Entity also acknowledges and agrees that Program Award funds are to be expended only on the eligible uses and activities identified relevant, Standard Agreement(s).
Section 3. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Program Award Documents on behalf of the Public Entity.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tulare this 2nd day of June 2026, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Abstain:
Patrick Isherwood, President of the Council
and Ex-Officio Mayor
ATTEST:
Marc Mondell, City Clerk
By Melissa Wilcox, Chief Deputy City Clerk
The presence of an electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the Tulare City Council.
Staff Report
Meeting: City Council
Date: June 2, 2026
Department: Community Development - Planning
Submitted by: Steven Sopp, Principal Planner
Agenda Title: Active Transportation Plan Adoption
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve a resolution adopting the City of Tulare 2026 Active Transportation Plan.
SUMMARY
In 2024, the Tulare County Association of Governments provided the City with $200,000 for the preparation of an Active Transportation Plan (ATP). With funding secured, the City’s Community Development Department issued a request for proposals (RFP) for qualified firms to prepare the ATP.
On November 5, 2024, the City Council approved a professional services agreement with TJKM Transportation Consultants to prepare the ATP.
The purpose of the ATP is to assist the City in meeting the needs of commuter and recreation bicycle users and pedestrians. It will assist the City in efforts to obtain local, state and federal funds for bikeways, sidewalks, and related facilities. The ATP vision statement is:
“Tulare envisions a City where individuals of all ages, abilities, income levels, and backgrounds can safely, conveniently, and comfortably walk, bike, roll, or use mobility devices to reach their destinations and access transit. A well-connected network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities will seamlessly link homes, jobs, schools, transit hubs, and other key destinations. This network will empower residents to choose active, sustainable travel options, fostering improved public health, reduced environmental impact, and an enhanced quality of life”.
The ATP development and community outreach process included numerous in-person and virtual means of public engagement and data collection, including:
• ATP Project Website www.tularesafestreets.com (November 2024 – Present) • Interactive ArcGIS Dashboard to identify collision trends & patterns (November 2024 - Present) • Survey with interactive map-based input (March 2025 – August 2025) • Street Story Report comment review and Integration (October 2018 – July 2025) • Pop-up event at the Community Health Fair (June 4, 2025) • City Council Presentation and Workshop (October 7, 2025) • Public Review Draft Available (March 25, 2026)
As part of the ATP, an existing conditions assessment was conducted. This assessment compiled and organized information on multi-modal travel volumes, collision data, City development standards and regulations, and relevant policy documents, reports, and studies. This information was used to identify bicycle and pedestrian high injury corridors, gaps in the existing bicycle network, and gaps in sidewalks.
With this assessment, a list of recommended bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs was developed (as shown on page 76 of the public review draft). The recommended project list will be used to inform and prioritize future bicycle and pedestrian CIP projects, future grant applications, and future active transportation planning efforts.
Item #: 9.1
Public Hearing
FISCAL IMPACT & FUNDING SOURCES
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Individual projects identified within the ATP will be programmed in the future based upon availability of grant funding and upon available funding and capital project programing.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.20.
POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.
LEGAL REVIEW
This item does not require legal review.
PUBLIC NOTICE
A notice of public hearing was published in The Visalia Times Delta on May 21, 2026, which is at least 10 days prior to the public hearing.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
1. Approve with changes
2. Deny
3. Table
ATTACHMENTS
1. Active Transportation Plan – Public Review Draft
2. Resolution
Reviewed/Approved: TG
City of Tulare
Active
Transportation
Plan
December 2025
Active Transportation Plan
2 The City of Tulare would like to express our gratitude to the residents, agencies, and other stackholders who helped shape this Plan. We appreciate your support and commitment to promoting Tulare as a healthy, safe, and vibrant community.
City Council
• Patrick Isherwood, Mayor
• Stephen C. Harrell, Vice Mayor
• Jose Sigala, Council Member
• Terry A. Sayre, Council Member
• Dennis A. Mederos, Council Member
Planning Commissioners
• Shauna Guerrero, Planning Commissioner
• Susan Henard, Planning Commissioner
• Jocelyn Limas, Planning Commissioner
• Charles Miguel, Planning Commissioner
• Sandra Miller, Planning Commissioner
City Staff
• Steven Sopp, Principal Planner
• Mario Anaya, Community Department Director
• Michael Miller, City Engineer
• Jan Bowen, Senior Civil Engineer
TJKM Transportation Consultants
• Ruta Jariwala, Vice President
• Rutvij Patel, Senior Project Manager
• Manual Montero, Transportation Engineer
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Active Transportation Plan
3 By signing and stamping this Active Transportation Plan (ATP), I am attesting to this report’s technical information and engineering data upon which local agency’s recommendations, conclusions and decisions are made.
Prepared by:
December XX, 2025.
Ruta Jariwala, PE, TE
Professional Civil Engineer, No. C73840,
Vice President, TJKM Transportation Consultants
ENGINEER’S SEAL AND STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction
Background & Purpose
The Plan Area
Setting
Why an Active Transportation Plan (ATP)?
Tulare at a Glance
Activity Generators
How the Active Transportation Plan was Developed
2. Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment
Street Network
Transit Access
Bicycling Conditions
Walking Conditions
Collision Analysis
High Injury Network
Transportation Equity
3. Community Engagement
4. Vision And Goals
Vision Statement
Goals and Objectives
Performance Measures
5. Project and Program Recommendation
Project Prioritization
Bicycle Projects and Recommendations
Pedestrian Infrastructure Recommendations
6. Implementation and Funding
Potenrial Funding Sources
Maintenance
References
Appendix A: Goals and Policies of Existing Planning Efforts Appendix B: List of Capital Improvement Projects
Appendix C: Collision Data Set (2019-2023)
Appendix D: Transportation Equity Collision Data Set (2019-2023) Appendix E: Interactive Map Input Data and Pop-Up Event Data set Appendix F: Bicycle Safety Recommendations & Cost Estimates
APPENDICES
Active Transportation Plan
4 LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES
Regional Location of Tulare within San Joaquin Valley.............................................................. 8 Key trip generation locations .............................................................................................................10 2035 General Plan Land Use ..............................................................................................................13 Street Network Classification............................................................................................................20 Existing Public Transit Routes and Stops.......................................................................................21 Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities...........................................................................................22 Existing Bicycle Facilities .....................................................................................................................23 Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) on Collectors and Arterial Roadways ......................................27 Walk-to-work Data.................................................................................................................................28 Existing and Proposed Sidewalk Facilities ....................................................................................29 All Injury Collisions on City Streets .................................................................................................32 KSI Collisions on City Streets.............................................................................................................32 Pedestrian Collisions on City Streets..............................................................................................34 Bicycle Collisions on City Streets .....................................................................................................38 All Injury Collisions on State Routes ...............................................................................................42 KSI Collisions on State Routes...........................................................................................................42 Pedestrian Collisions on State Routes............................................................................................44 Bicycle Collisions on State Routes ...................................................................................................48 High Injury Corridors based on Pedestrian Collisions .............................................................51 High Injury Corriodrs based on Bicycle Collisions.....................................................................52 Priority Census Tracts identified as Equitable Areas................................................................59 Injury Collisions Priority Census Tracts identified as Equitable Areas..............................63 Proposed Bikeways ................................................................................................................................78 Crosswalk Improvements (High-Visibility Crosswalks & RRFBs)........................................82 Signal Improvements ............................................................................................................................84 Corridor Safety Improvements..........................................................................................................86 Sidewalk Gap Closures..........................................................................................................................88 Pedestrian Safety Lighting...................................................................................................................90 TCRTA Transit Routes............................................................................................................................21 Bicycle Network Facilities ...................................................................................................................22 Pedestrian Network Facilities............................................................................................................28 Collisions by Severity - City Streets (2019-2023)......................................................................31 Collisions by Severity - State Routes (2019-2023)....................................................................41 High Injury Corridors based on Pedestrian Collisions (2019-2023)..................................51 High Injury Corridors based on Bicycle Collisions (2019-2023)..........................................52 ATP’s ranking-based criteria...............................................................................................................56 Summary of Key Factors ......................................................................................................................57 Census Tract in Equitable Areas in Tulare.....................................................................................58 Key Differences: Equitable vs. Non-Equitable Areas ...............................................................58 Distribution Population, Area and Ratio........................................................................................59 Collisions with the Non-Equitable areas in Tulare (2019-2023)..........................................60 Collisions within the Equitable areas in Tulare (2019-2023)................................................61 Summary Table: Street Story Reports- Tulare (1-mile Radius) .............................................71 Type of Transportation..........................................................................................................................72 Travel Mode and Report Type ............................................................................................................73 Reported by Cause .................................................................................................................................73 Reported by Improvement Suggestions.........................................................................................73 Performance Measures ........................................................................................................................76 Project Prioritization Phase................................................................................................................77 Propsoed Bicycle Projects by Type of Facility .............................................................................78 Proposed Bicycle Facility Improvements ......................................................................................79 Crosswalk Improvements (High-Visibility Crosswalks & RRFBs)........................................81 Signal Improvements ............................................................................................................................83 Corridor Safety Improvements..........................................................................................................85 Sidewalk Gap Closures..........................................................................................................................87 Pedestrian Safety Lighting...................................................................................................................89 Trail Crossing Enhancements .............................................................................................................91 Citywide Pedestrian Safety Improvements .................................................................................91 Active Transportation Plan
5 HOW TO NAVIGATE THE PLAN
Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter outlines the plan’s purpose, goals, and context. It emphasizes the City’s commitment to improving walking and biking conditions and promoting equity, safety, and connectivity across neighborhoods. The chapter also introduces the plan’s need and alignment with regional and state goals. It highlights Tulare’s demographics, transportation trends, and key destinations to guide future active transportation investments.
Chapter 2: Community Needs Assessment
This provides an overview of the community’s input and feedback regarding walking and biking conditions in Tulare. It identifies barriers such as missing sidewalks, unsafe crossings, lack of bike infrastructure, driver behavior, and speeding concerns. The chapter highlights engagement activities like surveys and outreach events, which helped identify priority areas for improvement.
The findings reflect a strong community desire for safer, more connected, and accessible active transportation networks, particularly near schools, parks, and major destinations.
Chapter 3: Vision and Goals
This chapter outlines the City’s comprehensive vision for a safer, more connected, and inclusive active transportation network. The vision emphasizes a future where people of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds can comfortably and safely walk, bike, roll, or use mobility devices throughout Tulare. The chapter presents eight strategic goals, from improving safety and connectivity to promoting equity, environmental sustainability, education, and effective project implementation. Each goal is supported by specific objectives and strategies, alongside performance measures to track progress over time. This visioning framework guides the plan’s direction and ensures alignment with community aspirations and long-term transportation goals.
Chapter 4: Project and Program Recommendations
This chapter presents a comprehensive set of bicycle and pedestrian project recommendations based on community needs, collision data, and existing plans. It proposes 17 bicycle and 38 pedestrian projects to create a safer and more accessible active transportation network. Bicycle improvements include a mix of Class I–IV facilities to enhance connectivity and safety across Tulare. Pedestrian improvements focus on sidewalk infill, high-visibility crosswalks, ADA upgrades, and lighting enhancements, particularly near schools and high-injury corridors. It also proposes eight citywide pedestrian safety improvements, which includes sidewalk gap closure, pedestrian lighting program, high visibility crosswalks etc. The chapter also includes a detailed prioritization strategy to phase projects based on impact, feasibility, and funding alignment, categorized into near-term, mid-term, and long-term timelines. This strategic framework supports a well-connected, equitable, and safe active transportation environment for all users.
Chapter 5: Implementation and Funding
This chapter outlines the City’s approach to implementing bicycle and pedestrian improvements over time. It emphasizes a phased strategy focused initially on high-impact, near-term projects, guided by community input and available funding. The chapter details various federal, state, regional, and local funding sources the City can pursue, including ATP, CMAQ, HSIP, and others. It also highlights opportunities for leveraging partnerships with regional agencies like TCAG. Additionally, the chapter stresses the importance of regular maintenance to ensure active transportation facilities remain safe and accessible, and calls for developing a dedicated maintenance plan for long-term sustainability.
Active Transportation Plan
6 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
BACKGROUND & PURPOSE
Active transportation including walking, biking, and rolling is a vital component of a safe, healthy, and connected community. In alignment with the City of Tulare’s long-term goals for livability and sustainability, the City developed this Active Transportation Plan (ATP) to create a more comprehensive and integrated network for non-motorized travel.
The ATP evaluates existing pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, identifies gaps and opportunities, and proposes strategies to improve connectivity, safety, and accessibility. The plan is guided by strategic analysis, community input, contemporary design standards and innovations to ensure that recommendations reflect both local priorities and best practices at the state and national levels.
This ATP serves as a foundational document to inform infrastructure investments and policy decisions. It supports future updates to the City’s General Plan and Circulation Element, and positions Tulare to pursue state and federal funding by demonstrating a clear, coordinated approach to active transportation planning.
Key objectives of the ATP include:
• Developing a citywide active transportation network that connects residential neighborhoods with schools, employment centers, parks, commercial areas, and transit facilities.
• Evaluating opportunities to enhance walking and biking along existing corridors, such as canals and utility easements. • Recommending updates to the City policies, design standards, and regulations to ensure safe, convenient, and inclusive travel options for all users.
1. INTRODUCTION 01
Active Transportation Plan
7 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
THE PLAN AREA
The City of Tulare is located in the Central San Joaquin Valley of California, approximately eight miles south of Visalia and 60 miles north of Bakersfield, along State Route 99. Tulare was established in 1872 by the Southern Pacific Railroad as the company’s San Joaquin Valley headquarters.
Today, Tulare encompasses approximately 20.4 square miles (13,050 acres), and population of 71,092 in Tulare and features a diverse and growing urban environment. Land uses within the City include vibrant commercial corridors, single-family and multifamily housing, schools, public institutions, medical facilities, parks, and areas of ongoing development. The ATP addresses the needs of this evolving landscape by identifying strategies that improve active transportation options for residents, workers, and visitors throughout Tulare. The map on right represents the regional location of Tulare within San Joaquin Valley.
Source: California County Offices – Tulare County
SETTING
Tulare is a growing City in California’s Central Valley, characterized by a mix of residential neighborhoods, agricultural lands, commercial corridors, and industrial zones. Its flat terrain, compact urban footprint, and moderate climate provide an ideal foundation for walking and biking as a practical and convenient mode of transportation.
The City includes both well-established neighborhoods and areas planned for future growth, offering opportunities and challenges in building a cohesive and connected active transportation network. Tulare’s land use patterns are shaped by its agricultural heritage, with major employment centers, schools, parks, and retail destinations distributed throughout the City.
The presence of regional highways, freight routes, and arterial corridors significantly influences travel patterns and underscores the importance of safe and efficient active transportation infrastructure. As the City evolves, improving first- and last-mile connections will be critical to increasing mobility choices and reducing reliance on personal vehicles.
Demographically, Tulare has a large population of school-aged children, youth, and working families. This highlights the need for equitable access to safe walking and biking routes, especially to schools, parks, and transit. Combined with a rising demand for affordable, healthy travel options, these characteristics make Tulare an ideal candidate for a robust, citywide ATP that supports the needs of all users.
Source: Caltrans Socioeconomic Forecasts – Tulare County (2022) Tulare
Kern
Inyo
Fresno
Kings
Madera
Tulare
Woodlake
Visalia
Dinuba
Fresno
Clovis
Lindsay
Porterville
Delano
Bakerfield
Regional Location of Tulare within San Joaquin Valley
Active Transportation Plan
8 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
WHY AN ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN (ATP)?
The ATP provides a coordinated strategy to enhance walking and bicycling throughout Tulare. As the City continues to grow, there is a growing need to create a safe, connected, and accessible transportation network for people of all ages and abilities. This plan supports Tulare’s goals of promoting healthy lifestyles, improving safety, enhancing connectivity, and advancing transportation equity. It builds on local and previous planning efforts to reduce collisions, improve access to parks and schools, and ensure that future development incorporates walking and biking infrastructure. The plan also positions Tulare to pursue grant funding and align with the following state and federal active transportation policies:
1. To promote walking and bicycling, accessible transportation options for all:
Encouraging active modes of travel supports healthier lifestyles and reduces reliance on cars for short trips and half/quarter miles trips.
2. To improve safety and reduce collisions involving pedestrians and bicyclists:
The plan prioritizes safer infrastructure, education, and policy strategies to eliminate severe and fatal collisions.
3. To close gaps in the walking and biking network and enhance citywide connectivity:
A connected network makes it easier and more convenient for people to travel across Tulare without a vehicle.
4. To support healthy lifestyles by making walking and biking to parks, schools, and other destinations easier:
Safe and inviting routes to everyday places encourage physical activity and improve community well-being.
5. To prioritize investments in underserved and disadvantaged communities:
The plan addresses historic inequities by ensuring all neighborhoods can access safe active transportation options.
6. To provide accessible infrastructure for people of all ages and abilities:
Design strategies will consider children, older adults, and people with disabilities to ensure an inclusive transportation system.
7. To reduce vehicle trips and emissions through sustainable transportation options:
Walking and biking help lower greenhouse gas emissions and support climate and air quality goals.
8. To coordinate implementation efforts and pursue funding for infrastructure and programs:
The plan positions the City to apply for state and federal grants and ensures projects are strategically phased and supported.
Active Transportation Plan
9 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
TULARE AT A GLANCE
Key Destinations Review
Key destinations within Tulare were reviewed to identify facilities, wayfinding, and other policies that can promote and support active transportation travel. This review will inform project selection by identifying where “low-hanging fruit” projects may be implemented around nodes of activity that will have a greater impact on improving active transportation within Tulare.
The map on right represents the key trip generation locations identified within Tulare. The graphic below represents socio-economic characteristics within Tulare.
Sources:
U.S. Census Bureau (2023). American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.
Tulare City Profile
Tulare, California-Quick Census Facts
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
U.S. Census Bureau-CensusReporter
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
î
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
![
v® ²¸
v®
v®
v
v®
v
v
![
·[
![ Community Center
Educational Institutes
v® Health Sevices/Medical Centers
[· Airport
; City Hall
n{ Library
I2 Transit and Mobility Centers ²¸ Museum
Religious Institutes
I
n{
;
î
î
2 Key trip generation locations
Population and People Education Attainment
Income
Income
Employment
Poverty
Population
People
Household
Age
Total Population High School Grad or Higher
Median Household Income
Per Capita Income
Unemployment Rate
Persons below poverty line
People per square mile
Male : Female
People per household
Median Age
71,092 81.2%
$77,286
$27,418
6.6%
16.9%
3,438
50 : 50
3.4 29.1
Active Transportation Plan
10 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
Commute Patterns
Tulare residents spend an average of 22.4 minutes commuting to work, significantly less than the California state average of around 30 minutes.
According to the LEHD (Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics) Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (LODES), about 8,000 residents live and work within Tulare, while approximately 12,000 commute to jobs outside the City, primarily to nearby employment centers such as Visalia and Fresno. This commute pattern explains the 22.4-minute mean travel time to work for Tulare residents.
Additionally, nearly 10,000 individuals commute into Tulare for work, highlighting the City’s dual role as a residential community and a regional employment hub. Based on the 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, approximately 60 percent of households in Tulare own two or more vehicles, 30 percent own one vehicle, and about 10 percent do not have access to a vehicle. This vehicle ownership distribution underscores the community’s significant reliance on personal automobiles for daily transportation.
The graphic below provides a snapshot of commuting patterns in and around Tulare.
Community Commute Patterns
Sources:
U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, LEHD (2023) U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (2023) Census Reporter – Tulare, CA
FRED – Mean Travel Time to Work
Transportation Mode Share
Of the households surveyed in 2023, most households in Tulare have access to one or more vehicles. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community Survey, Tulare has 27,524 workers. The mode split for workers’ commute trips is shown below:
• Car, truck, or van- drive alone: 83%
• Car, truck, or van-carpooled: 10%
• Public transportation (excluding taxicab): 0.5%
• Taxicab, motorcycle, bicycle, or other means: ~1% combined • Worked from home: 5.5%
• Walked: 0.7%
A large majority, 83 percent, of workers in Tulare drive alone to work, with another 10 percent participating in carpools. Public transportation is used by only 0.5 percent of commuters, and fewer than one percent rely on taxis, motorcycles, bicycles, or other means of travel. Walking to work accounts for just under one percent, while approximately 5.5 percent of the workforce telecommutes. These commuting patterns reflect the City’s high reliance on personal vehicles and limited use of sustainable transportation options. This data underscores the need to expand transit access, enhance pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and promote flexible work arrangements. Strategic investment in multimodal transportation can reduce car dependency, support environmental sustainability, and improve mobility and quality of life for all residents.
The chart below illustrates the transportation mode share split within Tulare.
