) would also reduce the potential for wildfire to spread compared to existing conditions. Therefore, impacts are less than significant. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project is located within city limits and is served by existing, maintained infrastructure, including roads and utilities. The Project itself would include off-site improvements (e.g., curb, gutter, sidewalk) and connections to existing utilities (e.g., water, sewer, power, stormwater drainage). These improvements are limited in scope and would connect to and improve the existing street and utility network. The addition of curb, gutter, and sidewalk and connection to existing utilities are not anticipated to exacerbate fire risk.

These improvements would not introduce new ignition sources. The design and construction of these improvements would be required to comply with all applicable City codes and regulations, including those related to fire safety, environmental protection, and traffic management. Through compliance, such infrastructure would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment and impacts would be less than significant.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 136 d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located on relatively flat terrain with stable, native soil and is not in or near state responsibility areas or areas classified as Fire Hazard Severity Zones, or rivers or creeks that would be more susceptible to landslides. The Project would incorporate drainage infrastructure designed in compliance with all applicable codes and standards to manage stormwater runoff effectively, as ensured through City reviewed and approved grading and drainage plans. Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides because of runoff, post-fire slop instability, or drainage changes. Impacts would be less than significant.

4.20.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 137

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the Project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the Project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
X
b) Does the Project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
Project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past
Projects, the effects of other current
Projects, and the effects of probable
future Projects)?
X
c) Does the Project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X

4.21.1 Impact Assessment
a) Does the Project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The analyses of environmental issues contained in this Initial Study indicate that the Project is not expected to have substantial impact on the environment or on any resources identified in the Initial Study. Standard requirements that will be implemented through the entitlement process and the attached mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been incorporated in the project to

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 138 reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant, including Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO3, BIO-4, BIO-5, BIO-6, BIO-7, and CUL-1. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
b) Does the Project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a Project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past Projects, the effects of other current Projects, and the effects of probable future Projects.)
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) states that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact of a project is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. Due to the nature of the Project and consistency with environmental policies, incremental contributions to impacts are considered less than cumulatively considerable. Standard requirements that will be implemented through the entitlement process and the attached mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been incorporated in the project to reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant, including Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-5, BIO-6, BIO-7, and CUL-1. The Project would not contribute substantially to adverse cumulative conditions, or create any substantial indirect impacts (i.e., increase in population could lead to an increased need for housing, increase in traffic, air pollutants, etc.). As such, Project impacts are not considered to be cumulatively considerable given the insignificance of project induced impacts.

The impact is therefore less than significant with mitigation incorporated. c) Does the Project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The analyses of environmental issues contained in this Initial Study indicate that the project is not expected to have substantial impact on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Standard requirements that will be implemented through the entitlement process and the attached mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been incorporated in the project to reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant, including Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-5, BIO-6, BIO-7, and CUL-1. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 139 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR VILLAS AT WINDING CREEK RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION This mitigation measure monitoring and reporting checklist was prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15097 and Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code (PRC). The timing of implementing each mitigation measure is identified in in the checklist, as well as identifies the entity responsible for verifying that the mitigation measures applied to a Project are performed. Project applicants are responsible for providing evidence that mitigation measures are implemented. As lead agency, the City of Porterville is responsible for verifying that mitigation is performed/completed.

Mitigation Measures
Party
Responsible
for
Implementing
Mitigation
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Monitoring
Verification
Verification of
Completion
Date Initials
Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (Protected Birds including Swainson’s Hawk): To mitigate potential impacts on protected birds, including Swainsons Hawk, and to avoid “take” as defined by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code, the following measures will be implemented.
1) Avoidance of Nesting Season: If feasible, all grounddisturbing activities (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) and vegetation removal will occur outside the typical nesting season for migratory birds in the San Joaquin Valley
(generally February 1 through August 31).
2) Pre-Construction Survey (If Work During Nesting Season): If ground disturbance or vegetation removal must be initiated or continue during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey for nesting birds, including specialProject Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 140 status species such as Swainson's Hawk, within the Project footprint and a suitable buffer (e.g., 500 feet for raptors like Swainson's Hawk, 250 feet for other protected birds, or as determined by the biologist based on species and site
conditions). The survey will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of any ground disturbance or
vegetation removal within the Project footprint. The survey results will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, who will then report to the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation
monitoring compliance. If no active nests are detected, no further species-specific mitigation for nesting birds is required.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Active Nests Found): If active nests are found in or near the construction zone/area, the qualified biologist will establish and implement an appropriate
species-specific non-disturbance buffer (as recommended by CDFW). This buffer will be clearly delineated, and no construction activities will occur within this buffer until the qualified biologist determines that the nesting effort has concluded (e.g., young have fledged and are no longer
reliant on the nest) and the nest is no longer active. The biologist will prepare a plan detailing the avoidance,
monitoring, and minimization actions, and the results of these efforts will be reported by the biologist to the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Project proponent, and the City of Porterville Community
Development Department for mitigation monitoring
compliance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (American Badger): To mitigate potential impacts on the American badger and avoid “take” under state law, the following measures will be implemented.