Transportation Mode Split
83%
Car, Truck or Van - Drive Alone
10%
Car, Truck or Van - Carpooled
5.5%
Working from Home
0.7%
Walked
0.5%
Public Transportation (Excluding Taxicab)
0.3%
Taxicab, Motorcycle, Bicycle or Other Means
Source: U.S. Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801: “Commuting Characteristics by Sex.
Active Transportation Plan
11 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
ACTIVITY GENERATORS
Tulare includes several destinations that serve as key generators of pedestrian and bicycle activity or have the potential to attract increased walking and biking. These activity generators are critical to understanding current travel patterns and prioritizing improvements to the active transportation network. The distribution of these locations also highlights the importance of developing safe, convenient, and connected routes for all users. • Downtown Tulare
Downtown is a central hub for civic, cultural, and mobility-related activities. It includes City Hall, the main library, transit and mobility centers, and the local museum (Tulare Historical Museum, Tulare County Museum, etc.). The dense street grid and concentration of services make this area a prime location for walking and biking. • Schools and Educational Institutions
Numerous schools are dispersed across the City, with clusters in the north and central regions. These include elementary, middle, and high schools, generating high levels of pedestrian and bicycle traffic during school commute hours. • Parks and Recreational Facilities
Green spaces that provide recreational opportunities for residents of all ages are distributed throughout the City.
These include neighborhood parks, open spaces, and community centers. Enhancing walking and biking access to these areas supports public health and promotes active lifestyles. • Health Services and Medical Centers
Several hospitals and clinics are located near central and western Tulare. These facilities (Adventist Health Tulare, Kaweah Health Tulare Clinic, Family HealthCare Network Clinic, Altura Community Health Center, etc.) serve residents citywide and generate regular and emergency trips, highlighting the need for accessible and direct active transportation routes.
• Retail Areas and Major Employers
Key commercial corridors and employment centers are located near Downtown and along major arterial routes (Mooney Boulevard, Prosperity Avenue, Cherry Street, Bardsley Avenue, Tulare Avenue, Cross Avenue, and Inyo Avenue). These areas attract a mix of commuter and shopping trips. Improving bicycle and pedestrian access to these areas can reduce vehicle dependency and enhance economic vitality. • Airport and Regional Connectors
The municipal airport and surrounding industrial zones in the southern part of Tulare serve as employment generators and regional access points. While less walkable, these areas may benefit from improved multimodal connections to nearby transit or residential zones.
Active Transportation Plan
12 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
Tulare’s existing land use map reveals a diverse mix of land uses concentrated within the City limits. The predominant land use is residential, particularly single-family residential (yellow), which is widely distributed throughout the City. Commercial and retail commercial areas (red and dark red) are clustered along major corridors such as J Street, M Street, and Tulare Avenue, forming the City’s commercial spine. Industrial zones (purple) are primarily located along the southern and central areas near the railroad and highway corridors. Office and public/quasi-public uses (blue and gray) are scattered across Tulare, often adjacent to residential zones and commercial centers. Parks and open spaces (green) are limited but strategically placed within neighborhoods. The map also shows mobile home areas (orange) and agricultural (light green) pockets on the City’s outskirts, reflecting Tulare’s rural heritage. This land use pattern supports a mix of housing, employment, and commercial opportunities while highlighting the importance of transportation corridors in shaping development.
The map on right represents the existing land use identified within Tulare.
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
D-MDR
Mobilehome
Residential
Agriculture
Commercial
Retail Commercial
Industrial
Single Family Residential
Multiple Family Residential
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
Office
Public/Quasi Public
Vacant
2035 General Plan Land Use
Active Transportation Plan
13 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
HOW THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN WAS
DEVELOPED
The ATP was developed by building on existing City and regional plans, studies, and infrastructure projects. This included reviewing current transportation, safety, and land use plans to ensure alignment with local goals and priorities. Planners assessed recent and ongoing projects, such as sidewalk improvements, bike lane installations, and traffic calming measures, to identify gaps, opportunities, and areas for integration. By coordinating with current efforts, the ATP ensures that recommendations are realistic, complementary, and supportive of broader mobility, equity, safety, and sustainability objectives.
This section summarizes the planning documents, ongoing projects, and relevant studies reviewed supporting the ATP. This ensures that the vision, goals, and strategies outlined in the ATP align with the City’s prior planning efforts, transportation projects, and non-infrastructure programs and those of the County. By aligning with these guiding documents and strategies, the ATP will deliver a cohesive and actionable framework that enhances safety, promotes equitable transportation solutions, and supports the City’s development vision.
The Active Transportation Plan’s (ATP) key strategies are guided by the “Six E’s” framework: Engineering, Encouragement, Education, Enforcement, Equity, and Evaluation. These components comprehensively address active transportation safety and accessibility while aligning with the City, County, and region’s broader long-term planning objectives.
The following documents and resources were reviewed:
• City of Tulare:
1. City of Tulare 2023-2031 Housing Element | (2023-2031)
2. City of Tulare Capital Improvement Program | (FY 2023/2024 thru 2027/2028)
3. City of Tulare Local Roadway Safety Plan | (2022)
4. City of Tulare Design Guidelines and Public Improvements Standards | (2016)
5. Tulare General Plan | Transportation Element (2014)
6. Tulare Transit-Oriented Development Plan | (2012)
7. City of Tulare Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Master Plan | (2005) • Tulare County:
1. Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2023-2031 | (2024
2. County of Tulare Local Roadway Safety Plan | (2022)
3. 2010 Tulare County Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan | (2010) Appendix A includes a detailed table of goals and policies from each of the aforementioned plans that is relevant to the ATP.
Appendix B includes a list of projects that have been included for funding in these plans. This will help inform the development of the ATP and ensure that it is well aligned with City and regional goals.
Active Transportation Plan
14 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
The Housing Element of the City of Tulare
aligns with the proposed Active Transportation Plan (ATP) by emphasizing the development of housing that supports
proximity to transit, jobs, and services.
The Housing Plan programs prioritize
housing opportunities near community
resources and transit infrastructure, promoting accessibility and reducing reliance on private vehicles. The integration of affordable housing near public transit
nodes and areas with existing infrastructure directly complements the ATP’s goals of enhancing multimodal connectivity and supporting sustainable transportation options. This alignment ensures that housing and transportation planning efforts work cohesively to improve accessibility, equity, and quality of life for Tulare residents.
The City of Tulare’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Fiscal Years 2023/2024 through 2027/2028 aligns
with the goals of the proposed Active
Transportation Plan by prioritizing
projects that enhance transportation
infrastructure, pedestrian safety, and
connectivity. The CIP emphasizes the
importance of comprehensive planning
and project management to address
community needs, focusing on improving
streets, sidewalks, and other transportation-related facilities. This alignment ensures that the City’s investments support the creation of a more accessible and pedestrian-friendly environment, fostering safer and more efficient active transportation options for residents and visitors.
The Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) for
the City of Tulare strongly aligns with the
goals of the Active Transportation Plan
(ATP) by prioritizing enhanced safety
for vulnerable road users and fostering
multi-modal transportation options. The
LRSP identifies critical emphasis areas,
such as pedestrian safety, intersection
improvements, and speeding reduction,
which are vital to achieving equitable
mobility and reducing traffic fatalities.
It incorporates strategies like upgrading
crosswalks, implementing protected pedestrian phases, and introducing traffic calming measures in high-collision zones. These measures echo the ATP’s objectives of creating safe, accessible, and well-connected infrastructure for pedestrians and bicyclists. Additionally, the LRSP’s reliance on data-driven analysis and public feedback ensures that its goals resonate with community needs and support the ATP’s vision for inclusive and active transportation systems in Tulare.
City of Tulare Local Roadway Safety Plan | (2022) City of Tulare Capital Improvement Program (FY 2023/2024 Thru 2027/2028) City of Tulare 2023-2031 Housing Element | (2023-2031) City of Tulare
Active Transportation Plan
15 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
The City of Tulare Design Guidelines and
Public Improvements Standards emphasize principles that directly align with the goals of the Active Transportation Plan
by fostering safe, accessible, and sustainable infrastructure. The Design Guidelines and Public Improvement Standards prioritize the development of sidewalks,
bike paths, and ADA-compliant curb
ramps to improve walkability and connectivity. They also mandate features such as pedestrian-friendly crosswalks, traffic
calming measures, and adequate lighting to enhance safety for non-motorized users. Furthermore, provisions for storm water management and landscaping improve environmental sustainability and comfort along transportation corridors. By integrating these principles, the Guidelines and Public Improvement Standards align with the Active Transportation Plan’s focus on creating equitable, multi-modal networks that encourage active modes of transportation, reduce reliance on cars, and ensure safety for all users.
The Tulare Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Plan aligns closely with the goals of the proposed Active Transportation Plan in their shared vision of enhancing mobility, safety, and sustainability by prioritizing non-motorized transportation and transit access. The Plan aims to create vibrant, walkable neighborhoods
centered around transit hubs, promoting
sustainability and reducing reliance on
automobiles. It focuses on higher-density, mixed-use developments near key areas like the Tulare Transit Center and
the College of the Sequoias (COS) North area, integrating housing, retail, and public spaces to enhance accessibility and community vitality. The plan emphasizes pedestrian and bicycle safety through streetscape enhancements, such as shaded sidewalks and dedicated bike paths, within a ¼-mile radius of transit stops. By improving connectivity and fostering transit-friendly land use, the TOD Plan seeks to support a multimodal transportation network while encouraging sustainable growth and economic development in the City of Tulare.
The Transportation Element of the City
of Tulare’s General Plan aligns closely
with the goals of the proposed Active
Transportation Plan (ATP) by emphasizing the development of a multimodal transportation system. The General Plan prioritizes compact and efficient
development patterns, promoting walking, biking, and public transit while supporting transit-oriented and mixed-use developments. It also aims to enhance
connectivity and accessibility for all users, including pedestrians and bicyclists, through the integration of Complete Streets principles. These policies complement the ATP’s objectives of improving safety, equity, and sustainability in active transportation infrastructure while fostering community health and reducing dependence on private vehicles. Together, these plans create a cohesive framework for advancing a connected and sustainable transportation network in Tulare.
City of Tulare Design Guidelines and Public
Improvements Standards | (2016) Tulare General Plan | Transportation Element (2014) Tulare Transit-Oriented Development Plan | (2012) City of Tulare
Active Transportation Plan
16 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
The City of Tulare Pedestrian and Bicycle
Trail Master Plan outlines a framework
for developing a cohesive network of
pedestrian and bicycle facilities that encourage active transportation and promote healthier lifestyles. By prioritizing the construction of multi-use paths, bike
lanes, and accessible sidewalks, the plan
seeks to improve connectivity between
neighborhoods, schools, parks, and employment centers. It incorporates strategies to enhance safety, accessibility, and comfort for users of all ages and abilities
while addressing gaps in the existing infrastructure. With its focus on increasing non-motorized transportation options and fostering sustainable mobility, the Master Plan aligns seamlessly with the goals of the Active Transportation Plan by supporting active, equitable, and environmentally friendly transportation choices.
The Tulare County Regional Housing Element aligns with the goals of the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) for the City
of Tulare by prioritizing equitable, safe,
and accessible housing and transportation options. It emphasizes housing developments that are integrated with active transportation networks, including sidewalks, bike paths, and public transit
accessibility, fostering connectivity between housing and essential services.
The plan identifies disparities in access to
opportunities, particularly for disadvantaged communities, and proposes improvements in walkability, transit access, and proximity to employment centers. With a focus on reducing barriers for underserved groups such as low-income households, farmworkers, and persons with disabilities, the Housing Element complements the ATP’s objectives by advocating for sustainable urban planning practices that enhance mobility and promote active, healthy lifestyles for all residents.
The Tulare County Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) primarily focuses on the unincorporated areas of Tulare County,
not specifically the City of Tulare. However, the plan’s strategies and safety projects, such as improving intersection
safety, reducing DUI and hit-object collisions, and enhancing pedestrian and bicyclist safety, will be aligned with the
City of Tulare’s Active Transportation
Plan (ATP). This alignment will ensures
that City-level ATP efforts complement
countywide safety initiatives, creating
a cohesive approach to improving roadway safety across both jurisdictions.
The LRSP emphasizes enhancing pedestrian and cyclist safety, addressing nighttime collisions, and improving intersection designs, core of the ATP’s objectives to promote sustainable and safe multimodal infrastructure. Both plans incorporate data-driven approaches to identify high-risk areas, propose targeted countermeasures, and integrate Complete Streets principles to support active and equitable transportation. By addressing connectivity gaps and ensuring community engagement, the County LRSP complements the City’s ATP’s vision for a safer, more accessible, and resilient countywide transportation network that aligns with the City network.
City of Tulare Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Master Plan | (2005) Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2023-2031 | (2024) County of Tulare Local Roadway Safety Plan | (2022) City of Tulare Tulare County
Active Transportation Plan
17 Chapter 1 - Introduction
Active Transportation Plan
The Tulare County Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan specifically includes the City of Tulare as part of its comprehensive strategy. The plan was developed to serve all local jurisdictions within Tulare County, including
the cities of Dinuba, Exeter, Farmersville,
Lindsay, Porterville, Tulare, Visalia, Woodlake, and the County of Tulare itself. The plan integrates these cities’ bicycle planning efforts into a unified regional approach, ensuring compatibility and coordination across different areas. This means that the City of
Tulare is explicitly mentioned and included
in the plan, which facilitates alignment between the county-level bicycle transportation strategy and the City’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP). This alignment helps to create a consistent and interconnected approach to improving bicycle infrastructure and promoting active transportation across both the City and County levels. The Plan emphasizes creating a comprehensive bikeway network that integrates Class I (separated paths), Class II (bike lanes), and Class III (shared routes) facilities, ensuring safe and efficient transportation options for commuters and recreational users alike. It also prioritizes end-oftrip amenities like secure bike parking and connections to transit systems to promote intermodal travel. By incorporating safety programs, such as bicycle education for schools and public outreach campaigns, and leveraging state and federal funding for infrastructure improvements, the Plan supports the ATP’s mission to increase active transportation usage and reduce reliance on motorized vehicles. Together, these efforts foster sustainable mobility, enhance air quality, and improve overall community health and well-being. 2010 Tulare County Regional Bicycle Tranportation Plan
Tulare County
Active Transportation Plan
18 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
An existing conditions assessment was conducted for Tulare, compiling and organizing information on multi-modal travel volumes, collision data, City development standards and regulations, and relevant policy documents, reports, and studies.
STREET NETWORK
The City of Tulare manages about 220 miles of streets, including arterial, collector, and local roads. Arterial streets in Tulare feature include key corridors such as State Routes 99, 63, and 137, along with major thoroughfares like Prosperity Avenue, Bardsley Avenue, Mooney Boulevard, and Inyo Street, which support regional connectivity and handle high traffic volumes. Collector streets link local neighborhoods to these arterials, balancing mobility and access. Meanwhile, local streets make up most of the network and mainly provide access to residential areas.
The City’s Public Works Street Services Division is responsible for the maintenance of a wide range of public infrastructure, including 46 signalized intersections, 379 City-owned streetlights, as well as public parking lots, alleys, sidewalks, ADA-compliant curb ramps, and stormwater infrastructure. This comprehensive network supports mobility and access across the community.
Source: City of Tulare Public Works – Streets Division
Traffic Volumes and Capacities
In urban environments, an excess of vehicle lanes or overly wide roadways can encourage higher driving speeds, often at the expense of safety and comfort for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-motorized users.
As a general planning rule of thumb, a single traffic lane can accommodate approximately 10,000 vehicles per day under typical conditions, assuming that peak-hour volumes comprise six to 10 percent of daily traffic.
2. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND
NEEDS ASSESSMENT 02
Active Transportation Plan
19 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Consequently, a two-lane arterial or collector street, with appropriate turning facilities can typically carry up to 20,000 vehicles per day before approaching capacity limits. In Tulare, several major four-lane corridors currently experience traffic volumes well below their maximum thresholds, which presents opportunities for reconsidering how roadway space is allocated potentially to enhance multimodal safety and efficiency.
Key roadway volume observations in Tulare include:
• Prosperity Avenue, a primary east-west arterial, carries between 16,000 to 18,000 vehicles (four-lane arterial roadway (two lanes in each direction)) per day, depending on the segment well within the capacity of a four-lane street. • Mooney Boulevard (SR 63), sees volumes of approximately 18,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day, with slight increases near major intersections and commercial destinations.
• Bardsley Avenue and Inyo Avenue (partial SR 137), both important connectors, typically carry fewer than 15,000 vehicles (two-lane roadway (one lane each direction)) daily, suggesting excess capacity. • State Route 99, a Caltrans-managed regional highway along the eastern edge of the City, serves over 50,000 vehicles per day (AADT) (six-lane freeway - three lanes in each direction separated by a median) and is designed for highspeed, high-volume regional travel.
These traffic patterns suggest strategic opportunities for roadway reconfiguration such as lane reductions, road diets, or enhanced multimodal facilities to improve safety, support active transportation, and better align street design with current and projected usage levels. The map on right illustrates Tulare’s existing street network and its roadway classifications.
Source: City of Tulare Traffic Volume Data
TRANSIT ACCESS
Public transit services in Tulare are provided by the Tulare County Regional Transit Agency (TCRTA). The City is served by a network of fixed-route bus lines that operate both within the City and throughout the surrounding region. Local bus routes designated numerically (e.g., Routes 10, 20, 30, 40) offer comprehensive north–south and east–west coverage, connecting residential neighborhoods, schools, parks, downtown destinations, and major commercial corridors.
Most local routes operate Monday through Saturday, with scheduled stops at key community locations and timed connections to regional services. This ensures reliable access for a wide range of users, including students, seniors, commuters, and individuals without access to private vehicles.
In addition to the local routes, intercity transit lines provide valuable regional connections:
• The 11X commuter express route offers longer-distance travel options for Tulare residents. • Intercity services connect Tulare to nearby communities such as Dinuba and Porterville, expanding access to employment, education, healthcare, and shopping destinations across the region. • These routes also serve smaller rural areas, helping integrate outlying communities into the regional mobility network.
Street Network Classification
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Highway
Expressway
Principal Arterial
Parks
State Highway 99
City of Tulare Limits
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Street
Road (Function Class)
Active Transportation Plan
20 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Bus stops are distributed widely across Tulare, ensuring that most residents live within a short walking distance of transit access points. The map to the right shows the layout of the transit network within the City, and the table below summarizes key transit routes currently in service.
This multimodal network, which blends local fixed-route service with regional and intercity transit options, enhances mobility for Tulare residents and strengthens the City’s connectivity within the broader Tulare County transportation system.
Source: City of Tulare Transit Services
Existing Public Transit Routes and Stops
Route Description Direction Route
Type Key Destinations / Notes
10 Main Tulare Route North–South Local Connects north/south neighborhoods 11X Tulare to Visalia Commuter
Express North–South Express Limited stops; commuter service 20 Secondary Local Route North–South Local Runs parallel to Route 10 30 East–West Connector East–West Local Serves the eastern/western edges of the City
40 Additional City Circulator North–South Local Supports main corridors 50–90 Intercity Regional Routes Various Regional Includes Dinuba (brown) and Porterville (orange) routes
Dinuba Route Connects Tulare and Dinuba Intercity Regional Runs north into Dinuba Porterville Route Connects Tulare and
Porterville Intercity Regional Runs southeast into Porterville TCRTA Transit Routes
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
TCRTA Routes
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
11X
TCRTA Stops
20 NB & SB
40 NB & SB
Tulare Routes
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
W
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
TCRTA Routes
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
11X
TCRTA Stops
20 NB & SB
40 NB & SB
Tulare Routes
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
W
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
Active Transportation Plan
21 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
BICYCLING CONDITIONS
The City of Tulare maintains approximately 25.14 miles of bikeway facilities, comprised primarily of Class II on-street bike lanes and a limited number of Class I shared-use paths. These facilities serve key travel corridors and provide critical connections to schools, parks, and residential neighborhoods.
While the existing system offers a foundation for active transportation, network gaps and limited north–south connectivity restrict seamless and comfortable bicycle access, particularly to employment centers, commercial areas, and key transit stops.
Major Corridors & Composition
Tulare’s bikeway network includes the following facility types:
• Class I – Shared-Use Paths: These off-street paths provide dedicated space for bicyclists and pedestrians. Notable segments include the Mooney Boulevard trail and portions of the Santa Fe Trail, offering recreational and commuter routes with limited vehicle interaction.
• Class II – Bike Lanes: Standard striped lanes for exclusive bicycle use, found along Tulare Avenue, Bardsley Avenue, and Cherry Street, providing direct east–west access through central neighborhoods. • Class III – Bike Routes: Signed shared-roadway routes designated on lower-stress streets such as Cross Avenue, M Street, and San Joaquin Avenue, where bicyclists and vehicles share the road. • Class IV – Protected Bikeways: While not currently part of the network, Class IV facilities may be considered in future projects to enhance safety and comfort.