Project
Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 141 1) Avoidance of Denning Season: If feasible, ground disturbance (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) in suitable and identified American badger habitat (e.g., grasslands, shrublands with friable soils, or areas with known burrow complexes) will be scheduled outside their primary denning season (typically February through July) when young may be present. Construction activities will avoid filling or altering known or potential badger dens.
2) Pre-Construction Survey (If Work During Denning Season): A qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for American badgers and their dens within the Project footprint and a suitable buffer (e.g., 50 feet) at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance. The survey results will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. If no badgers or active dens are detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required. 3) Minimize Impacts (If Badgers/Dens Found): If American badgers or their active dens are found and complete avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and/or
mitigation actions to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan may include establishing buffer zones around active dens (e.g., 50-foot non-disturbance buffer), installing exclusion fencing, passively relocating to suitable, protected habitat, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, CDFW, and the Project proponent in accordance with CDFW guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the CDFW and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring
compliance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3 (Northern California Legless Lizard): To mitigate potential impacts on the Northern California legless lizard Project
Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 142 and avoid “take” under state law, the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Survey: A qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance in suitable legless lizard habitat (e.g., areas with loose sandy soils, leaf litter, or dense vegetation cover) to identify the presence/absence of legless lizards. The survey may involve hand-raking through loose soil and leaf litter. The results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance. If no legless lizards are detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required.
2) Avoidance: If feasible, ground disturbance (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) in suitable legless lizard habitat will be minimized.

Construction activities will avoid filling or altering known or potential legless lizard habitat where feasible.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Legless Lizards Found): If legless lizards are found and complete avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and/or mitigation actions to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan may include establishing exclusion fencing, salvaging and relocating to suitable, protected habitat, monitoring, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, CDFW, and the Project proponent in accordance with CDFW guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE– Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 143 Endangered Species Act (CESA), the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Survey: Prior to ground disturbance, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for San Joaquin kit fox and their dens within the Project footprint and a suitable buffer (e.g., 200-500 feet, as per agency guidelines) at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance. This survey will strictly follow current U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) protocols.

The survey results will be reported by the biologist to the Project proponent, CDFW, USFWS, and the City of Porterville
Community Development Department for mitigation
monitoring compliance. If presence is not detected, no further species-specific mitigation is required, but adherence to standard avoidance measures (e.g., pre-activity surveys, speed limits) may still be required by agencies.
2) Avoidance of Pupping Season: If feasible, ground disturbance (including grading, grubbing, or mobilization of construction equipment and materials) in suitable San Joaquin kit fox habitat (e.g., arid grasslands, scrublands, and areas with potential dens) will be scheduled outside their primary pupping season (typically February through May) to avoid impacts to vulnerable young. Construction activities will avoid filling or altering known or potential kit fox dens.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Kit Foxes/Dens Found): If San Joaquin kit foxes or their dens (natal, pupping, or known active dens) are found and complete avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and mitigation actions, including compensatory mitigation, to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan will be developed in consultation with and approved by USFWS and CDFW. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist to the USFWS, CDFW, and the City of Porterville Community