The map on right illustrates the existing and planned bicycle facilities throughout Tulare, highlighting areas where connectivity improvements are needed to support a safe, comfortable, and cohesive citywide network.
Existing and Planned Bicycle Network
The table below summarizes the current and planned mileage for each facility type, based on GIS data and the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP):
Type Existing (Miles) Planned (Miles) Total (Miles)
Class I - Bike Paths 7.91 43.76 51.67
Class II - Bike Lanes 17.16 37.72 54.88
Class III - Bike Routes 0.06 11.08 11.14
Total 25.14 92.56 117.70
Bicycle Network Facilities
Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
Existing Bicycle Facilities Planned Bicycle Facilities
Existing Class I
Existing Class II
Planned Class I
Planned Class II
Existing Class III Planned Class III
*Note: “Planned” includes proposed projects from the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
Source: GIS data provided by the City of Tulare.
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
TCRTA Routes
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
11X
TCRTA Stops
20 NB & SB
40 NB & SB
Tulare Routes
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
W
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
Active Transportation Plan
22 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Tulare’s current bicycle infrastructure network spans approximately 25.14 miles and includes a mix of bike lanes, bike routes, and shared-use paths. Over half of the existing facilities consist of bike lanes concentrated along major corridors such as Tulare Avenue, Cherry Street, and Bardsley Avenue, providing direct access through central and residential parts of the city. Bike routes are designated along streets such as Cross Avenue, M Street, and San Joaquin Avenue, offering lower-stress alternatives for bicyclists. Additionally, shared-use paths along Mooney Boulevard and the Santa Fe Trail support recreational and commuting travel.
The existing network emphasizes east-west connectivity, while north-south access remains limited, with only a few dedicated bikeways such as those on M Street and Mooney Boulevard. Tulare’s network includes standard bike lanes (Class II), protected bike lanes, bike routes (Class III), and shared-use paths. These facilities are mapped across the City, with key corridors utilizing different bikeway types.
The map on right represents existing bicycle facilities within Tulare.
Summary of Barriers to Bicycling
Despite a growing bikeway network, several key barriers limit safe, comfortable, and connected bicycling in Tulare under current conditions. These gaps hinder the system’s effectiveness, particularly for utilitarian trips such as commuting to work, accessing schools, or reaching key destinations.
Key barriers include:
• Limited North–South Connectivity
The existing bikeway system primarily serves east–west travel via corridors like Tulare Avenue, Cross Avenue, and Bardsley Avenue. However, north–south corridors such as Blackstone Street, Laspina Street, and M Street suffer from gaps or reliance on low-comfort Class III routes, restricting access between neighborhoods, employment centers, and key destinations. • Discontinuities in Existing Bike Lanes
Class II bike lanes along critical streets, such as Mooney Boulevard, Inyo Avenue, and Paige Avenue, contain frequent gaps or inconsistent segments, forcing bicyclists to merge with vehicle traffic. These discontinuities reduce comfort and safety, particularly for less experienced riders.
• Few Class I (Off-Street) Facilities Within the Urban Core While planned Class I paths (e.g., along Morrison Street and in southern areas) will enhance future access, existing off-street trails are minimal within the urban core. This lack of low-stress, recreational, and family-friendly bicycling options limits broader use.
Existing Bicycle Facilities
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
Existing Class I
Existing Class II
Existing Class III
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Active Transportation Plan
23 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
• Limited Access to Industrial and Commercial Zones
Streets such as Industrial Place, Laspina Street, and parts of Paige Avenue serve key employment and freight areas, yet lack continuous or protected bicycle facilities, posing barriers for bicycle commuting and last-mile connectivity. • Inconsistent Access to Parks and Schools
While some park and school sites are accessible via bikeways, many, particularly in the southeastern and southwestern portions of the City, remain disconnected from the core network. This limits safe access for youth and recreational riders.
• Gaps in the Bicycle Network
Several critical gaps exist throughout Tulare, including areas where Class II or III facilities do not connect to the broader network. Notably, the southwestern industrial area near Paige Avenue and Industrial Place remains largely disconnected, limiting opportunities for continuous, safe bicycle travel.
Active Transportation Plan
24 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Types of Bicycle Facilities
There are four classifications of bikeway facilities in California as defined by the Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
1. Multi-Use Paths (Class I Bikeways) – a path physically separated from motor vehicle traffic by an open space
or barrier, used by bicyclists, pedestrians, joggers,
skaters, and other non-motorized travelers. Because
the availability of uninterrupted rights-of-way is
limited, this type of facility may be complex to locate and expensive to build relative to different bicycle
and pedestrian facilities, but inexpensive compared
to new roadways. Prime bike path locations include
power-line easements, utility easements, canal banks,
river levees, drainage easements, railroad or highway
rights-of-way, or regional community parks.
2. Bicycle Lanes (Class II Bikeways) are roadway travel lanes set aside by striping and pavement markings
for bicyclists’ preferential or exclusive use. They are intended to promote an orderly flow of bicycle and
motor vehicle traffic. This facility type is established using the appropriate striping, legends, and signs.
3. Bicycle Routes (Class III Bikeways) – bicycle routes designated by signage where bicyclists share travel
lanes with motor vehicle traffic. Bicycle routes must
benefit bicyclists and offer more service than adjacent streets. Class III bikeways are often designated on low-volume local residential streets. Additionally,
many cities have installed an enhanced type of Class
III Bicycle Route called a “Bicycle Boulevard.” Bicycle Boulevards are generally installed on relatively low
volume streets and often include elements to facilitate bicycle travel, such as reorienting stop signs to reduce delays to bicyclists, and/or discouraging use by motorists making through trips, such as through the inclusion of traffic calming measures.
4. Separated Bikeway (Class IV Bikeways) – A Class IV
Bikeway is for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation between the bikeway and adjacent vehicle traffic. The physical separation may include
flexible posts, grade separation, inflexible physical
barriers, or on-street parking. Separated bikeways
generally operate in the same direction as vehicle traffic on the same side of the roadway. However, two-way separation bikeways can also be used, usually in lower
speed environments (35 miles per hour or less).
Multi-Use Paths (Class I Bikeways) Bicycle Lanes (Class II Bikeways) Bicycle Routes (Class III Bikeways) Separated Bikeway (Class IV Bikeways) Active Transportation Plan
25 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
The Bicycle Level of Stress (LTS) is an evaluation that quantifies the discomfort people feel when bicycling near motor vehicle traffic. It assigns a numeric stress level to roadway segments, trails, and intersections based on attributes such as motor vehicle speed, volume, number of lanes, lane blockage, on-street parking, and ease of intersection crossing. The higher the bicycle LTS, the higher the discomfort. Higher LTS implies the possibility of improving bicycle infrastructure to make such bicycle facilities safe and comfortable for all types of users.
The four bicycle LTS ratings as generally perceived from the user perspective:
• LTS 1 Very low traffic stress: Most children feel comfortable bicycling. • LTS 2 Low traffic stress: The mainstream adult population feels comfortable bicycling. • LTS 3 Moderate traffic stress: Bicyclists considered “enthused and confident” but still prefer having their own dedicated space to feel comfortable while bicycling. • LTS 4 High traffic stress: Only “strong and fearless” bicyclists feel comfortable while bicycling on these routes, which have high-speed limits, multiple travel lanes, limited or non-existent bicycle lanes and signage, and large distances to cross at an intersection.
Source: Mekuria, Maaza C.; Furth, Peter G.; and Nixon, Hilary. “Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity.”
Mineta Transportation Institute, Report 11-19, May 2012.
Active Transportation Plan
26 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) on Collectors and Arterial Roadways In the Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) analysis, the focus is often placed specifically on collector and arterial roadways due to their critical role in the transportation network and their greater potential to present safety and comfort challenges for people walking and biking. These roads typically carry higher traffic volumes and operate at greater speeds, which contributes to increased stress levels and collision risks for non-motorized users. Since collectors and arterials serve as primary connectors between neighborhoods, schools, parks, and commercial areas, addressing barriers on these corridors can significantly improve network connectivity and accessibility.
Additionally, these road types are more likely to have infrastructure gaps such as missing sidewalks or inadequate bike lanes and account for a disproportionate share of bicycle and pedestrian collisions. By focusing on these corridors, the LTS analysis helps prioritize safety improvements in areas where they can have the greatest impact, supports alignment with funding programs and policies, and avoids diluting the analysis with lower-stress local streets that generally function well for active transportation.
A Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) analysis was conducted to evaluate the degree of comfort or stress experienced by bicyclists while riding on Tulare’s street network. The analysis considered factors such as vehicle speed, number of lanes, roadway width, and the presence or absence of dedicated bike infrastructure.
The findings indicated that many of Tulare’s major roadways are rated LTS 4, the highest level of traffic stress.
These include:
• Cross Avenue
• Cherry Street
• Blackstone Street
• Bardsley Avenue
• Prosperity Avenue
• Pleasant Avenue
• West Street
• Carmill Avenue
• Pratt Stretts
• J Street
• Laspina Street
• Foster Drive
These corridors often feature higher vehicle volumes and speeds, multiple travel lanes, and limited or no bike infrastructure. In some cases, narrow curbside shoulders, lack of bike lanes, and the presence of on-street parking exacerbate rider discomfort and risk. The map on right represents Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) on collectors and arterials within Tulare.
Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) on Collectors and Arterial Roadways K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
LEGEND ÅÄ99
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
LTS - 3
LTS - 4
Parks
State Highway 99
City of Tulare Limits
Bicycle (LTS)
Active Transportation Plan
27 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Less than 1%
More than 1% (Max 3.6%)
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
A few roadways, such as Cherry Street (south of Prosperity Avenue) and segments of Cross Avenue (west of Blackstone Street), are rated LTS 3, indicating moderately high stress. Even these corridors are generally unsuitable for most bicyclists without dedicated infrastructure or calming measures.
The network-wide prevalence of LTS 4 conditions highlights the need for protected bike lanes, traffic calming, and intersection improvements, particularly on key commuting and school routes. Enhancing comfort and safety on these highstress corridors is critical to encouraging broader bicycle use in Tulare.
WALKING CONDITIONS
Tulare’s sidewalk network provides important pedestrian connections to schools, parks, commercial centers, and community destinations. Most local streets are equipped with standard barrier curbs, offering physical separation between vehicles and pedestrians, enhancing safety by discouraging vehicles from encroaching onto sidewalk space.
However, sidewalk coverage is inconsistent, particularly in older residential areas and along several key arterial corridors.
Based on field observations and existing conditions assessments, sidewalk gaps persist in many areas of the City, such as Mooney Boulevard, Cross Avenue, Blackstone Street, and parts of Laspina Street. These gaps hinder pedestrian mobility and may force individuals to walk along the edge of travel lanes, exposing them to unsafe conditions, especially along arterial roadways with higher speeds and traffic volumes.
Sidewalk coverage is remarkably inconsistent near the downtown core, industrial zones, and in Tulare’s southern and eastern areas, where development patterns are more fragmented. These gaps present barriers for school-aged children walking to nearby campuses, seniors accessing services, and other residents making short local trips.
Most streets in Tulare feature sidewalks with standard barrier curbs that improve pedestrian access to schools, parks, and commercial areas. However, field reviews and planning assessments reveal ongoing gaps in the sidewalk network, particularly in older residential neighborhoods and near arterial corridors. These sidewalk gaps can force some pedestrians into travel lanes, raising safety issues. Moreover, ADA curb ramps are not consistently installed, and many intersections either lack ramps or have inadequate features. The map on right represents walk-to-work data within Tulare.
Pedestrian Network Inventory
The table below summarizes Tulare’s pedestrian and shared-use path infrastructure:
Walk-to-work Data
Type Existing (Miles) Planned (Miles) Total (Miles)
Class I - Bike Paths (Share-Use) 7.91 43.76 51.67
Sidewalks 363.85 93.14 456.99
Pedestrian Network Facilities
(Source: Data received from City of Tulare)
Active Transportation Plan
28 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Summary of Barriers to Walking
Despite the presence of a sidewalk network in much of the City, several barriers limit safe and accessible walking in Tulare, particularly for vulnerable users such as school-aged children, seniors, and transit riders.
Key Barriers Include:
• Gaps in the Sidewalk Network
Several areas, particularly in the western, eastern, and industrial zones, lack continuous sidewalks. Streets such as Paige Avenue, Mooney Boulevard, and Blackstone Street have notable gaps, often forcing pedestrians to walk in or near vehicle lanes.
• Discontinuous Sidewalks Near Schools and Transit Stops In many areas, sidewalks exist on only one side of the street or terminate abruptly near key pedestrian destinations such as schools, parks, or bus stops. This forces pedestrians, especially children and transit users to navigate unpaved shoulders or cross mid-block.
• High Vehicle Speeds on Arterial Corridors
Streets such as Mooney Boulevard, Inyo Avenue, and Bardsley Avenue feature posted or operating speeds of 35 mph or higher, creating unsafe and uncomfortable conditions for pedestrians, particularly where sidewalks are missing or lack buffer zones.
• Limited Signalized Pedestrian Crossings
Long distances between signalized crossings, especially on wide corridors like Tulare Avenue and Mooney Boulevard, discourage safe pedestrian travel and increase the risk of mid-block crossings. • No Sidewalk Access in Industrial or Agricultural Zones In the southern and eastern edges of the City, such as along Industrial Place and segments of Paige Avenue, sidewalks are largely absent. These areas also carry heavy truck traffic, compounding pedestrian safety concerns. • Long Intersection Crossing Distances
Many arterial intersections, particularly those on Tulare Avenue, Cross Avenue, and Cherry Street, have wide curb radii and long pedestrian crossings, increasing exposure to traffic and reducing comfort for youth, seniors, and individuals with disabilities. • Lack of Connectivity in Newer Neighborhoods
In some northern and eastern subdivisions, internal sidewalks are present but are not connected to the broader pedestrian network. This isolates residents from nearby schools, commercial areas, and transit, making walking less practical for daily trips.
The map represents the existing and proposed sidewalk facilities within Tulare.
Existing and Proposed Sidewalk Facilities
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
Existing Sidewalk
Proposed Sidewalk
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
Active Transportation Plan
29 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
COLLISION ANALYSIS
This section summarizes the results of the collision analysis, detailing the total number of injury collisions categorized by type and severity that occurred in Tulare between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2023, and the High injury Network (HIN) as part of Tulare Active Transportation Plan (ATP).
This section primarily focuses on pedestrian and bicycle collisions and overall injury collisions. As with any City or agency, the main objective is to reduce fatalities and severe injuries (KSI), so the analysis emphasizes fatal and severe injury collisions compared to overall injuries, including those categorized as other visible injuries and complaint of pain collisions.
This analysis will help guide recommendations for specific locations. The section begins with a summary of the data analysis results, followed by detailed information on pedestrian and bicycle collisions over the past five years, including year-wise trends. It also presents the HIN for both City streets and State Routes (SR). Collision data for the years 2019- 2023 is under Appendix C.
Methodology
Once the collision data was collected, it was analysed using various tools and techniques to visualize and identify trends across the City. The key components of the analysis include:
• Severity Analysis: Categorizing collisions based on severity (e.g., fatal, severe injury, other visible injury, and complaint of pain). • Temporal Trends: Examining collision patterns by year. • Road User Analysis: Identifying the most vulnerable road users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists, to ensure targeted safety measures. • Contributing Factors Analysis: Determining the trends related to contributing factors like collision type, primary violation factor, lighting conditions, and location to know about real reasons for occurred collisions. • Location Analysis: Mapping collision locations using Geographic Information System (GIS) tools to identify focused corridors.
Active Transportation Plan
30 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Collisions on City Streets
Collisions by Severity
Between 2019 and 2023, the City of Tulare reported 238 collisions on City streets. The chart illustrates the distribution of 238 injury collisions in Tulare based on severity. The majority of collisions, 45 percent, resulted in complaint of pain, followed by 26 percent that involved visible injuries. Collisions classified as fatal or severe injury collisions totaled 69 over the five-year period, representing approximately 29 percent of all reported collisions. Severe injuries accounted for 18 percent, while fatal collisions made up 11 percent. The chart below provides a detailed breakdown of collisions by severity.
Collisions by Severity
The table below provides yearly trends for all injury collisions according to severity on City streets:
Collisions by Mode
The chart below presents the distribution of 238 injury collisions in Tulare by mode of transportation. The majority, 61 percent, involved passenger cars or pickup trucks, followed by pedestrians at 18 percent and motorcycles at 11 percent. Bicycles accounted for seven percent, while trucks and buses represented two percent and one percent, respectively. The percentage of collisions attributed to each mode highlights that while most injury collisions involved passenger vehicles, a notable portion affected vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists.
Collisions by Mode
*Note: Of the 238 total injury collisions on City streets, 44 involved pedestrians, accounting for 18 percent of all injuries, while 17 involved bicycles, accounting for seven percent.
The map on next page shows all injury collisions and KSI collisions on City streets in Tulare between 2019 and 2023.
Year Fatal Severe Injury Other Visible
Injury
Complaint of
Pain KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
2019 6 11 16 28 17 61
2020 3 9 11 21 12 44
2021 3 6 14 20 9 43
2022 7 7 6 24 14 44
2023 6 11 14 15 17 46
Total 25 44 61 108 69 238
45%
Complaint of Pain
(108 Collisions)
11%
Fatal
(25 Collisions)
18%
Severe Injury
(44 Collisions)
26%
Other Visible Injury
(61 Collisions)
Collisions by Severity - City Streets (2019-2023)
61%
Passenger Car or
Pickup Truck
(144 Collisions)
11%
Motorcycle (26 Collisions)
18%
Pedestrian (44 Collisions)
7%
Bicycle (17 Collisions)
2%
Trucks (5 Collisions)
1%
Bus (2 Collisions)
238
Injury
Collisions
238
Injury
Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
31 All Injury Collisions on City Streets KSI Collisions on City Streets K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99 LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
!
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Complaint of Pain
Other Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
!
!
!
Active Transportation Plan
32 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Collision Yearly Trend
Between 2019 and 2023, KSI collisions have remained relatively consistent at around six each year, with a drop in 2020 to two, with four counted in 2021. Injury collisions show a general fluctuation, with a significant drop in 2020 to six collisions from 11, likely due to reduced traffic during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the data indicates rises in injury collisions in the subsequent years. The chart below represents the yearly trends for pedestrian injury collisions and pedestrian KSI collisions.
Pedestrian Collisions by Year
Pedestrian Collisions on City Streets
This section of the analysis focuses specifically on pedestrian-involved collisions. The chart compares pedestrian collisions to total injury collisions by severity. Pedestrians accounted for 10 fatal, 14 severe injuries, 11 visible injuries, and nine complaint of pain collisions, while total injury collisions were 25, 44, 61, and 108, respectively. However, fewer in number, pedestrian collisions contribute significantly to severe and fatal injuries. The chart below compares pedestrian collisions to injury collisions by severity.
Pedestrian Collisions v/s Injury Collisions
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
Complaint
of Pain
Other Visible
Injury
Fatal Severe Injury
25 10 14
44 11
61 9
108
Pedestrian Collisions Injury Collisions KSI Collisions Injury Collisions Severity Year
Number of CollisionsNumber of Collisions
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
11 6 6
2 7
4 10
6 10
6 Active Transportation Plan
33 Pedestrian Collisions on City Streets
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Complaint of Pain
Other Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
!
!
!
Pedestrian Collisions by Violation Category
Pedestrian violations account for the highest percentage, contributing to 50 percent of KSI collisions and 41 percent of injury collisions, indicating a significant role in severe pedestrian crashes. Other notable factors include pedestrian right-of-way violations, DUI, and unsafe speed, contributing to pedestrian collisions at lower rates. The data suggests that pedestrian behavior is key to severe and injury-related pedestrian collisions. The chart below shows violation categories responsible for pedestrian collisions.
Pedestrian Collisions by Violation Category
The map on left shows the pedestrian collisions on City streets in Tulare between 2019 and 2023. 0 10
20 30
40 50
Pedestrian Unknown
Violation
Pedestrian
ROW
Improper
Turning
Improper
Passing
Unsafe
Speed
DUI
13%
7% 8%
14%
0% 2%
4% 5%
13%
16%
50%
41%
13%
16%
Primary Collision Factor
Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
34 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Collisions by Collision Type
Collisions between vehicles and pedestrians are the most prevalent, accounting for 92 percent of KSI collisions and 89 percent of injuries. The chart below shows pedestrian collisions by type.
Pedestrian Collisions by Collision Type
Pedestrian Collisions by Location
Most pedestrian collisions occurred at intersections, accounting for 79 percent of KSI collisions and 86 percent of injuries.
In contrast, roadway segments contributed 21 percent of KSI collisions and 14 percent of injury collisions. The chart below provides a detailed breakdown of pedestrian collisions by location.
Pedestrian Collisions by Location
86%
79%
0 20
40 60
80 100
Intersection Roadway
21%
14%
Location Collisions Type
Percentage of Collisions Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions KSI Collisions Injury Collisions 0 20
40 60
80 100
Head-On Broadside Vehicle/ Pedestrian Other
4% 5% 0% 5%
92% 89%
4% 2%
Active Transportation Plan
35 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Collisions by Lighting
The highest percentage of KSI collisions, 46 percent, and a significant share of injury collisions, 41 percent, occur in dark conditions with streetlights, emphasizing night-time visibility as a key factor in severe collisions. Daylight conditions also account for a substantial share, with 38 percent of KSI collisions and 41 percent of injury collisions, indicating that pedestrian and driver behaviour plays a crucial role regardless of lighting. Dark conditions without streetlights contribute to 17 percent of KSI collisions and 16 percent of injury collisions, showing a lower but still notable risk. The chart below shows pedestrian collisions by lighting conditions.
Pedestrian Collisions by Lighting
0 10
20 30
40 50
Dark - No Street
Lights
Dark - Street
Lights
Daylight Dusk-Dawn
38% 41%
0% 2%
46%
41%
17% 16%
Lighting
Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
36 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Bicycle Collisions on City Streets
This section of the analysis focuses specifically on bicycle collisions. Bicycle collisions account for a small portion of total injury collisions across all severity levels. There was one fatal bicycle collision compared to 25 total fatal injury collisions. Similarly, severe injuries included three bicycle collisions out of 44 total, while nine bicycle collisions resulted in visible injuries compared to 61 total injury collisions. Complaints of pain were the least frequent among bicycle collisions, with four collisions compared to 108 total injury collisions. The chart below compares bicycle collisions with injury collisions according to the severity.
Bicycle Collisions v/s Total Injury Collisions
Severity
Number of Collisions
Bicycle Collisions Injury Collisions
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
Complaint
of Pain
Other Visible
Injury
Fatal Severe Injury
1 25
3 44
9 61
4 108
Bicycle Collision Yearly Trend
The chart below shows the yearly trends in KSI and injury collisions involving bicycles from 2019 to 2023. Injury collisions peaked in 2020 with seven collisions before dropping to zero in 2021, then rising to four in 2023. KSI collisions followed a similar pattern, increasing from zero in 2019 to three in 2020, then declining to zero in 2021 and 2022 before recording one in 2023.
Bicycle Collisions by Year
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
3 0
7 3
0 0
3 4
1 Year
Number of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
37 Bicycle Collisions on City Streets
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Complaint of Pain
Other Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
!
!
!
Bicycle Collisions by Violation Category
The chart illustrates the percentage of KSI and injury collisions attributed to different primary collision factors. The most significant contributors to KSI collisions are DUI, wrong-side driving, and improper turning, each accounting for 25 percent of KSI collisions. Automobile right-of-way violations are an essential factor in 24 percent of injury collisions, while unknown factors contribute significantly, making up 25 percent of KSI collisions and 12 percent of injury collisions. Other factors, such as pedestrian right-of-way violations, traffic signals/sign violations, and improper driving, account for smaller percentages. The chart below shows the categories of violations responsible for bicycle collisions.
Bicycle Collisions by Violation Category
The map on left shows the bicycle collisions on City streets in Tulare between 2019 and 2023. 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
Other Unknown
Improper
Driving
Signals
and
Signs
Automobile
ROW
Improper
Turning
Wrong
Side of
Road
Unsafe
Speed
DUI
25%
6%
0%
6%
25% 24% 25%
6% 6% 6%
24%
0% 0% 0% 0%
12% 12%
25%
Primary Collision Factor
Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
*Note: The attribute "Unknown" indicates missing, unreported, or unavailable data for key collision factors such as location, severity, primary cause, or responsible party.
Pedestrian
ROW
Active Transportation Plan
38 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Bicycle Collisions by Collision Type
The chart below highlights the distribution of KSI and injury bicycle collisions by collision type. Broadside collisions account for the highest percentage, making up 50 percent of KSI collisions and 35 percent of injury collisions, indicating their severity. Sideswipe and other collision types contribute 25 percent of KSI collisions, while vehicle/bicycle collisions represent 24 percent of injury collisions. Head-on, hit-object, and not-stated collisions have lower percentages.
The chart suggests broadside collisions pose the highest risk for severe injuries or fatalities.
Bicycle Collisions by Collision Type
Collision Type
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions KSI Collisions Injury Collisions 0 10
20 30
40 50
Not
Stated
Vehicle/ Other
Bicycle
Hit
Object
Head-On Sideswipe Broadside
0%
6%
25%
18%
50%
35%
0% 0%
6%
24% 25%
6%
0%
6%
Bicycle Collisions by Lighting
The chart below shows the distribution of KSI and injury collisions based on lighting conditions. Daylight conditions account for the highest percentage of injury collisions, 65 percent, and a significant share of 50 percent. Similarly, dark conditions with streetlights contribute 50 percent of KSI collisions but only 24 percent of injury collisions, highlighting their role in severe collisions. Dark conditions without streetlights and not stated lighting conditions each account for a small percentage of injury collisions, six percent, with no KSI collisions recorded in these categories. The chart below shows bicycle collisions by lighting conditions.
Bicycle Collisions by Lighting
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Dark - No
Street Lights
Dark - Street
Lights
Daylight Dusk-Dawn
50%
65%
50%
24%
0%
6%
0%
6%
Lighting Type
Percentage of Collisions Percentage of Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
39 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Bicycle Collisions by Location
The chart illustrates that 75 percent of KSI and 88 percent of injury collisions occur at intersections, highlighting them as high-risk areas for pedestrian and vehicle conflicts. In contrast, roadway segments account for a smaller share, with 25 percent of KSI collisions and only 12 percent of injury collisions. The chart below provides the details of bicycle collisions by location.
Bicycle Collisions by Location
75%
0 20
40 60
80 100
Intersection Roadway
25%
12%
88%
Location
Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
40 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Collisions on State Routes
Collision Severity
The City of Tulare reported 58 collisions between 2019 and 2023 on SR 137 and SR 63, which are Caltrans maintained roadways. The chart below shows that out of 58 injury collisions, the majority, 48 percent, involved complaint of pain, followed by fatal collisions with 22 percent, visible injuries with 21 percent, and severe injuries with nine percent.
Collisions by Severity
The table below provides yearly trends for all injury collisions according to severity on State Routes:
Collisions by Mode
The chart below shows that out of 58 injury collisions, the majority, 69 percent, involved passenger cars or pickup trucks. Pedestrians accounted for 14 percent, followed by bicycles nine percent, motorcycles five percent, and trucks three percent. This chart highlights that while most collisions involving passenger vehicles, vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists still make up a notable share, emphasizing the need for targeted safety measures.
Collisions by Mode
*Note: Of the 58 total injury collisions on State Routes, eight involved pedestrians, accounting for 14 percent of all injuries, while five involved bicycles, accounting for nine percent.
The maps on the next page show all injury collisions and KSI collisions on State Routes in Tulare between 2019-2023. 48%
Complaint of Pain
(28 Collisions)
9%
Severe Injury
(5 Collisions)
21%
Other Vehicle Injury
(12 Collisions)
22%
Fatal
(13 Collisions)
Year Fatal Severe Injury Other Visible
Injury
Complaint of
Pain KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
2019 2 2 2 4 4 10
2020 3 0 3 4 3 10
2021 4 0 4 4 4 12
2022 1 1 1 9 2 12
2023 3 2 2 7 5 14
Total 13 5 12 28 18 58
Collisions by Severity - State Routes (2019-2023)
58 Injury
Collisions
58 Injury
Collisions
69%
Passenger Car or
Pickup Truck
(40 Collisions)
9%
Bicycle (5 Collisions)
14%
Pedestrian (8 Collisions)
5%
Motorcycle (3 Collisions)
3%
Trucks (2 Collisions)
Active Transportation Plan
41 All Injury Collisions on State Routes KSI Collisions on State Routes K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99 LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
!
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Complaint of Pain
Other Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
!
!
!
Active Transportation Plan
42 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Collision Yearly Trend
The chart illustrates fluctuations in pedestrian-related KSI and injury collisions from 2019 to 2023. The number of overall collisions remained low from 2019 to 2021, with a slight increase in 2021 with two injury collisions. While there were zero pedestrian collisions reported in 2022, a significant rise occurred in 2023, with four injury collisions and two KSI collisions, indicating a notable increase in pedestrian-related collisions. The chart below represents the yearly trends for pedestrian KSI collisions and pedestrian injury collisions.
Pedestrian Collisions by Year
0.0 1.0
2.0 3.0
4.0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
0 4
2 1 1
2 Pedestrian Collisions on State Routes
The chart compares the number of pedestrian-related collisions to overall injury collisions across different severity levels. There were six fatal pedestrian collisions, which in turn accounted for a significant portion of the 13 overall injury collisions. Pedestrians had no fatal injuries, whereas total severe injury collisions were five. Pedestrians accounted for only one collision each in the other visible injury and complaint of pain categories, with 12 total collisions, and 28 total in their respective categories. The chart below compares pedestrian collisions with total injury collisions according to severity.
Pedestrian Collisions v/s Total Injury Collisions
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Complaint
of Pain
Other Visible
Injury
Fatal Severe Injury
13 6
0 5
1 12
1 28
Severity Year
Number of Collisions Number of Collisions
Pedestrian Collisions Injury Collisions KSI Collisions Injury Collisions Active Transportation Plan
43 Pedestrian Collisions on State Routes
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Complaint of Pain
Other Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
!
!
!
!
Pedestrian Collisions by Violation Category
The chart shows that pedestrian violations were the primary cause of injury collisions, accounting for 100 percent of KSI collisions and 88 percent of total injury collisions. A small percentage, 12 percent, of injury collisions were categorized as having an unknown primary factor, with no KSI collisions recorded in this category. This data highlights the significant impact of pedestrian violations on injury collisions, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions to improve pedestrian safety and compliance with traffic laws. The chart below shows violation categories responsible for pedestrian collisions.
*Note: The attribute “Unknown” indicates missing, unreported, or unavailable data for key collision factors such as location, severity, primary cause, or responsible party.
Pedestrian Collisions by Violation Category
The map on left shows the pedestrian collisions on State Routes in Tulare between 2019 and 2023. 100%
0 20
40 60
80 100
Pedestrian Unknown
Violation
0%
12%
Primary Collision Factor
Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
88%
Active Transportation Plan
44 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Collisions by Location
The chart indicates 83 percent of KSI collisions and 88 percent of injury collisions occurred at intersections. The rest of the collisions occurred on roadways, with 17 percent of KSI collisions and 12 percent of injury collisions happening in these locations. This suggests that intersections pose a higher risk for injury-related collisions, emphasizing the need for improved intersection safety measures. The chart below provides the details of pedestrian collisions by location.
Pedestrian Collisions by Location
Pedestrian Collisions by Collision Type
The chart shows that 100 percent of both KSI and injury collisions involved vehicle/pedestrian collisions. The chart below shows pedestrian collisions by type.
Pedestrian Collisions by Collision Type
88% 83%
0 20
40 60
80 100
Intersection Roadway
17%
12%
Locations
Collision Type
Percentage of Collisions
Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
100% 100%
0 20
40 60
80 100
Vehicle/ Pedestrian
Active Transportation Plan
45 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Collisions by Lighting
The chart presents the percentage of injury and KSI collisions under different lighting conditions. It shows that the highest proportion of collisions occur in dark conditions with street lighting, accounting for 67 percent of KSI collisions and 63 percent of injury collisions. In daylight, injury collisions make up 25 percent, while KSI collisions account for 17 percent. Similarly, KSI collisions are at 17 percent from dusk to dawn, but injury collisions are slightly lower at 13 percent.
The chart below shows pedestrian collisions by lighting conditions.
Pedestrian Collisions by Lighting
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Daylight Dusk-Dawn Dark - Street Lights
17%
25%
13% 17%
67% 63%
Lightng Type
Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
46 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Bicycle Collisions on State Routes
The chart compares the number of bicycle collisions to overall injury collisions across different severity levels. This indicates that bicycle collisions are significantly lower than total injury collisions in all categories. Fatal collisions include one bicycle collision versus 13 total injury collisions. Severe injuries have two bicycle collisions compared to five total injury collisions. Other visible injuries show one bicycle collision versus 12 total, while complaint of pain are the most frequent in overall injury collisions, with 28, and only one involving a bicycle. The chart below compares bicycle collisions with injury collisions according to the severity.
Bicycle Collisions v/s Total Injury Collisions
Severity
Number of Collisions
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 Complaint
of Pain
Other Visible
Injury
Fatal Severe Injury
1 13
2 5
1 12
1 28
Bicycle Collisions Injury Collisions
Bicycle Collisions Yearly Trend
The chart illustrates the variation in KSI and injury bicycle collisions from 2019 to 2023. Both types of collisions remained low throughout the period. Injury collisions peaked in 2021 with two collisions, while KSI collisions were zero in both 2020 and 2021. In 2019, 2022, and 2023, there was a consistent count of one KSI collision per year, with a spike to two in 2021. The chart below represents the yearly trends for bicycle KSI collisions and bicycle injury collisions.
Bicycle Collisions by Year
0.0 0.5
1.0 1.5
2.0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
1 0
2 0
11 11
Year
Number of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
47 Bicycle Collisions on State Routes
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Complaint of Pain
Other Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
!
!
!
Bicycle Collisions by Violation Category
The chart presents the percentage of KSI and injury collisions for different types of violations. The automobile rightof-way category accounts for the highest proportion of KSI collisions, with 67 percent, and a significant share of injury collisions, with 40 percent. Traffic signals and signs violations contribute to 33 percent of KSI collisions and 40 percent of injury collisions. Meanwhile, wrong-side road violations result in 20 percent of injury collisions but do not contribute to any KSI collisions. The chart below shows the categories of violations responsible for bicycle collisions.
Bicycle Collisions by Violation Category
The map on left shows the bicycle collisions that occurred on State Routes in Tulare between 2019 and 2023. 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 and Signs
Automobile
ROW
Wrong Side
of Road
0%
20%
67%
40% 40%
33%
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
Primary Collision Factor
Percentage of Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
48 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Bicycle Collisions by Lighting
The chart indicates that 100 percent of KSI and injury collisions occurred during daylight. This suggests that all recorded injury-related collisions in the dataset happened in daylight, with no reported collisions under other lighting conditions such as nighttime or dusk. The data emphasizes that even in well-lit conditions, significant collisions can occur, highlighting the need for safety measures regardless of lighting conditions. The chart below shows bicycle collisions by lighting conditions.
Bicycle Collisions by Lighting
Bicycle Collisions by Collision Type
The chart compares the percentage of KSI and injury collisions for two types of collisions: broadside and hit object.
Broadside collisions account for 33 percent of KSI collisions and 60 percent of injury collisions, indicating that while they frequently cause injuries, they are less likely to result in severe or fatal outcomes. On the other hand, hit object collisions have the highest percentage of KSI collisions with 67 percent but a lower percentage of injury collisions 40 percent. This suggests that collisions involving fixed objects tend to be more severe than broadside crashes The chart below shows bicycle collisions by collision type.
Bicycle Collisions by Collision Type
60%
33%
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Broadside Hit Object
67%
40%
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions KSI Collisions Injury Collisions Collision Type Lighting Type
Percentage of Collisions Percentage of Collisions
100% 100%
0 20
40 60
80 100
Daylight
Active Transportation Plan
49 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Bicycle Collisions by Location
The chart shows that 100 percent of KSI and injury collisions occurred at intersections. This suggests that all recorded injury-related crashes in the dataset occurred at intersections, with no reported collisions occurring at mid-block or other locations. The chart below provides the details of bicycle collisions by location.
Bicycle Collisions by Location
100% 100%
0 20
40 60
80 100
Intersection
Location
Percentage of Collisions
KSI Collisions Injury Collisions
talities. By understanding the factors contributing to collisions, the City can implement targeted strategies to enhance the safety and effectiveness of active transportation networks.
Of the 296 collisions recorded between 2019 and 2023, 238 collisions (80 percent) occurred on City streets, while 58 collisions (20 percent) occurred on State Routes.
For the purpose of this collision analysis and consideration for the overall Active Transportation Plan, both SR 137 (East Tulare Avenue, M Street, and Inyo Avenue) and SR 63 (Mooney Boulevard) have been considered for this analysis, while Highway 99 has not.
Although SR 137 and SR 63 are Caltrans facilities, since they are integral to Tulare infrastructure and circulation patterns, these roadways will be considered for evaluating and identifying safety improvements along with the City roadway network. While the City does not assume any liability for potential improvements on these Caltrans facilities, collision findings and potential improvements and recommendations will be shared with Caltrans to ensure coordination on broader traffic safety efforts.
Due to its configuration, impact on the local roadway network, and low number of collisions, Highway 99 has not been included in this analysis, nor will any proposed recommendations address it. Any safety enhancements or mitigation measures for Highway 99 will remain Caltrans’ sole responsibility.
The chart below provides a breakdown of collisions by facility in Tulare.
Collisions by Facility
Summary
The collision analysis summarizes collision data from 2019 to 2023 based on five years of data from the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS). TIMS offers comprehensive collision data, which is further categorized by severity, location, collision type, violation type, and other causes over the five years. Additionally, the analysis will examine annual trends and statistical changes in collision patterns. A total of 296 injury collisions were observed over the five years, and these collisions will be discussed in greater detail as part of this technical memorandum, with the primary focus on pedestrian and bicycle-related collisions.
Collision analysis plays a crucial role in an active transportation plan by identifying patterns and hotspots where collisions occur, particularly for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other vulnerable road users. It helps prioritize the areas for safety improvements, supports the design of safer infrastructure, and guides policy decisions to reduce injuries and fa80% City Streets (238 Collisions)
20%
State Routes (58 Collisions)
296
Injury
Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
50 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
High Injury Corridors based on Pedestrian Collisions
HIGH INJURY NETWORK
High Injury Network - Pedestrian Collisions
The map shows the high injury corridors based on pedestrian collisions within Tulare between 2019 and 2023.
Label Corridor Fatal Severe Injury Other Visible
Injury
Complaint of
Pain
KSI
Collisions
Injury
Collisions
State Routes
A SR 137: City limits (West)
to Blackstone St 5 0 1 1 5 7
City Streets
a Bardsley Avenue: Pratt St
to S Mooney Boulevard 3 3 2 1 6 9
b Blackstone St: Merrit
Avenue to Lyndale Avenue 3 1 2 0 4 6
c J St: Cross Avenue to
Owens Avenue 2 1 0 1 3 4
d
K St: Tulare Avenue to
Martin Luther King Jr
Avenue
0 1 1 2 1 4
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99 LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
HIN Corridor - State Route
HIN Corridor - City Street
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
A
!a
!b
!c
!d
High Injury Corridors based on Pedestrian Collisions (2019-2023) Active Transportation Plan
51 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
High Injury Network - Bicycle Collisions
The map shows the high injury corridors based on bicycle collisions within Tulare between 2019 and 2023.
High Injury Corriodrs based on Bicycle Collisions
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99 LEGEND
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
HIN Corridor - State Route
HIN Corridor - City Street
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
!
A
!a
!a
! !b c !d
Label Corridor Fatal Severe Injury Other Visible
Injury
Complaint of
Pain
KSI
Collisions
Injury
Collisions
State Routes
A SR 137: West St to Mooney
Boulevard 1 2 1 1 3 5
City Streets
a K St: Inyo Avenue to Rankin
Road 0 1 2 0 1 3
b Bardsley Avenue: E St to
Stoney Creek St 0 1 1 1 1 3
c F St: W Tulare Avenue to W
Bardsley Avenue 0 0 2 0 0 2
d D St: Tulare Avenue to
Sonora Avenue 0 0 0 2 0 2
High Injury Corridors based on Bicycle Collisions (2019-2023)
HIGH INJURY NETWORK
Active Transportation Plan
52 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Existing Conditions of High Injury Corridors
State Route 137 (SR 137): City Limits (West) to Blackstone Street • Infrastructure: SR 137 is a significant east-west arterial accommodating local and regional traffic. The corridor includes multiple intersections with varying traffic control measures. • Safety Concerns: High traffic volumes and speeds (35-45 mph) increase collision risks, particularly at intersections lacking adequate pedestrian crossings.
• Active Transportation Challenges: Limited sidewalks and the absence of dedicated bicycle lanes hinder safe movement for pedestrians and bicyclists.
This segment of SR 137 has the highest number of pedestrian fatalities in the City, with five pedestrian deaths and seven total pedestrian-involved injury collisions between 2019 and 2023. Most collisions occurred at intersections and under dark conditions with streetlights, indicating significant visibility and speed issues. Though SR 137 is a Caltrans facility, it serves as a key arterial for the City and is included in Tulare’s ATP due to its importance in the local circulation network. Coordination with Caltrans is essential for high-visibility crosswalks, advanced lighting, traffic calming elements, and improved pedestrian signaling.