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 144 Development Department for mitigation monitoring
compliance.
4) Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP): Prior to any ground disturbance, all construction personnel will attend a WEAP conducted by a qualified biologist. The program will include a detailed description of the San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat, legal protection, and the critical importance of avoiding "take." It will also outline specific measures to be implemented during construction, such as speed limits, trash management, and reporting procedures for observations of kit foxes or dens. 5) Designated Biologist: A qualified biologist will be available during all ground-disturbing activities to ensure compliance with mitigation measures and agency conditions, and to
monitor for the presence of San Joaquin kit fox.
6) Compensatory Mitigation: If impacts to San Joaquin kit fox habitat cannot be avoided and are authorized by USFWS and CDFW, compensatory mitigation (e.g., purchase of conservation easements or credits at an approved conservation bank) will be required to offset habitat loss. The amount of compensatory mitigation will be determined in consultation with the agencies.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 145 foraging and nesting periods (typically spring through fall) to avoid direct harm to active bees and nests.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Bumble Bees/Habitat Found): If sensitive bumble bee species or active nests are found, or if complete avoidance of foraging or nesting habitat is not feasible, the qualified biologist or entomologist will prepare a plan that describes proposed avoidance, monitoring, minimization, and/or mitigation actions to reduce impacts to a less than significant level and avoid "take." This plan may include establishing buffers, enhancing landscaping with native, pollinator-friendly flowering plants that provide continuous bloom throughout the year, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, CDFW, and the Project proponent in accordance with CDFW guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be reported by the biologist and submitted to the CDFW and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 146 (or as otherwise specified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - USFWS) will be established around all elderberry shrubs. This buffer will be clearly delineated with fencing and signage, and no ground disturbance, vehicle access, or material storage will occur within this zone. No pesticides or herbicides will be used within 100 feet of any elderberry shrub.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Avoidance Not Feasible): If complete avoidance of elderberry shrubs or their designated buffer is not feasible, impacts will be minimized, and compensatory
mitigation will be implemented in consultation with and approval from the USFWS to avoid "take." Measures may
include transplantation, propagation, compensatory habitat acquisition/enhancement, etc. The plan will be implemented in consultation with the qualified biologist, USFWS, and the Project proponent in accordance with USFWS guidelines related to the species. The plan and results of efforts will be documented by the biologist and submitted to the USFWS and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7 (Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp): To mitigate potential impacts on the Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and avoid “take” under the federal ESA, the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Wet Season Surveys: Prior to any ground disturbance that could impact potential vernal pool habitat, a protocol-level wet season survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist during the appropriate inundation periods (typically December through April) to determine the presence or absence of vernal pool fairy shrimp. These surveys will follow current USFWS guidelines. If presence is not detected, no further mitigation is required.
2) Avoidance: Prior to any ground disturbance, a qualified biologist will identify and delineate all vernal pools and other suitable ephemeral wetland habitats within the Project area. All identified vernal pools and suitable ephemeral wetland habitats Project
Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 147 will be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. A nondisturbance buffer (e.g., 250 feet or as specified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - USFWS) will be established around all such features. This buffer will be clearly delineated with fencing and signage, and no ground disturbance, vehicle access, or material storage will occur within this zone. No activities that could alter the hydrology of vernal pools (e.g., changes in drainage patterns, increased runoff, introduction of pollutants) will be permitted.
3) Minimize Impacts (If Avoidance Not Feasible): If impacts to vernal pool fairy shrimp habitat are unavoidable (and presence is confirmed or assumed based on surveys), minimization and/or compensatory mitigation will be implemented in
consultation with and approval from the USFWS to avoid "take." Measures may include reducing the footprint of impact,
implementing erosion control measures, ensuring no pollutants enter the habitat, compensatory mitigation etc. The results of efforts will be documented by the biologist and submitted to the USFWS and the City of Porterville Community Development Department for mitigation monitoring compliance
Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: In order to avoid the potential for impacts to historic and prehistoric archaeological resources, the following measures shall be implemented in conjunction with the construction of each phase of the Project:

If previously unknown historical, archeological, cultural, or paleontological resources are encountered before or during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archeologist, historical resources specialist, or paleontologist, shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. Notification of discovery shall be Project
Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 148 provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

Notification of the measures shall be provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 149 Geology and Soils
See Cultural Resources
Tribal Cultural Resources
See Cultural Resources

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 150 6 REPORT PREPARATION
Names of Persons Who Prepared or Participated in the Initial Study:

Lead Agency
Lead Agency
City of Porterville
Community Development
Department
(559) 782-7460
Caludia Calderon, Community
Development Director
Initial Study Consultant
Initial Study
Precision Civil Engineering
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 449-4500
Bonique Emerson, AICP, VP of Planning
Jenna Chilingerian, AICP, Senior Planner
Isaiah Medina, Assistant Planner

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 151 7 APPENDICES

7.1 Appendix A: Air Quality/Energy/Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reference Materials CalEEMod Results

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 152

7.2 Appendix B: Biological Resources Database Results
IPaC and CNDDB Occurrences reports

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 153

7.3 Appendix C: Cultural Resources Reference Materials
Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center CHRIS record search results and California Native American Heritage Commission correspondence

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 139 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (American Badger): To mitigate potential impacts on the American badger and avoid “take” under state law, the following measures will be implemented.

Project
Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

Mitigation Measure BIO-3 (Northern California Legless Lizard): To mitigate potential impacts on the Northern California legless lizard Project
Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

Mitigation Measure BIO-7 (Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp): To mitigate potential impacts on the Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and avoid “take” under the federal ESA, the following measures will be implemented:
1) Pre-Construction Wet Season Surveys: Prior to any ground disturbance that could impact potential vernal pool habitat, a protocol-level wet season survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist during the appropriate inundation periods (typically December through April) to determine the presence or absence of vernal pool fairy shrimp. These surveys will follow current USFWS guidelines. If presence is not detected, no further mitigation is required.
2) Avoidance: Prior to any ground disturbance, a qualified biologist will identify and delineate all vernal pools and other suitable ephemeral wetland habitats within the Project area. All identified vernal pools and suitable ephemeral wetland habitats Project
Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

If previously unknown historical, archeological, cultural, or paleontological resources are encountered before or during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archeologist, historical resources specialist, or paleontologist, shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. Notification of discovery shall be Project
Applicant
Prior to
construction
City of Porterville

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
October 2025
CITY OF PORTERVILLE – Villas at Winding Creek Subdivision | 148 provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

Notification of the measures shall be provided to the City of Porterville Community Development Department.

Page 1 of 3 ends

Porterville City CouncilDecember 2, 2025

Porterville City Council
December 2, 2025