2. Bardsley Avenue: Pratt Street to South Mooney Boulevard • Infrastructure: This corridor connects residential neighborhoods to commercial areas, with varying roadway widths and traffic controls. • Safety Concerns: Inconsistent pedestrian infrastructure increases vulnerability for non-motorized users, such as missing sidewalks and crosswalks.
• Active Transportation Challenges: The lack of continuous sidewalks and bicycle facilities discourages walking and bicycling.
This corridor experienced nine pedestrian injury collisions, including three fatalities and three severe injuries, marking it as one of the City’s most dangerous pedestrian routes. The intersection at Bardsley Avenue & Blackstone Street is highlighted in the LRSP for a proposed roundabout to replace the existing signal, incorporating pedestrian refuge islands and high-visibility treatments. Bardsley Avenue is also targeted in the City’s Capital Improvement Program and Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Master Plan for sidewalk and lighting enhancements to improve walkability and safety.
3. Blackstone Street: Merritt Avenue to Lyndale Avenue
• Infrastructure: This segment runs immediately adjacent to Highway 99 and passes through mixed industrial/commercial and residential zones. Sidewalks are present on the west side; the east side currently lacks continuous sidewalk or pedestrian zone adjacent to the freeway. • Safety and Active Mobility Challenges: The proximity to freeway ramps, limited pedestrian infrastructure on the east side, and the absence of dedicated crosswalks or pedestrian signals at some ramp and frontage intersections introduce safety concerns for walking and bicycling.
• Implementation Consideration: The addition of sidewalks and marked crossings on the east side would likely require acquisition of right-of-way from Caltrans (due to the Highway 99 frontage) and coordination with the freeway ramp/interchange alignment. This could complicate project delivery and timing.
This corridor recorded six pedestrian injuries, including three fatalities, predominantly at intersections. The area’s mixed residential and commercial land use and gaps in pedestrian infrastructure contribute to a highrisk environment. The LRSP and ATP emphasize the need for intersection enhancements, traffic calming measures, ADA-compliant ramps, and improved nighttime lighting to increase pedestrian safety.
4. J Street: Cross Avenue to Owens Avenue
• Infrastructure: J Street is a north-south connector within the City’s grid, with varying traffic volumes and roadway conditions. • Safety Concerns: High vehicular speeds (35 mph) and insufficient pedestrian crossings contribute to elevated injury risks. • Active Transportation Challenges: The lack of dedicated bicycle lanes and pedestrian infrastructure limits safe active transportation options.
J Street reported four pedestrian injury collisions, including two fatalities and one severe injury, especially near community facilities and schools. The LRSP proposes a traffic signal with pedestrian countdown timers and audible pushbuttons at J Street and Kern Avenue, just south of this segment.
These safety improvements align with the City’s complete streets policies to prioritize multimodal infrastructure and school zone safety.
5. K Street: Tulare Avenue to Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue • Infrastructure: K Street is a vital thoroughfare linking downtown Tulare to southern neighborhoods, with mixed land uses along the corridor.
• Safety Concerns: Inadequate lighting and sidewalk obstructions compromise pedestrian visibility and safety. • Active Transportation Challenges: Discontinuous sidewalks and the absence of bicycle facilities hinder non-motorized mobility.
K Street had four pedestrian injury collisions, including one severe injury.
Although it did not record fatalities, the severity of collisions indicates the need for intervention. The corridor is listed for improvements in the City’s Capital Improvement Program. It is prioritized in the Transit-Oriented Development Plan to enhance connectivity between downtown, residential areas, and transit nodes. Key ATP strategies include widened sidewalks, upgraded crossings, and pedestrian-scale lighting.
6. SR 137: West Street to Mooney Boulevard
• Infrastructure: This segment of SR 137 is integral for cross-town travel, intersecting with major City routes and featuring multiple lanes. • Safety Concerns: Frequent merging and turning movements without dedicated lanes increase collision potential.
• Active Transportation Challenges: Limited pedestrian crossings and a lack of bicycle infrastructure reduce safety for non-motorized users.
This corridor is the most hazardous for bicyclists, with five bicycle-involved collisions, including one fatality and two severe injuries. All collisions occurred during the day and at intersections, pointing to turning conflicts and right-of-way violations. Improvements recommended in the ATP include protected intersections, green pavement markings, and better signage. Coordinated efforts are needed to implement these treatments as a Caltrans route.
Active Transportation Plan
53 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
7. K Street: Inyo Avenue to Rankin Road
• Infrastructure: Extending through residential zones, this portion of K Street supports local traffic flow with varying roadway conditions.
• Safety Concerns: Limited traffic calming measures result in higher vehicle speeds, endangering pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Active Transportation Challenges: The absence of sidewalks and bicycle lanes restricts safe active transportation.
This corridor experienced three bicycle injury collisions, including one severe injury. Located in older residential neighborhoods, K Street is identified in the Bicycle Master Plan for Class II bike lanes or shared-lane markings. Most collisions occurred at intersections, indicating a need for improved motorist awareness, bike lane striping, and visibility enhancements.
8. Bardsley Avenue: E Street to Stoney Creek Street
• Infrastructure: This stretch connects suburban areas to central Tulare, serving as a commuter route with mixed land uses.
• Safety Concerns: The absence of continuous sidewalks and bike lanes hinders safe active transportation. • Active Transportation Challenges: Inconsistent pedestrian infrastructure and a lack of bicycle facilities limit non-motorized mobility.
This segment is an important east-west route with three reported bicycle injuries, including one severe injury. It connects residential neighborhoods to schools and parks, making it ideal for upgraded bicycle infrastructure such as buffered bike lanes. The LRSP and CIP already prioritize sidewalk and safety enhancements along Bardsley Avenue, supporting further ATP-led bicycle improvements.
9. F Street: West Tulare Avenue to West Bardsley Avenue • Infrastructure: F Street is a minor arterial, linking key residential sectors with varying roadway widths and traffic controls.
• Safety Concerns: Intersections along this corridor lack adequate pedestrian signaling, increasing crossing hazards. • Active Transportation Challenges: Limited sidewalks and the absence of bicycle lanes discourage walking and bicycling.
This corridor had two bicycle-related injury collisions involving visible injuries at intersections. While the severity is lower, F Street is a connector between several arterial roads and a candidate for low-cost safety enhancements such as sharrows, signage, and curb extensions. The corridor aligns with citywide goals to improve neighborhood bike-friendliness as part of the ATP.
10. D Street: Tulare Avenue to Sonora Avenue
• Infrastructure: D Street connects downtown and adjacent neighborhoods, with mixed land uses along the corridor. • Safety Concerns: High traffic density and limited pedestrian infrastructure contribute to elevated injury occurrences. • Active Transportation Challenges: Discontinuous sidewalks and a lack of bicycle facilities hinder safe active transportation.
D Street experienced two lower-severity bicycle collisions involving complaints of pain. While no severe injuries were reported, this segment has potential for proactive safety improvements due to its residential context and proximity to schools and transit stops. Potential ATP measures may include upgraded crosswalks, speed humps, and Class III bicycle routes aimed at enhancing cyclist comfort and improving overall safety.
Active Transportation Plan
54 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Prioritizing Equity using Calenviroscreen
Equity must be a foundational principle in the ATP to ensure mobility improvements reach the neediest communities. According to CalEnviroScreen 4.0, several census tracts within Tulare rank in the top 75th to 96th percentiles statewide for cumulative pollution burden and population vulnerability. These areas experience elevated levels of PM2.5, diesel emissions, drinking water contaminants, high poverty rates, unemployment, asthma, and low educational attainment. These neighborhoods often lack adequate walking and biking infrastructure, compounding barriers to safe, healthy, and affordable transportation. By using CalEnviroScreen data to guide planning and project prioritization, Tulare can ensure that active transportation investments address long-standing environmental and health inequities, ultimately advancing mobility justice, public health, and equitable community development.
Understanding Equity Vulnerability through Calenviroscreen CalEnviroScreen 4.0 comprehensively assesses equity conditions by examining factors influencing public health and well-being. The screening tool evaluates environmental exposures, environmental effects, sensitive populations, and socioeconomic factors to create percentile scores that range from 0 to 100. Communities with scores at or above the 75th percentile are classified as disadvantaged communities under California state programs and federal equity initiatives.
The methodology incorporates pollution burden indicators such as air quality measures, drinking water quality, and proximity to toxic cleanup sites.
It also considers population characteristics, including asthma and cardiovascular disease rates, and socioeconomic factors such as poverty levels, unemployment rates, and housing cost burden. These multiple dimensions provide a nuanced understanding of equity conditions that extend beyond any single indicator and help identify areas where transportation equity concerns may be most acute.
CalEnviroScreen is a science-based screening tool developed by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) under
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY
The City of Tulare Active Transportation Plan (ATP) incorporates a comprehensive equity framework that ensures traffic safety improvements serve all residents fairly while addressing the disproportionate burden of traffic injuries experienced by disadvantaged communities. This section examines how safety investments can advance protection from traffic harm and equitable access to safe transportation throughout Tulare.
The ATP utilizes California’s Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen 4.0) to identify disadvantaged communities and ensure that safety interventions are responsive to local conditions and historical patterns of underinvestment. This analysis reveals that the entire City falls within areas designated as disadvantaged communities, with CalEnviroScreen percentile scores ranging from 75 to 100. While this designation applies Citywide, Tulare has notable variations, with some neighborhoods experiencing more intensive environmental and socioeconomic burdens that may compound transportation safety risks. Collision data for 2019- 2023 is under Appendix D.
Equitable Areas: Equitable areas are census tracts identified as disadvantaged communities under California’s CalEnviroScreen 4.0, with scores at or above the 75th percentile statewide. These areas face cumulative environmental and socioeconomic burdens, including high levels of pollution, poverty, unemployment, and limited access to transportation infrastructure, and are prioritized for equity-focused investments under state and federal programs.
Non-Equitable Areas: Non-equitable areas are census tracts with CalEnviroScreen scores below the 75th percentile, indicating lower cumulative environmental and socioeconomic risk. These areas are not considered disadvantaged for the purposes of equity-based funding eligibility but may still contain localized safety or infrastructure concerns.
CalEPA. Its core purpose is to identify communities in California that are most affected by pollution burdens and vulnerable population characteristics.
Purpose: To reflect cumulative impacts, recognizing that vulnerable populations experience amplified effects from environmental burdens.
The methodology includes:
Geographic Scale: Analysis is done at the census tract level across California.
Components:
• Pollution Burden is made up of two subcomponents:
˚ Exposure indicators (e.g., air quality, traffic, drinking water contamination) ˚ Environmental effects (e.g., hazardous waste sites, groundwater threats)
• Population Characteristics is also made up of two subcomponents:
˚ Sensitive populations (e.g., asthma rates, cardiovascular disease) ˚ Socioeconomic factors (e.g., poverty, unemployment, educational attainment)
• Scoring Approach:
˚ Each indicator is scored using percentile ranks across all tracts in the state.
˚ The Pollution Burden score is calculated by averaging the exposure and half-weighted environmental effect scores. ˚ The Population Characteristics score is calculated by averaging sensitive population and socioeconomic indicators.
˚ The final CalEnviroScreen score is the product (multiplication) of the Pollution Burden and Population Characteristics scores.
This methodology results in a relative ranking of California communities, identifying the most environmentally disadvantaged areas.
For transportation safety planning, CalEnviroScreen data helps identify areas where residents may face additional challenges related to safe mobility. These might include neighborhoods with higher rates of pedestrian activity due to economic necessity, areas with older infrastructure that may Note: Per the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Technical Report (2021), the following are definitions of- ‘Equitable Areas’ and ‘Non-Equitable Areas’
Active Transportation Plan
55 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Aspect CalEnviroScreen Use in ATP
Purpose Statewide screening for cumulative
environmental burdens
Identify and prioritize projects in Disadvantaged
Communities
Geography Census tract Census tract
Scoring Percentile ranking (0–100), calculated from
21 indicators
Threshold-based: top 25% (≥75th percentile)
considered DAC
Application Public health, environmental justice,
enforcement, and funding targeting
Project eligibility and scoring in ATP grant
applications
ATP’s ranking-based criteria
not meet current safety standards, or communities where residents have historically had less political influence in transportation planning decisions and therefore experienced inequitable distribution of safety investments.
Use of Calenviroscreen in ATP’s Ranking-Based Criteria
The ATP, administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC), allocates funding to projects that increase walking, biking, and safe mobility, particularly in disadvantaged communities (DACs). CalEnviroScreen is key in ranking and evaluating project applications in the ATP. The methodology for this use includes:
• Identification of Disadvantaged Communities:
˚ Projects are eligible for DAC points if they are located in census tracts that rank in the top 25% (75th percentile or higher) in CalEnviroScreen. ˚ This threshold ensures funds are directed to the most impacted communities. • Scoring Criteria:
˚ CalEnviroScreen rankings are used in ATP application scoring to assign equity points. ˚ Projects serving higher-ranked (more burdened) tracts may receive additional points during evaluation, increasing their competitiveness.
• Supporting Requirements:
˚ Applicants often use CalEnviroScreen maps and percentile scores to demonstrate need and justify benefits to disadvantaged communities.
˚ This use aligns with CalEPA’s goals of advancing environmental justice and equity-based investments. • Complementary Tools: CalEnviroScreen is often used alongside other tools such as:
˚ Caltrans Environmental Justice Screening Tool
˚ Healthy Places Index (HPI), in other grant programs.
The table below shows the ATP’s ranking-based criteria:
Active Transportation Plan
56 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Calenviroscreen Scoring Model
The CalEnviroScreen Scoring Model is a statewide analytical tool developed by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to identify communities that are disproportionately burdened by pollution and socio-economic vulnerabilities. It combines environmental exposure indicators, such as air quality, traffic pollution, and hazardous waste, with population characteristics like poverty, health outcomes, and linguistic isolation. By integrating these factors, CalEnviroScreen produces a cumulative score that highlights communities facing the greatest environmental and health-related risks, guiding State funding, policy decisions, and equity-focused planning efforts.
For example, the difference between CalEnviroScreen scores in the 75–80 percentile vs. the 80–85 percentile comes from several environmental, health, and socioeconomic indicators.
The CalEnviroScreen 4.0 score is calculated as:
CalEnviroScreen Score = Pollution Burden × Population Characteristics Each of those two categories is based on multiple indicators:
• Pollution Burden includes:
˚ Exposures (e.g., ozone, PM2.5, diesel emissions, drinking water contaminants, traffic)
˚ Environmental Effects (e.g., cleanup sites, hazardous waste, groundwater threats)
• Population Characteristics include:
˚ Sensitive Populations (e.g., asthma, cardiovascular disease, low birth weight)
˚ Socioeconomic Factors (e.g., poverty, unemployment, housing burden, education, linguistic isolation)
Environmental Effects are weighted half as much as Exposure indicators.
For Instance: Key Differences Between 75–80 and 80–85 Percentile Scores: Even a slight shift in indicators can bump a Census Tract from the 75–80 bracket to the 80–85 bracket. Typical significant differentiators include:
• Air Quality (PM2.5, Ozone, Diesel PM)
˚ Tracts in the 80th–85th percentile typically face higher levels of fine particulate matter and ozone, often due to proximity to highways, industrial facilities, or wildfire-prone areas. ˚ Diesel PM strongly correlates with freight corridors, ports, or warehouse distribution zones.
• Traffic and Transportation
˚ Higher percentile tracts often have intense traffic volumes, contributing to air pollution and pedestrian safety risks. ˚ Tracts with major freeways, rail yards, or goods movement infrastructure often score higher. • Health Indicators
˚ Communities in the 80–85 bracket often report more emergency room visits for asthma or heart attacks.
˚ Low birth weight rates can also increase the Population Characteristics score. • Economic and Housing Factors: The 80–85 percentile tracts typically have:
˚ Higher poverty rates
˚ Lower educational attainment
˚ Greater proportion of housing-burdened low-income households ˚ Linguistically isolated populations
• Environmental Hazards
˚ Slightly higher counts of hazardous waste sites, impaired water bodies, or cleanup sites can push a tract into the 80–85 range.
Indicator Type Higher in 80-85 Typical Factors
PM2.5, Diesel PM Yes Traffic, wildfire, industry
Traffic Impacts Often Freeways, goods movement
Poverty Yes Disadvantaged urban cores
Asthma rates Yes Health-burdened
communities
Low birth weight Yes Socioeconomic stressors
Education Lower Less than high school is
prevalent
Summary of Key Factors
Summary of Key Factors Between 75–80 and 80–85 Percentiles:
Active Transportation Plan
57 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
In Tulare, eight census tracts are identified as part of equitable areas under CalEnviroScreen 4.0, each scoring above the 75th percentile statewide. These include Census Tracts 6107002400, 6107003002, 6107002100, 6107002304, 6107003001, 6107002202, 6107002901, and 6107003100. These tracts exhibit some of the highest burdens in the region, including exposure to diesel particulate matter, ozone, PM2.5, and contaminated drinking water. Socioeconomic vulnerabilities are also prominent, with high rates of poverty (up to the 98th percentile), unemployment (up to the 99th percentile), and low educational attainment (up to the 92nd percentile). Additionally, these tracts face elevated health burdens, such as asthma and cardiovascular risks, combined with infrastructure challenges like housing burden. This data underscores the need for focused environmental justice interventions and funding to mitigate these disparities in Tulare. The table below compares equitable and non-equitable census tracts, pointing out key differences in each indicator.
Key Differences: Equitable vs. Non-Equitable Areas:
Source: Cal EnvironScreen 4.0 Data
*Note: CIscore Percentile is the percentile ranking of a census tract’s combined pollution burden and population vulnerability score compared to all other tracts in California. It determines how environmentally burdened and socioeconomically vulnerable a community is relative to the rest of the state.
Indicator Equitable Tracts (75th to 100th Percentile) Non-Equitable Tracts (below 75th Percentile)
CIscore Percentile 79–96% 57–73%
PM2.5 Higher (96th–98th percentile) Still high (94–98th), but slightly lower Diesel PM Up to the 87th percentile Often below the 60th percentile Drinking Water
Contaminants Up to the 99th percentile Generally, 76th–78th percentile Lead Exposure High: 66–77th percentile Lower: often 24th–49th percentile Poverty 76–98th percentile 19–67th percentile
Unemployment Up to the 99th percentile As low as 2.7–32nd percentile Housing Burden Up to the 85th percentile As low as 13–43rd percentile Education (low attainment) 87–92nd percentile 38–79th percentile Key Differences: Equitable vs. Non-Equitable Areas
Census Tract in Equitable Areas in Tulare
The following tracts have CalEnviroScreen scores above the 75th percentile, qualifying them as equitable areas based on environmental justice screening:
No. Object ID Census Tract CI Score Percentile Zip Code Reasons in Equity 1 2036 6107002400 79.03 93274 Very high lead risk and drinking water contaminants
2 2003 6107003002 81.93 93274 High ozone, PM2.5, and
poverty
3 2010 6107002100 82.06 93274 Elevated diesel PM and low educational attainment
4 2029 6107002304 83.09 93274 High asthma and housing
burden
5 2005 6107003001 88.89 93274 Significant lead risk and pesticide exposure
6 2046 6107002202 91.93 93274 High PM2.5 and toxic releases 7 2015 6107002901 95.21 93274 The highest percentile for diesel PM and asthma
8 2009 6107003100 96.11 93274 Very high pollution and
cardiovascular disease risks
Census Tract in Equitable Areas in Tulare
Note: These tract IDs are approximated based on OBJECTID mapping and the ZIP code 93274, which covers most of the urban City of Tulare. *CI Score: Cumulative Impact Score
Active Transportation Plan
58 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Land Use and Population Density Comparison: Equitable vs. Non-Equitable Census Blocks An analysis of Tulare’s land area and population distribution reveals a significant disparity between equitable and non-equitable census blocks. Equitable areas, which cover a larger geographic footprint of 15.98 square miles, are home to 40,531 residents. In contrast, non-equitable areas span only 6.15 square miles but house 32,082 residents.
This results in a much higher population density in non-equitable areas (5,215 people per sq. mile) than in equitable areas (2,537 people per sq. mile). This figure suggests that while equitable areas encompass more physical space, non-equitable areas are more densely populated, potentially indicating built-up or developed areas of the City. However, the larger land coverage and substantial population in equitable areas highlight the need for expansive, equity-focused transportation and infrastructure investments across a broader area. The table below represents the distribution of population, area within the City, and ratio comparison for a better understanding. The map on right highlights the priority census tracts identified as equitable areas in Tulare.
Land Use & Density Non-Equitable Census Block Equitable Census Block Population 32,082 40,531
Area (sq. mile) 6.15 15.98
Ratio 5215.87 2536.94
Priority Census Tracts identified as Equitable Areas
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
CAL ENVIRO SCORE
ILEGEND
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
0.01 - 75
75 - 80
80 - 85
85 - 90
90 - 95
95 - 100
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
Distribution Population, Area and Ratio
Active Transportation Plan
59 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Disadvantaged Communities and Collision Analysis in
Tulare
Like many urban areas, Tulare includes census tracts with varying socioeconomic conditions. An analysis of disadvantaged community indicators in the City reveals areas that may experience higher transportation-related challenges, including limited access to safe pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, inadequate transit options, and higher collision risk. The equity analysis suggests that some neighborhoods within Tulare face transportation insecurity, meaning residents may have fewer transportation options, increased reliance on walking or biking, and greater exposure to road safety risks.
Disadvantaged communities in Tulare often correlate with higher pedestrian and bicycle collision rates, as these groups are more likely to rely on non-motorized transportation. Additionally, residents in these areas may have limited access to resources such as adequate lighting, safe crosswalks, and protected bike lanes, further increasing their vulnerability to severe traffic incidents. Addressing these disparities through targeted safety interventions and infrastructure improvements is crucial to enhancing mobility equity across the City.
Implications for Collisions in Tulare
• These disadvantaged communities often contain populations with limited vehicle access, relying more heavily on walking, biking, or transit, exposing them to greater risk of collisions.
• Equitable areas often coincide with corridors experiencing poor air quality, high truck traffic, and inadequate pedestrian infrastructure (e.g., missing sidewalks, unsafe crossings).
• Many collisions in equitable tracts occur during peak travel hours and evening, when visibility and traffic volumes are both concerns.
Collision Analysis in Tulare
A comprehensive review of collision data in Tulare highlights several high-injury corridors and locations where severe traffic collisions have occurred. The analysis categorizes collisions based on severity, including fatal, severe injury, other visible injury, and complaint of pain.
Key findings include:
• High-Injury Corridors: Certain roadways, particularly SR-137 (State Route 137) and major arterials, like Bardsley Avenue, Black Stone Street, J Street, and K Street, experience a higher frequency of severe collisions. These corridors experience a significant mix of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle collisions. • Pedestrian and Bicycle Collisions: A notable number of collisions involve pedestrians and bicyclists, particularly in areas with limited pedestrian crossings and poor lighting conditions. • Nighttime Collisions: A significant proportion of severe collisions occur at night, emphasizing the need for better street lighting and visibility improvements in critical areas. • Intersection-Related Collisions: Many fatal and severe injury collisions occur at intersections, highlighting the importance of traffic signal improvements, roundabouts, and better crosswalk infrastructure.
Collision History (2019-2023) occurred within Tulare’s
Equitable vs Non-Equitable Areas.
Injury Collisions in the Equity/ Non Equitable Areas
An in-depth review of injury collisions in Tulare reveals that communities classified as equitable areas, based on CalEnviroScreen scores above the 75th percentile, experience a disproportionate share of traffic-related injuries and fatalities. Of the 296 total injury collisions reported citywide, 66 percent (194 collisions) occurred within equitable census tracts, while only 34 percent (102 collisions) occurred in non-equitable areas. This disparity is particularly alarming when considering the severity of outcomes. As illustrated in the table below, collisions occurred within the equitable and the non-equitable regions, as per their severity.
Non-Equity All Injury Collisions in the City of Tulare
Fatal Severe
Injury
Other
Visible Injury Complain of Pain
0.01-75 6 20 29 47
Total 6 20 29 47
Collisions with the Non-Equitable areas in Tulare (2019-2023) 66%
Equitable Area
34%
Non-Equitable Area
Active Transportation Plan
60 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Primary Collision Factors in Tulare’s Equitable Areas
The leading causes of traffic collisions in equitable areas of Tulare are overwhelmingly related to unsafe driving behaviors and right-of-way violations. The most prevalent primary collision factor (PCF) is automobile right-of-way violations, accounting for 51 collisions, followed by hazardous speed with 32 collisions, and traffic signal/sign violations at 28 collisions. Other significant contributors include pedestrian violations and unknown causes, each with 19 collisions, and DUI and improper turning, both with 11 collisions. The chart below represents the primary collision factor in the equitable areas within the City.
Primary Collision Factors - Equitable Areas
Inequitable areas recorded three fatalities, 29 severe injuries, 44 other visible injuries, and 89 complaints of pain. By contrast, non-equitable areas recorded six deaths, 20 severe injuries, 29 other visible injuries, and 47 complaints of pain. This suggests that collisions, aside from KSI, are more frequent and severe in inequitable areas.
The collision data also shows that the most impacted tracts are those within the 90–95 percentile range, which alone accounted for 17 of the 32 total fatalities and a significant share of visible injuries and pain-related collisions. These high-CalEnviroScreen-score tracts also tend to align with areas facing systemic barriers such as poor air quality, high poverty rates, limited access to health services, and substandard active transportation infrastructure like sidewalks, crossings, and lighting.
This concentration of severe traffic injuries and fatalities in Tulare’s most environmentally and socioeconomically burdened neighborhoods highlights the urgent need for equity-focused transportation and safety planning. Prioritizing investments in these areas, such as safe pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, traffic calming, and access to public transit, addresses safety disparities and supports broader goals of environmental justice, health equity, and community well-being.
Equity All Injury Collisions in the City of Tulare
Cal Enviro Score Fatal Severe Injury Other Visible Injury Complain of Pain 75-80 9 5 12 26
80-85 4 10 6 19
85-90 1 5 9 10
90-95 17 8 15 34
95-100 1 1 2 0
Total 32 29 44 89
Collisions within the Equitable areas in Tulare (2019-2023) Primary Collision Factor
Number of Collisions
11 22
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 Other Improper Driving
Unsafe Starting or Backing
Other than Driver
Pedestrian Violation
Improper Turning
Automobile ROW
Pedestrian ROW
Unsafe Lane Change
Improper Passing
Wrong side of road
Unsafe Speed
DUI
Unknown
11 32
7 22
19 11
51 5
19 28
11 3
Active Transportation Plan
61 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Type of Collisions in Tulare’s Equitable Areas
In equitable areas of Tulare, the most common type of collision is broadside collisions, with over 80 collisions, significantly outpacing all other categories. This pattern suggests a high frequency of collisions at intersections, likely linked to failure to yield, signal violations, or lack of protected turns. Vehicle/pedestrian collisions are the second most common, with nearly 40 collisions, underscoring the vulnerability of non-motorized users in areas with limited pedestrian infrastructure. Rear-end, head-on, and hit-object collisions also occur at notable levels, while more severe outcomes like overturned vehicles are relatively rare. The chart below represents the collision type in the equitable areas within the City.
Collisions Type - Equitable Areas
Motor Vehicle Collision Types in Tulare’s Equitable Areas In equitable areas of Tulare, the vast majority of traffic collisions, 107 collisions, involve motor vehicles striking other motor vehicles, making it the most common interaction type. However, a significant number of collisions, 38 collisions, involve pedestrians, indicating serious safety concerns for vulnerable road users in these communities. Bicycle-related collisions (17) and collisions with fixed objects (14) also represent notable shares, pointing to infrastructure gaps such as the absence of protected bike lanes or traffic calming features. Seven collisions involving parked vehicles further suggest potential issues with visibility and constrained roadway design. The chart below represents motor vehicles involved in the equitable areas within the City.
Motor Vehicle Involved With - Equitable Areas
Collision Type Motor Vehicle Invovled
Number of Collisions
Number of Collisions
0 20
40 60
80 100
Other
Vehicle/ Pedestrian
Overturned
Broadside
Hit Object
Rear End
Sideswipe
Head-On
19 11
19 2
38 5
85 15
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
Fixed Object
Other Object
Bicycle
Parked Motor
Vehicle
Motor Vehicle on
Other Roadway
Other Motor
Vehicle
Pedestrian
Non-Collision
2 38
107
2 7
17 14
2 Active Transportation Plan
62 Injury Collisions Priority Census Tracts identified as Equitable Areas Additional Areas of Concern in Equitable Areas
1. Demographics of Injured Parties
Many collisions involve young adults (20–39 years old), and many victims are pedestrians or bicyclists.
A high portion of those involved are identified with racial/ethnic backgrounds typically associated with disadvantaged groups (e.g., Latino, Black, and Asian individuals).
2. Hot Spot Corridors
Repeated references to Prosperity Avenue, Mooney Blvd, Cartmill Ave, and Bardsley Avenue suggest they are high-risk corridors in equity areas.
These corridors intersect with frequent collision locations and routes with limited safety infrastructure, indicating key opportunities for Complete Streets enhancements.
3. Movement Prior to Collision (MVIW Patterns)
Many collisions involve pedestrians crossing mid-block or vehicles making unsafe turns, indicating a need for more marked crosswalks, curb extensions, and protected left turns.
4. Disability and Age-Related Risk
Some involved parties are elderly individuals (70+ years) or children and teens, suggesting the need to design safe routes to school and age-inclusive pedestrian environments.
5. Socioeconomic and Built Environment Patterns
The combination of high poverty, low educational attainment, and limited vehicle ownership in these tracts means that residents rely heavily on walking, biking, or transit, making them more vulnerable to unsafe road conditions.
In summary, additional collision data analysis in equitable areas of Tulare reveals key spatial and demographic patterns. A large share of victims are pedestrians and young adults, many from historically marginalized racial and socioeconomic groups. High-risk corridors such as Prosperity Avenue, Mooney Boulevard, and Cartmill Avenue emerge as repeated collision locations, often lacking pedestrian crossings and traffic calming measures. Vulnerable road users, including children, seniors, and individuals with disabilities, are overrepresented in collision records. These findings reinforce the urgent need for inclusive, context-sensitive transportation solutions tailored to the environmental and social realities of Tulare’s most burdened neighborhoods.
The map on left highlights injury collisions in priority census tracts identified as equitable areas within Tulare.
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND CAL ENVIRO SCORE
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Complaint of Pain
Other Visible Injury
Severe Injury
Fatal
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
0.01 - 75
75 - 80
80 - 85
85 - 90
90 - 95
95 - 100
!
!
!
!
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
CAL ENVIRO SCORE
ILEGEND
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
0.01 - 75
75 - 80
80 - 85
85 - 90
90 - 95
95 - 100
Parks
State Highway 99
Street
City of Tulare Limits
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
Active Transportation Plan
63 Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions and Needs Assessment Active Transportation Plan
Implications for Collisions in Tulare
Tulare contains several census tracts designated as equitable focus areas due to a concentration of socioeconomic and environmental stressors. These areas face pronounced disparities across multiple dimensions:
1. High Poverty Rates:
• Many of the equity tracts in Tulare fall within the lowest income brackets, with a poverty percentage ranging from 20% to 30% in the dataset. • This economic hardship limits residents’ ability to afford reliable transportation, access health care, or live in safer housing conditions.
2. Limited Accessibility to Essential Services:
• Equity tracts often have restricted access to vital services like medical facilities, grocery stores, and employment centers. • These limitations elevate transportation dependency and create mobility challenges for residents without private vehicles.
3. Infrastructure Deficiencies:
• Areas with higher concentrations of pedestrian and cyclist collisions coincide with neighborhoods that lack adequate sidewalks, street lighting, or marked crossings. • The collision data in these tracts shows frequent incidents near arterial streets and state routes, indicating poor infrastructure contributing to unsafe conditions.
4. Economic and Social Barriers:
• Disadvantaged communities in Tulare exhibit lower education attainment and limited employment opportunities. • These barriers affect economic mobility and influence transportation mode choices, increasing reliance on walking and biking, often in unsafe environments.
5. Environmental Health Stressors:
According to CalEnviroScreen 4.0, many identified equity tracts score high on pollution burdens, including diesel emissions and poor air quality.
These environmental risks compound the health vulnerabilities of the residents.
By aligning the collision and equity analysis findings with the City’s broader transportation safety goals, Tulare can develop data-driven safety initiatives to reduce high-injury collisions and improve transportation access for all residents, particularly in disadvantaged communities. The entire City of Tulare falls within disadvantaged community areas, as identified through socioeconomic and accessibility factors. Due to the significant transportation challenges and safety concerns in these areas, they will receive focused attention during the development of safety projects. Targeted interventions will improve pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, address high-injury corridors, and enhance overall mobility equity to ensure safer and more accessible transportation options for all residents.
Active Transportation Plan
64 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
Community engagement plays an essential role in the successful development of an ATP.
It helps create more equitable, practical, and implementable solutions. The community engagement strategy consisted of surveys and workshops, providing many opportunities for residents to share feedback.
Project Website
The Tulare Active Transportation Plan website (tularesafestreets.com) serves as a comprehensive hub for the City’s effort to enhance walking, biking, rolling, and overall multimodal safety. The homepage introduces the ATP as a data-driven, inclusive strategy designed to guide infrastructure investments, such as sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks, and multi-use trails, while emphasizing public input, safety, connectivity, equity, health, economic resilience, and climate benefits.
Key sections include:
• Project Overview & Goals: Outlining objectives like reducing pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities, improving connectivity to schools and transit, supporting zero-emission travel, and promoting physical and mental well-being. • Public Outreach: Encouraging community engagement through surveys, pop-up events, comment forms, and stakeholder outreach, with an open invitation for feedback.
• Collision History: This interactive map shows reported collisions in Tulare between 2019 and 2023, allowing users to explore hotspots and collision severity.
Interactive Map Input
In addition to the online survey, the project website included an interactive map input tool that allowed community members to pin specific locations or street segments within the City of Tulare where they experienced safety issues or had improvement suggestions. This map-based feature enabled residents to provide location-specific feedback, helping the planning team identify priority areas for walking, biking, and roadway improvements based on real community input.
Community Health Fair (Pop-Up Event)
On June 4, 2025, the City of Tulare and TJKM participated in a pop-up outreach event at the Community Health Fair hosted by the Parks and Recreation Department. The event served as an opportunity to introduce the Active Transportation Plan (ATP), share key data on collisions and existing conditions, and gather public feedback through surveys, maps, and interactive discussions. Participants prioritized improvements such as enhanced crosswalks, better lighting, protected bike lanes, and traffic calming in residential areas, while also calling for stronger traffic law enforcement and public safety education. The event underscored community support for safer, more inclusive transportation and provided critical input to inform the ATP.
Street Story Report - Tulare
Street Story is an online platform developed by UC Berkeley that allows community members to report transportation-related experiences, including crashes, near-misses, hazards, and safe locations. The tool helps collect location-specific, user-generated data to support planning efforts by providing insights into where and why people feel unsafe or safe while traveling.
3. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 03
Source: https://www.tularesafestreets.com/
Active Transportation Plan
65 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
a risk of a collision, but that risk had yet to materialize as an actual event.
This is more than a general fear of a collision occurring, but an intuitive and rational sense that a particular location was unsafe.
The comments received were about Prosperity Avenue, J Street, Pratt St, Tulare Avenue, and Hillman Street. The most common concerns involved bicycle-pedestrian safety and speeding. The results of the interactive map are shown below. In the screenshot of the map input platform below, each dot and line represents a comment provided by a community member.
Comments received from the community are attached in Appendix E.
Screenshot of the interactive map input platform representing dot and line showing comments provided by the community members.
Project Website and Public Map Input Platform
The website served as a central hub for project information, public engagement opportunities, and data resources. It provides background on the ATP process, goals, and timeline, along with links to online surveys, interactive mapping tools, and upcoming community meeting announcements. The interactive map allowed residents and stakeholders to identify locations with safety concerns, missing pedestrian or bicycle facilities, and opportunities for network improvements. Feedback collected through the online tools and in-person outreach events was incorporated into the plan, ensuring the recommendations reflect community needs and priorities. This approach enabled participation from a broader audience, including those unable to attend traditional public meetings.
Project website: Tulare Safe Streets
Online Map Tool
Community members and stakeholders shared their observations and concerns regarding locations and situations where collisions are occurring but are not necessarily being reported. They shared their knowledge and experiences of places where “near-miss” collisions were happening. They also indicated locations that did not “feel safe” and that a heightened risk of collision could occur despite a lack of documented collision data. In other words, there was Active Transportation Plan
66 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
Traffic Law Enforcement Perceptions:
When asked whether traffic laws (speed limits, yielding to pedestrians, etc.) are adequately enforced:
• The most common response was Agree, followed by Neutral. • A smaller number of respondents indicated Disagree or Strongly Disagree, suggesting some concerns about enforcement effectiveness.
Support for Traffic Enforcement:
Residents were somewhat split on the level of enforcement needed:
• The largest share supported more enforcement.
• Several felt the current level is sufficient, while one respondent wanted less enforcement and another was unsure.
Bike Lanes and Pedestrian Spaces:
Feedback highlighted a general dissatisfaction with bike and pedestrian infrastructure:
• Most rated availability of bike lanes and pedestrian-friendly spaces as Fair or Poor. • Only one respondent rated them as Good, and none considered them Excellent.
Speed Reduction near schools and residential areas:
The residents of Tulare would like to support speed reduction measures in the areas close proximity to schools and residential areas to improve safety amongst children who walk and bike in an around those areas.
The survey feedback results from the community are summarized below:
Age Group
Respondents represented a range of age groups, with the majority being between 30–39 years old, followed by 20–29 years. Smaller shares of participants were in the 40–49 and 50–59 categories, while no responses came from those under 19 or over 60.
Primary Mode of Travel:
The overwhelming majority of respondents reported that their primary mode of travel is driving, with one respondent indicating bicycling. No respondents selected walking, transit, carpooling, or other alternatives as their main mode of transportation.
Summary of Traffic Survey recieved from the Community
60+
50-59
40-49
30-39
20-29
15-19
<15
3 5
1 2
0 1 2 3 4 5
Respondents
Options
Options Respondents
0 2
4 6
8 10
Public Carpooling E-Scooter Other
Transportation
Motor- Rideshare
cycle/
Moped
Walk Bike Drive
10 1
0.0 1.0
2.0 3.0
4.0 Strongly
Disagree
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree
Agree
4 3
22 22
Options Options
Options
Options
Respondents
Respondents Respondents
Respondents
0 1
2 3
4 5
Less Not sure
Enforcement
More
Enforcement
5 11
4 11
44 0.0
1.0 2.0
3.0 4.0
Excellent Good Fair Poor
1 44
0 2
4 6
8 10
Yes No Other
9 1
Active Transportation Plan
67 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
Transportation Safety Priorities
Residents prioritize better bike/pedestrian infrastructure for safety. Improving driver behavior improvements are also notable concerns. Education about road safety ranked lower, suggesting a focus on infrastructure and enforcement first.
Effectiveness of Public Education Campaigns on Transportation Safety Four respondent explicitly found them effective, suggesting most residents are skeptical or unsure. Need for improvement: If “No” dominates, residents may favor alternative strategies (e.g., infrastructure upgrades, enforcement) or redesigned campaigns. Uncertainty: Some respondents were undecided, indicating a lack of clear impact from past efforts. 0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 Educating the Other
public about
road safety
Improving
driver
behavior
Increasing
public transit
options
Improving bike
and pedestrian
infrastructure
Reducing
vehicle
speed
7 1
2 Options
Options
Respondents Respondents 0.0
1.0 2.0
3.0 4.0
Yes No Not sure
4 3
Community Health Fair (Pop-Up Event) – June 4, 2025
TJKM, along with City Staff, participated in a community engagement outreach effort on June 4, 2025, between 8:30 and 10:30 a.m., as part of the Community Health Fair hosted by the Parks and Recreation Department.
The goal of this event was to introduce the ATP to the community, provide information about collision data and existing conditions, and provide a platform for feedback and education.
• Participating in the event allowed high public attendance, offering an ideal setting to engage directly with families, children, and other community members. Representatives from the City and TJKM jointly hosted a pop-up covered booth, where input was collected through surveys and interactive dialogue was encouraged. Participants were invited to complete surveys, engage with maps displaying collision data, and learn about the City’s current mobility challenges and opportunities.
• To support public understanding and participation, informative brochures and flyers highlighting the importance of bike safety were created and distributed. The booth also featured giveaways such as bike headlamps, reflective bands, lighted bells, and healthy snacks, all aimed to encourage safer biking habits and promote active lifestyles.
• Community feedback was collected through in-person surveys and the interactive online map tool as part of the project website.
In addition, representatives from Tulare police and fire departments contributed valuable insights by marking key locations of concern and discussing safety priorities from their field experience.
Public response to the engagement was enthusiastic. We received 22 completed feedback surveys and several thoughtful contributions via the online interactive platform. Survey findings revealed that most respondents were between the ages of 20 and 39, with the majority primarily relying on driving but also showing interest in walking and biking. Many participants raised safety concerns, specifically distracted driving, speeding, and failure to stop at traffic signals. The lack of bike lanes, obstructed or narrow sidewalks and poor nighttime visibility were barriers to commuting safely via non-motorized travel modes.
When asked about improvements, participants indicated enhanced crosswalks and pedestrian signals, better street lighting, speed management in residential areas, and protected bike lanes should be prioritized. Public education on road safety and more vigorous enforcement of traffic laws were also supported.
Participating in the Community Health Fair demonstrated strong community interest in safer and more inclusive transportation infrastructure in Tulare. The feedback gathered will be instrumental in shaping Tulare’s ATP to ensure it reflects residents’ lived experiences and needs. 4 Active Transportation Plan
68 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
0 5
10 15
20 Limited
visibility
when
bicycling
or walking
Narrow or
obstructed
sidewalks
No
designated
bike lanes
or side walks
People
driving
run red
lights/
stop signs
Distracted
drivers
People
driving out
of their
lanes
Driving
too
fast
11 6
16 10
5 ing interventions across all travel modes will ensure a safer and more equitable transportation network for all users.
Perceived Safety Issues When Driving, Biking, or Walking Tulare residents were asked to identify specific factors that make them feel unsafe when using City streets, whether driving, biking, or walking.
The chart above summarizes the key safety concerns raised in the survey responses.
Distracted drivers were the most frequently cited concern, which was mentioned 16 times, underscoring a significant behavioral issue affecting all roadway users. This was followed by driving too fast (11 concerns) and people running red lights or stop signs (10 concerns), highlighting the urgency of addressing reckless driving behaviors.
Infrastructure-related issues also emerged as significant barriers to safety, including narrow or obstructed sidewalks, limited visibility when walking or biking (both noted seven times), and a lack of designated bike lanes or sidewalks (five concerns). These points relate to physical conditions in the built environment that need attention to improve safety and accessibility for non-motorized users.
7 7
Summary of Traffic Concerns from the
Community Pop-Up Event
As part of Tulare’s ongoing efforts to develop a safer, more inclusive ATP, community members were invited to participate in a survey during the Community Pop-Up Event held on June 4, 2025. This outreach aimed to gather local perspectives on transportation habits, safety concerns, and infrastructure priorities across Tulare. Through this event, we heard directly from residents about their everyday experiences, whether walking, biking, driving, or using public transit, and the barriers they face in feeling safe on City streets. The feedback collected serves as a critical foundation for shaping future improvements and ensuring that the plan reflects the community’s values and needs.
Age Group Distribution of Traffic Concerns
As part of the community survey, participants were asked to share their traffic safety concerns and identify their age group. The chart illustrates the number of traffic-related concerns reported by respondents across different age brackets.
Most concerns came from individuals aged 20–29 and 30–39, each contributing seven responses, highlighting that younger adults are particularly engaged with or affected by transportation issues in Tulare. The 40–49 age group followed, contributing four concerns. Older adults reported fewer concerns, with only one concern each from the 50–59 and 60+ age groups.
This distribution suggests that younger residents may experience more 0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+
4 1 1
daily interactions with unsafe transportation infrastructure or be more active in voicing their concerns. It also reinforces the importance of engaging this demographic when designing future safety improvements under Tulare’s ATP. The insights gathered from this age-diverse feedback ensure the plan is responsive to the needs of all users across generations.
Primary Mode of Travel and Reported Traffic Concerns
The chart above reflects the number of traffic safety concerns reported by participants, categorized by their primary mode of travel in Tulare.
Individuals who primarily drive reported the overwhelming majority of 21 concerns. This finding highlights that despite focusing on walking and biking in active transportation planning, drivers remain significantly impacted by safety issues, likely related to speeding, aggressive behavior, or poor infrastructure design at intersections.
Those who walk (three responses), bike (two responses), report fewer concerns, or use E-scooters/E-bikes (one response) and carpool (one response).
This distribution suggests that while walking and biking are essential components of the transportation system, the driving experience presents the most prevalent challenges for residents.
These insights and the age group analysis reinforce the importance of addressing vehicle-based safety concerns while prioritizing improvements for non-motorized and shared modes. As Tulare advances its ATP, balanc0 5 10
15 20
25 Walk Bike E-Scooter/ E-Bike Carpooling Drive
3 2
21 1 1 7 7
Age Group
Number of Collisions
Mode Unsafe when Driving, Biking or Walking
Number of Collisions
Number of Collisions
Active Transportation Plan
69 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
Other recommended improvements included:
• Adding more speed limit signs (four responses)
• Installing speed bumps in residential areas (three responses) • Widening bike lanes (three responses)
These results show a balanced concern for pedestrian and bicyclist safety, along with general speed control and driver behavior. The community feedback highlights that residents are seeking a comprehensive and layered approach to safety that addresses lighting, enforcement, intersection design, and separation between modes. These insights will be instrumental in guiding the development of Tulare’s ATP and ensuring it reflects real, lived experiences across the City’s transportation network.
Community Priorities for Improving Transportation Safety Tulare residents were asked to identify what they believe should be the top priority for improving transportation safety in the City. The chart above reflects the survey responses and provides key insight into community values and safety needs.
The most frequently selected priority was improving driver behavior through enforcement, with eight respondents identifying it as critical. This Although people driving out of their lanes was reported less frequently (six concerns), it still reflects erratic or careless driving behavior contributing to unsafe travel conditions.
These insights collected directly from community members highlight the dual need for infrastructure upgrades and behavioral interventions. Addressing both will be essential in shaping a safer, more inclusive transportation system under Tulare’s ATP.
Community-Preferred Improvements for Roadway Safety
Residents were asked to identify infrastructure improvements that would most effectively enhance roadway safety for all users as part of the community engagement. The chart above reflects the distribution of these suggestions.
The top-ranked improvement was improving crosswalks and pedestrian signals, cited seven times, reflecting the community’s desire for safer and more visible pedestrian infrastructure. This was closely followed by increasing street lighting, timing traffic signals better to reduce speeding, and adding physical barriers between bike lanes and traffic, each cited six times. These concerns reflect a demand for visibility improvements and traffic calming strategies to create safer travel conditions, particularly for vulnerable users.
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 Adding more
speed limit
signs
Adding
physical
barriers
between
bike lanes
Widening
bike
lanes
signals better
to reduce
speeding
Installing
speed
bumps in
residential
areas
Improving
crosswalks
and
pedestrian
signals
Increasing
street
lighting
6 7
3 6
3 6
4 iour
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 Educating
the public
about road
safety
Improving driver
behav
through
enforcement
Increasing
public transit
options
Improving
bike and
pedestrian
infrastructure
Reduce
vehicles
speeds
6 8
7 2 2
highlights a strong community concern with law compliance and accountability on the road, particularly in light of other reported issues like distracted driving, speeding, and running red lights.
Seven participants cited educating the public about road safety as the second most common priority, emphasizing the community’s interest in not only enforcement but also proactive, awareness-based strategies that influence long-term behavior change.
Improving bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure also ranked high (six mentions), aligning with previous concerns about inadequate sidewalks, bike lanes, and visibility, particularly for non-motorized road users.
Meanwhile, fewer participants identified reducing vehicle speeds (two concerns) and increasing public transit options (two concerns) as top priorities. While still relevant, these issues appeared to take a backseat to more direct behavioral and infrastructure problems.
These responses indicate a dual strategy is needed to improve safety in Tulare: one that strengthens infrastructure for active transportation and complements it with behavioral interventions and public education. This well-rounded approach will be vital for achieving the goals of the ATP and creating safer streets for all.
Improve Roadway Safety for all Users
Improving Transportation Safety
Number of Collisions
Number of Collisions
behavior
Active Transportation Plan
70 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
Street Story Report- (October 1st, 2018 through July 21st, 2025) This information has been collected through Street Story. This online platform allows residents, community groups, and agencies to collect community input about transportation crashes, near misses, general hazards, and safe locations to travel.
Between October 1, 2018, and July 21, 2025, Street Story collected four community reports on transportation safety within a one-mile radius in Tulare.
Overall Summary
Half of the reports were crashes, and the other half were hazards; no near misses or safe locations were reported.
The crashes involved a pedestrian and an e-scooter rider (the latter occurring in a bike lane or paved shoulder). In contrast, the hazards involved a vehicle occupant and a situation involving multiple modes. Common causes reported for crashes and hazards included poor or missing bike infrastructure, failure to yield, and speeding. Residents also flagged malfunctioning or missing signs and signals as key concerns. 10 community suggestions were submitted for improving safety. The most common recommendations included adding more stop signs and signals, reducing vehicle speeds, improving bike lanes, increasing lighting, enhancing crosswalks, and providing public education on road safety. This feedback offers localized, real-world insights into the types of infrastructure and behavioral issues residents face and provides a clear direction for prioritizing safety improvements in Tulare.
Category Details
Timeframe October 1, 2018 – July 21, 2025
Total Reports 4 (2 crashes, two hazards)
Modes Involved Walking (1 crash), E-scooter (1 crash), Vehicle occupant (1 hazard), Multiple modes (1 hazard)
Top Crash/Hazard Causes Poor or missing bike lanes (33%), People do not yield (33%), Speeding (33%) Hazard Location Issues Faulty/missing signs/signals, unsafe speeds, failure to yield Improvement Suggestions More stop signs/signals (30%)- Slower speeds (20%)- Better bike lanes, crosswalks, lighting, seating, and education (10% each) Summary Table: Street Story Reports- Tulare (1-mile Radius) Active Transportation Plan
71 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
Summary of Traffic Concerns from the Community Pop-Up Event This input helps inform transportation planning and safety improvements by capturing lived experiences of people walking, biking, scooting, or driving in the area. These reports included an even split between crash and hazard reports, with no near-misses or designated “safe” locations reported during this period. This small but meaningful dataset provides insight into residents’ lived experiences navigating the area on foot, by scooter, or by car. The map on right represents all the reported crashes, near misses, and hazards.
The chart above summarizes the types of transportation safety reports submitted through Street Story. Of the four total reports, 50 percent were crash-related, and the remaining 50 percent were hazard-related. There were no reports of near-miss incidents or safe locations. This even split highlights the prevalence of both types and potential dangers in the area.
Travel Modes Summary
Report Type Count Percent
Crash 2 50%
Near-miss 0 0%
Hazard 2 50%
Safe 0 0%
Total 4 100%
Type of Transportation
50%
Crash
50%
Hazard
0.0 1.0
2.0 Crash Near-miss Hazard Safe
1 1
1 1
Walking Riding an E-Scooter Riding in a vehicle
All the reported Crashes, Near-miss, and Hazards
Total Reports
Active Transportation Plan
72 Chapter 3 - Community Engagement
Active Transportation Plan
The chart on previous page summarizes the travel modes involved in the Street Story reports. Among the two crash reports, one involved a pedestrian (walking) and the other someone riding an e-scooter. The two hazard reports included one related to riding in a vehicle and another involving multiple travel modes. No reports were submitted for near-miss incidents, biking, mobility device use, or safe locations. This limited dataset highlights a mix of pedestrian, micro-mobility, and vehicle-related safety concerns in the area.
The table above provides a detailed breakdown of the four transportation safety reports submitted in Tulare by travel mode and report type.
There were two crash reports, one involving a pedestrian and the other an e-scooter rider. The two hazard reports related to vehicle riding and multiple travel modes. No reports were submitted for biking, bus usage, mobility devices, or safe experiences, and no near-miss incidents were reported across any mode. This snapshot highlights limited but diverse modal involvement in safety concerns within the study area.
Mode Crash Near-miss Hazard Safe Total
Biking 0 0 0 0 0
Walking 1 0 0 0 1
Riding and
E-Scooter 1 0 0 0 1
Taking a Bus 0 0 0 0 0
Using a Mobility
Device 0 0 0 0 0
Riding in a
Vehicle 0 0 1 0 1
Multiple Modes 0 0 1 0 1
Other 0 0 0 0 0
Total 2 0 0 0 0
Travel Mode and Report Type The reported causes of crashes and hazards reveal behavioral and infrastructure-related concerns. All three recorded causes of crash or hazard events were cited equally: poor or missing bike lanes or pathways, people not yielding the right-of-way, and unsafe vehicle speeds, each representing 33% of the total causes reported. Among the hazard-specific submissions, additional concerns included malfunctioning or missing traffic signs and dangerous driving behavior such as speeding and failure to yield.
As part of the Street Story platform’s community engagement, respondents were invited to suggest roadway safety improvements. Ten suggestions were submitted, with the most common being installing more stop signs and traffic signals, which comprised 30 percent of the responses. This was followed by calls to reduce vehicle speeds (20 percent), and several suggestions received equal support at 10 percent each, including: improving bike lane infrastructure, adding more lighting, enhancing crosswalk visibility, installing public seating (such as benches), and providing education for road users about safe behaviors.
These reports and community insights reveal a clear need for behavioral interventions and infrastructure improvements. While the number of reports is limited, the consistency in the issues raised, such as lack of yielding, unsafe speeds, and deficient street design, provides valuable direction for prioritizing actions in Tulare’s ongoing efforts to improve transportation safety and equity for all users.
Crash/ Near-miss Cause Count Percent
Poor/Missing bike lanes or paths 1 33%
People don’t yield 1 33%
Someone was speeding 1 33%
Total 3
Hazard Location Cause Count Percent
Signs, Signals or Markings were
not working or missing 1 33%
People don’t yield 1 33%
People drive at unsafe speeds 1 33%
Total 3
Reported by Cause
Improvement Suggestion Count Percent
More stop signs and/ or signals 3 30%
Slower speeds 2 20%
Better or more bike lanes or pathways 1 10%
More lighting 1 10%
Better or more crosswalks 1 10%
More places for people to sit or rest (ex. benches) 1 10% Education for road users on how to use the road safety 1 10% Total 10
Reported by Improvement Suggestions
Active Transportation Plan
73 Chapter 4 - Vision and Goals
Active Transportation Plan
The Tulare Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is guided by a bold, community-driven vision for the City’s walking, biking, and rolling networks. The ATP’s vision is to create a complete, safe, and comfortable network of trails, sidewalks, and bikeways that serve all residents of Tulare. The plan focused on equitably improving walking and bicycling safety, increasing active transportation trips, enhancing geographic equity, and filling key gaps in the City’s active transportation networks.
VISION STATEMENT
Building on this foundation, the 2025 Active Transportation Plan Vision is expanded to:
“Tulare envisions a City where individuals of all ages, abilities, income levels, and backgrounds can safely, conveniently, and comfortably walk, bike, roll, or use mobility devices to reach their destinations and access transit. A well-connected network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities will seamlessly link homes, jobs, schools, transit hubs, and other key destinations. This network will empower residents to choose active, sustainable travel options, fostering improved public health, reduced environmental impact, and an enhanced quality of life.”
This vision statement reflects the community’s aspirations for Tulare, prioritizing active transportation as a fundamental part of a balanced, equitable, and livable transportation system. This overarching vision statement is the guiding principle that shapes the goals, strategies, and recommended improvements detailed throughout the Tulare ATP. Specifically, this ATP was updated to accomplish the following goals and objectives:
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Goal 1: Safety Enhancements
Objective: Reduce the number of injuries and fatalities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and users of mobility devices.
Strategies:
1.1: Provide safe pedestrian and bicycle safety access by installing proven countermeasures using practices, emerging technology, and tools.
1.2: Support programs like traffic calming and safe routes to school to encourage more students to walk and bike to school.
1.3: Implement law and enforcement for issues related to pedestrian and bicycle violations.
1.4: Promote education campaigns on road safety.
Goal 2: Connect, Accessibility, and Comfort
Objective: Create a comprehensive, connected network of pedestrian and bicycle routes that link homes, workplaces, schools, parks, transit, and other key destinations that are comfortable and convenient.
Strategies:
2.1: Develop a comprehensive pedestrian and bicycle network plan prioritizing continuous and convenient connections between residential neighborhoods and major destinations, including employment centers, schools, parks, transit stops, and commercial areas.
2.2: Identify and address gaps in the sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure to ensure a safe, seamless, and accessible network, focusing primarily on areas with high pedestrian or bicycle demand and those with known safety issues.
2.3: Install consistent, user-friendly wayfinding signage throughout the pedestrian and bicycle network to help people navigate to key destinations.
2.4: Enhance walking and biking connections to bus stops and transit hubs with better lighting, ramps, and signage.
4. VISION AND GOALS 04
Active Transportation Plan
74 Chapter 4 - Vision and Goals
Active Transportation Plan
2.5: Encourage walkable, mixed-use developments that supports short and safe walking and biking trips.
2.6: Build facilities that are ADA-compliant and comfortable for people of all ages and abilities.
2.7: Utilize state-of-the-practice and emerging designs included in this plan and national manuals such as the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide and AASHTO Guide for developing Bicycle Facilities, 2nd Edition.
Goal 3: Equity and Inclusivity
Objective: Ensure that active transportation options are accessible to all community members, regardless of age, ability, income, or background.
Strategies:
3.1: Encourage comfortable walking, bicycling, and transit facilities in disadvantaged communities.
3.2: Engage low-income communities and underserved populations during all stages of the planning and implementation process.
3.3: Consider walking and bicycling infrastructure as a tool for community revitalization and economic growth.
Goal 4: Promote Walking and Bicycling
Objective: Encourage and support walking and bicycling through education, community engagement, and accessible programs that build awareness, skills, and enthusiasm for active transportation.
Strategies:
4.1: Education: Provide an educational program for residents explaining the benefits of active transportation.
4.2: Conduct group skills rides, walking and bicycling audits, and other community events to encourage walking and bicycling.
4.3 Provision of Active Transportation Infrastructure: Identify and work to implement a complete and convenient active transportation network.
4.4: Conduct classroom/physical education lessons, mock cities and traffic gardens, bicycle rodeos, and field trips to promote bicycling and walking among students.
Goal 5: Education, Encouragement, and Enforcement
Objective: Raise awareness and encourage the use of active transportation options.
Strategies:
5.1: Implement community programs, events, and campaigns that promote walking, biking, and rolling; provide resources and incentives for active transportation.
5.2: Implement enforcement of bicycle and pedestrian-related violations by motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, and emphasize positive enforcement for safe bicycling behavior by children.
5.3: Support Safe Routes to School efforts, including educational and incentive programs to encourage more students to bicycle or walk to school.
5.4: Maintain bicycle route maps and make these maps available to Tulare households, visitors, and businesses.
5.5: Continue to partner on school-based education and encouragement activities, utilizing partnerships with law enforcement, bicycle advocates, and other appropriate groups and organizations.
5.6: Develop and maintain a safety campaign for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Where appropriate, utilize existing materials and education campaign materials.
Goal 6: Support a healthy environment through sustainable transportation Objective: Reduce vehicle emissions and environmental impacts by promoting active transportation and implementing strategies that lower vehicle miles traveled (VMT) across the City.
Strategies:
6.1: Implement a citywide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) policy and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program that includes bike share, transit passes, and carpooling strategies.
6.2: Establish and enforce a policy framework that reduces vehicle miles traveled to support climate action and air quality goals.
6.3: Launch a TDM program that encourages alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle uses through incentives, outreach, and mobility options.
6.4: Support the implementation of bike share, scooter share, and carpooling programs to reduce dependence on personal vehicles.
6.5: Provide or subsidize transit passes for residents, students, and employees to increase public transit ridership.
6.6: New developments must incorporate TDM strategies such as endof-trip bicycle facilities, rideshare support, and transit access improvements.
Goal 7: Data Collection and Performance Measures
Objective: Track progress and adjust strategies based on data and community feedback.
Strategies:
7.1: Collect and analyze data on active transportation usage, safety, and community satisfaction regularly.
7.2: Review collision data annually to identify problem areas involving bicyclists and pedestrians and to prioritize projects and program activities using collision history as one metric.
7.3: Improve bike and pedestrian safety at intersections using best practices and emerging tools.
7.4: Update the plan as needed to reflect new challenges and opportunities.
Active Transportation Plan
75 Chapter 4 - Vision and Goals
Active Transportation Plan
Performance Measures
Goal Performance Measure Source of Information Baseline Current Performance
Promote Walking
and Bicycling
Number of active transportation education and
outreach events conducted annually
City of Tulare, Community Events (Street Story,
Community Health Fair – June 2025) 01
Safety Number of pedestrian and bicycle collisions annually Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS, 2019-2023)
Pedestrian – 01
Bicycle – 01
Connectivity Number of active transportation projects completed annually City of Tulare To be established
Health Walking and biking mode share percentage
U.S. Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community
Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801:
“Commuting Characteristics by Sex.
Walked – 0.7%
Bicycled – 1%
Equity Number of bicycle/pedestrian projects implemented in equity-priority or disadvantaged areas City of Tulare, CalEnviroScreen 01 Accessibility
1. Miles of new bike facilities (bike lanes, trails)
2. Miles/number of new pedestrian facilities (e.g.,
sidewalks, walkways, curb ramps, crosswalks)
City of Tulare, Capital Improvements Projects NA
(project-dependent)
Environment Reduction in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita after plan implementation City of Tulare, VMT Policy To be calculated post-ATP adoption Goal 8: Effective Implementation of Active Transportation Projects and Programs Objectives: Establish strong partnerships, policies, and funding mechanisms to support the planning, construction, and long-term success of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and programs.
Strategies:
8.1: Ensure new developments include funding and constructing nearby pedestrian and bicycle facilities to support safe and convenient access.
8.2: Coordination with Other Agencies: Collaborate with Tulare City, Tulare Union High, Sundale, and Liberty School Districts, Tulare Parks & Recreation and Community Services Department to conduct educational activities to teach students about pedestrian and bicycle safety.
Collaborate with Caltrans to identify and prioritize safety enhancement opportunities along Caltrans-owned facilities within the City limits, and advocate for Caltrans funding and partnership opportunities to support the implementation of safety improvements within these corridors.
8.3: Work with the School Districts to actively pursue Safe Routes to School (SRTS) grants to fund programs that facilitate safe bike routes.
8.4: Pursue funding opportunities for designing, developing, and maintaining walking and biking projects and programs. Goals, objectives, and strategies are intentionally listed in more than one goal area because they address multiple, interrelated outcomes and reflect best practices for comprehensive active transportation planning. Many actions, such as Safe Routes to School, education and encouragement programs, enforcement activities, and infrastructure improvements, simultaneously support safety, access, equity, behavior change, and long-term implementation. As a result, these strategies are presented under more than one goal to clearly demonstrate how a single action contributes to several Plan priorities and to maintain consistency with widely used active transportation and safety planning frameworks that emphasize integrated approaches across engineering, education, encouragement, enforcement, equity, and evaluation. This approach also ensures that the Plan aligns with funding and performance-based implementation requirements and allows projects and programs to be clearly connected to multiple goals during prioritization, reporting, and future updates of the Tulare Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Pedestrian and bicycle projects and program recommendations were formulated specifically to meet the goals and objectives within the Plan, created through a process of extensive community outreach. Performance measures were developed for these projects and programs that will help City of Tulare staff to track progress over time. Future active transportation planning efforts can utilize these performance tracking metrics to identify potential priorities moving forward.
Active Transportation Plan
76 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
A list of bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs has been developed based on the community needs assessment. This will create a safe, connected, vibrant, and well-maintained walking and bicycling network that supports people of all ages and abilities. 17 bicycle and 38 pedestrian projects are recommended for the City of Tulare.
PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
Projects identified in the Active Transportation Plan will likely be implemented in phases. A clear prioritization framework helps ensure that investments are directed toward projects with the most significant potential to improve safety, connectivity, and equity. Prioritization is also essential in positioning the City to be competitive for grant funding opportunities. The City of Tulare’s project prioritization methodology is grounded in the Plan’s goals and objectives, using measurable criteria to evaluate each proposed improvement. The evaluation considers four primary factors:
• Equity: Prioritizes projects that serve communities with higher concentrations of disadvantaged populations.
• Land Use: Gives higher scores to projects in or near areas with land uses that generate greater pedestrian and bicycle activity (e.g., schools, commercial areas, high-density housing).
• Collision History: Scores projects based on pedestrian and bicycle collision data, prioritizing areas with more incidents. • Outside Factor: Assigns a score of zero for projects located outside the City’s identified priority areas.
5. PROJECT AND PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION 05 Each criterion is assigned a score based on a high/medium/low classification, with High receiving 15 points, Medium 10 points, and Low 5 points.
The combined total across all criteria yields a Priority Score, ranging from 1 to 45 points, which determines the project’s overall priority tier:
• High Priority: 1–15 points
• Medium Priority: 15–30 points
• Low Priority: 30–45 points
The detailed project prioritization methodology and supporting materials are provided in Appendix F.
Based on the final prioritization scores, projects have been classified into Low-Priority, Medium-Priority, and High-Priority phasing, as shown in the table below.
Implementation Phase Scoring Criteria Timeline
High Priority 1-15 Less than 5 years
Medium Priority 15-30 Between 5 and 10 years
Low Priority 30-45 More than 10 years
Project Prioritization Phase
Active Transportation Plan
77 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
BICYCLE PROJECTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The map to the right shows the location of all 17 proposed bicycle projects. Projects are classified by facility type. The following table outlines proposed bicycle facility improvements across key corridors in Tulare. These projects aim to enhance bicycle safety, connectivity, and accessibility by introducing or upgrading bikeway infrastructure based on existing roadway conditions, right-of-way (ROW) availability, traffic speeds, and land use context. The recommendations include a mix of Class I (off-street paths), Class II (striped bike lanes), Class III (shared lane markings), and Class IV (separated bike lanes) facilities. Improvements include removing or narrowing medians, parking adjustments, lane reconfiguration, and potential roadway widening where feasible to support a safer and more connected bike network citywide.
The table below summarizes the list of recommended bicycle projects, including project description and implementation phasing.
Facility Type Number of Projects Existing Bicycle
Facilities (Miles) Proposed Bicycle Facilities (Miles)
Class I 1 9.34 58.09
Class II 11 17.67 46.14
Class III 2 0.06 10.01
Class IV 3 0 2.41
Total 17 27.07 116.66
*Note: The proposed bicycle facilities and network will include 2010 City of Tulare Update_Tulare County Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan, Parks and Recreation Master Plan and CIP projects from the City’s ongoing efforts. Improvements would fall under the jurisdiction of Caltrans for portions that are designated as a State highway. Details on the proposed trails can be found in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Report.
Note: A detailed, scaled version of the Proposed Bicycle Facilities map and the trails proposed in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan is included in Appendix F.
Propsoed Bicycle Projects by Type of Facility
Proposed Bikeways
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
Proposed Class II
Proposed Class I
Proposed Class III
Proposed Class IV
Proposed Class I - Parks
and Recreation Master
Plan
Existing Class I
Existing Class II
Existing Class III
Active Transportation Plan
78 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
Proposed Bicycle Facility Improvements
Id Roadway
Name Project Limits Current Conditions Recommended Facility Type Length (Miles) 1 Blackstone St E Prosperity Ave to
San Joaquin Ave
This segment traverses a residential/commercial area with existing lane geometry, including a large curve and posted speed limits of 35 to 45 mph. The roadway has a 10' center two-way left-turn lane (TWTL) and 11' through lanes. The right-of-way varies between 60 and 64 feet, and just south of Cross Avenue, the corridor connects to the Santa Fe Trail, providing an essential east-west bicycle connection. To accommodate improvements, it is recommended that the median lane be reduced from its current 13-foot width up to the intersection at Cross Avenue.
Class-II BL 1.1
N Sonora Ave to N
Walnut Ave
This approximately 3,500-foot segment has no apparent on-street parking and consists only of median striping. The area includes a commercial zone on the right side and residential on the left. The posted speed limit is currently 50 mph, with a recommended reduction to 45 mph. Red curbs are present. A Class IV facility can be initiated along this segment and continue to the terminus at Hwy 99. (45-50 mph speed limit as well as available curb-to-curb allows for Class IV) Class-IV BL 0.7
E Walnut Ave to E
Batavia Ct
ROW deviation from 52' to 64' front of Walnut Ave for about only 165 ft, 50 mph A small segment of 575' that will be class II due to limited space that doesn't allow for class IV Class-II BL 0.1 E Batavia Ct to Hwy
99 This segment passes through a commercial-rural area with a posted speed limit of 50 mph. The right-of-way varies from 30' to 55', including a narrow 228-foot stretch near Levin Avenue. At this constrained segment, consider widening the roadway to accommodate 11' travel lanes and 2–6' bike lanes. Further along, the segment narrows from 64' to 44' near Continental and then widens back to 64'. In the 44' section, bike lanes can be reduced to 5', buffers can be minimized, and travel lanes can be narrowed to 11' to maintain bike infrastructure without parking (This would remove the required width from bike buffers for both southbound and northbound directions equally) Class-IV BL 0.7
Hwy 99 to
Industrial Ave Rural corridor, 45–50 mph; ROW varies from 46' to 64'. Bike lane with buffer feasible without parking. The segment begins after a dead end. Class-II BL 0.5 2 Bardsley Ave S K St to Rd 124
This corridor traverses a mix of residential, commercial, and vacant land uses, with varying posted speed limits between 25 mph (near the high school) and 50 mph (near rural/farm segments and event venues). To accommodate Class II bike lanes, TWLTs and LTLs should be reduced to 10'. In some segments, such as east of Blackstone, approximately 470' of concrete median removal is required (40 mph zone) (the existing concrete medians could be modified with left turn movement openings along the segment) South side of Bardsley has no parking in residential/commercial areas, with existing red curbs by the church. Roadway geometry varies, especially near vacant land and farm areas, where buffers can be increased as the lane configuration transitions to two travel lanes. Near the high school, the posted speed drops to 25 mph (When children are present), requiring special consideration for school zone safety improvements.
Class-II BL 2.7
3 Mooney Blvd Tulare Ave (route
63) to Kern Ave ROW deviation from 64' to 74' approaching Tulare Ave Class-II BL 0.3 Kern Ave to E
Bardsley Ave
Closed off the residential area to the right and the Tulare canal to the left, 55 mph speed, Roadway segment transitions between median/ TWTL and two travel lanes northbound & two southbound (consider removing concrete median to fit in buffered bike lanes) (Medians can be kept and the proposed bike buffers will either have to be adjusted or removed accordingly to fit in existing curb to curb widths), Few driveways, recommend class IV bike facilities.
Class-IV BL 0.8
4 E St Zumwalt Ave to W
Prosperity Ave
Residential school zone, 25 mph; ROW varies from 68' to 38'. Maintain existing west-side parking for school use. Recommend widening east side to accommodate Class I facility. Class-I BL 0.5
W Prosperity Ave to
Lemonwood Ave
This corridor segment runs through predominantly residential and school zone areas, with posted speed limits ranging from 25 mph in school zones (e.g., near a Child Development Center and High School) to 40 mph in other segments. Lane shifts occur near W Pleasant Ave where the land use transitions from vacant to residential (40 mph). Roadway widths vary from 46' to 62', allowing opportunities to enhance bike buffers where space permits. In several segments, bike lanes and on-street parking exist without buffers. To better accommodate bicycle infrastructure, it is recommended to shrink travel lanes, particularly through residential areas and from the dead-end section onward.
Class-II BL 2.8
Active Transportation Plan
79 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
*CIP Projects: City of Tulare Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Master Plan | (2005)-Mooney Blvd (Class II): Northwest Tulare (designated striped bike lanes), Improve multi-modal access and reduce conflicts with vehicular traffic. 2022 Regional Active Transportation Plan (RATP)-citywide Bike Lane Enhancements: Class II (Bike Lanes): The plan proposes the addition of Class II bike lanes on several arterial and collector streets within Tulare to improve bicycle connectivity and safety. Downtown Bicycle Route Network: Class III (Bike Routes): Various downtown streets-Class III (shared bike routes with signage) Proposed Bicycle Facility Improvements
Id Roadway
Name Project Limits Current Conditions Recommended Facility Type Length (Miles) 5 E Inyo Ave/
State Route
137
(CalTrans)
Gemini St to S O St
This corridor runs through a mix of residential, commercial, and school zone areas, with speed limits ranging from 25 mph (in school zones) to 45 mph in other segments. In residential areas with a 45 mph limit, the roadway can be widened on both north and south sides to fit Class II bike lanes. Where right-of-way varies from 40' to 77', parking is not feasible with bike lanes, but widening on the south side can allow for bike buffers. In 35 mph zones, parking removal along either side is recommended to accommodate bike lanes. Although there are no 'no parking' signs along some 35 mph segments, minimal on-street parking exists. The corridor also includes railroad-adjacent segments and commercial areas with a posted speed of 30 mph.
Class-II BL 2.1
S O St to R St Residential area. Only parking able
could potentially fit a class III with 11' travel lanes Shared Class III/TL 0.3 6 Kern Ave S West St to S J St Residential 25mph, transition to have a striping median approaching J St to match lane geometry east of J St Class-II BL 1.3 S J St to O St Suggest Class III along the angled parking section Shared Class III/TL 0.4 7 Prosperity
Ave
S West St to Cherry
St
The paved roadway width varies from 28' to 52', potentially widening at pinch points to 52' to accommodate the proposed lane geometry, including 6' bike lanes. Existing parking is located on the north side, and in 52' segments, parking is also present on the south side. Where feasible, parking can be maintained as the roadway widens. At intersection approaches, lane geometry varies, and additional left and right turn lanes may require narrowing bike buffers and removing parking (for right turn lanes) to fit the design. Some segments have no existing parking, allowing more flexibility for bike lane and buffer allocation.
Class-II BL 1.7
8 O St Santa Fe Trail to
Walnut Ave
Along this corridor, the ROW varies between 44' and 64', widening to 64' at the northbound approach to Bardsley, where left and right turn lanes are proposed. Due to heavy truck traffic, accommodating 5' bike lanes throughout may be challenging. At the northbound approach to Tulare, a right turn lane will be added between the curb and bike lane, with 11' through lanes and a 10' right turn lane. Occasional on-street parking exists along the east and west sides of O Street; removing these small parking areas, particularly on the east side is recommended to fit Class II bike lanes, as the demand for parking is low and limited to just a few residential homes.
Class-II BL 1.4
9 I St Pleasant Ave to Inyo
Ave
This segment has residential uses on the west side and no existing parking on the east side. To improve lane continuity and avoid abrupt geometry shifts, widening the northbound bike lane or travel lane along this short segment is recommended. Parking on the east side can be removed to allow additional lane width, despite low demand.
Class-II BL 1.0
Active Transportation Plan
80 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Crosswalk Improvements (High-Visibility Crosswalks & RRFBs) Note: Project 1A is recommended in City of Tulare LRSP (2022), Ped/Bike Trail Master Plan (2005), and 1B is mentioned in County LRSP, 1K is mentioned in Tulare CIP (2023–2028) No. Location Project Type Justification Description ATP 2025 Recommendations
1A Cherry St at Santa Fe Trail
Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons
(RRFBs), improve striping and warning
signage.
Improve visibility and close proximity
near the trail
Install RRFB at the existing crossing and advanced pedestrian warning signs on Cherry St Proposed
1B
Mission Oak High School
(Bardsley Ave & Rd 124) City
Limits East
-Sidewalk infill
Install new sidewalks and signage.
-Convert to an all-way stop intersection.
Install sidewalks, safe school crossings,
RRFB, and crosswalks to address the long
distances between signals in school zones.
Install sidewalks along Bardsley Ave and Rd 124
Install RRFB with advanced flashing beacons and pedestrian warning signs Proposed 1C
Inyo Ave
- Inyo Ave & E St
- Inyo Ave & J St
(CalTrans)
High Visibility Crossing Improve visibility and proximity to schools Upgrade existing standard crosswalks to High Visibility Crossings Proposed (Collision Data)
1D K St & Martin Luther King Jr
Ave High Visibility Crossing/ RRFB
Repeated pedestrian injury site, install
flashing beacons and bulb-outs for
visibility
Install RRFB with High Visibility Crosswalk and advanced pedestrian warning signs on K St
Proposed
1E Cross Ave & N H St High Visibility Crossing/ RRFB Pedestrian injury site Install High Visibility Crosswalk and advanced pedestrian warning signs on Cross Ave Proposed
1F Alpine Ave & Laspina St High Visibility Crossing/ RRFB Install RRFB/Crosswalk Install RRFB with High Visibility Crosswalk and advanced pedestrian warning signs on Cross Ave Proposed
1G Bardsley Ave at Cesar E.
Chavez Memorial Park High Visibility Crossing/ RRFB
Route pedestrians towards midblock
crossing to eliminate illegal crossings not
at crosswalks
Install RRFB with High Visibility Crosswalk and advanced pedestrian warning signs on Bardsley Ave Proposed
1H Inyo Ave and I St
(CalTrans) High Visibility Crossing/ RRFB
Pedestrian collisions in proximity to this
intersection crossing, Inyo at unmarked
crossings
Route pedestrians towards the High Vis crossing to eliminate illegal crossings at midblocks Proposed
1I Inyo Ave and D St
(CalTrans) High Visibility Crossing/ RRFB
Pedestrian collisions in proximity to this
intersection crossing, Inyo at unmarked
crossings
Route pedestrians towards the High Visibility crossing to eliminate illegal crossings at midblocks Proposed
1J Bardsley Ave and D St High Visibility Crossing/ RRFB Pedestrian collisions in proximity to
this intersection crossing Bardsley at
unmarked crossings
Route pedestrians towards the High Visibility crossing to eliminate illegal crossings at midblocks Proposed
1K Bardsley Ave and Spruce St Improve crossing to a high-visibility crosswalk Pedestrian collisions in existing crosswalks at the intersection
Install Pedestrian Countdown Heads, APS pushbuttons, and upgrade crosswalks to High Visibility
Proposed
Active Transportation Plan
81 Crosswalk Improvements (High-Visibility Crosswalks & RRFBs) K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
"
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
High Visibility Crossing
!( HVC with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
)
!(
"
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( ") )
") ")
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
Active Transportation Plan
82 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
2. Signal Improvements
No. Location Project Type Justification Description ATP 2025 Recommendations
2A Inyo Ave & Howard St
(CalTrans) Pedestrian Flashing Beacon Upgrades Improve existing crossing and close proximity to schools Upgrade existing Flashing Beacons. Potential for a new Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) System
Proposed
2B S J St & W Kern Ave Intersection Improvements Pedestrian injury site Install Bulb-outs on the west side of Kern Ave Proposed 2C S K St & E Owens Ave Intersection Improvements Pedestrian injury site Install Bulb-outs at the north side of K St Proposed 2D Tulare Ave & J St
Signal Upgrades (Pedestrian Countdown
Heads, APS pushbuttons) LPI and High
Visibility Crosswalks
Pedestrian collisions in existing
crosswalks at the intersection
Install Pedestrian Countdown Heads, APS pushbuttons, and upgrade crosswalks to High Visibility
Proposed
2E Tulare Ave & K St
Signal Upgrades (Pedestrian Countdown
Heads, APS pushbuttons) and High Vis
Crosswalks
Pedestrian collisions in existing
crosswalks at the intersection
Install Pedestrian Countdown Heads, APS pushbuttons, and upgrade crosswalks to High Visibility
Proposed
2F Tulare Ave & O St
(CalTrans)
Signal Upgrades (Pedestrian Countdown
Heads, APS pushbuttons) and High Vis
Crosswalks
Pedestrian collisions in existing
crosswalks at the intersection
Install Pedestrian Countdown Heads, APS pushbuttons, and upgrade crosswalks to High Visibility
Proposed
2G Prosperity Ave & Brentwood
Signal Upgrades (Pedestrian Countdown
Heads, APS pushbuttons) and High Visibility
Crosswalks
Existing crossings are not up to current
ADA standards Square out crosswalks to meet current ADA compliance Proposed Note: LRSP, 2G is mentioned in LRSP (2022), CIP
Active Transportation Plan
83 Signal Improvements
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
Intersection Improvements
Pedestrian Flashing Beacon
Signal Upgrades
Pedestrian Flashing Beacon
Active Transportation Plan
84 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
3. Corridor Safety Improvements
No. Location Project Type Justification Description ATP 2025 Recommendations
3A Bardsley Ave Install concrete medians with pedestrian fencing (Modify existing medians)
Pedestrian collisions in Bardsley Ave at
unmarked crossings
Pedestrian fencing will prohibit pedestrians from crossing roadways and direct them to closest midblock/intersection crossings
Proposed
3B Inyo Ave (Pratt St to I St)
(CalTrans)
Install concrete medians with pedestrian
fencing
Pedestrian collisions in Inyo Ave at
unmarked crossings
Pedestrian fencing will prohibit pedestrians from crossing roadways and direct them to closest midblock/intersection crossings
Proposed
3C
Tulare Ave (Cherry St to
Blackstone St)
(CalTrans)
Install concrete medians with pedestrian
fencing
Pedestrian collisions in Tulare Ave at
unmarked crossings
Pedestrian fencing will prohibit pedestrians from crossing roadways and direct them to closest midblock/intersection crossings
Proposed
3D
Mooney Blvd & Prosperity Ave
(CalTrans)
- Target (CalTrans)
Install concrete medians with pedestrian
fencing
Two fatal collisions at target entrance
possibly due to j-walking from Target to
bus stop on east side of Mooney Blvd
- Install median fencing to reduce J-Walking 400ft starting south of - Target entrance, Relocation of bus stop next to gas station Proposed
Active Transportation Plan
85 Corridor Safety Improvements K ST J ST M ST O ST LASPINA ST I ST TULARE AVE F ST CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99 LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I0 0.5
1 1.5 Miles
Parks
Install concrete medians with
pedestrian fencing
Concrete Medians
Active Transportation Plan
86 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
4. Sidewalk Gap Closures
No. Corridor / Neighborhood Project Type Justification Description ATP 2025 Recommendations
4A Paige Ave (I St to Mooney
Blvd) Sidewalk infill Major gaps force pedestrians into traffic; targeted for sidewalk installation. Sidewalk infill for residential connectivity Proposed 4B Blackstone St (Lyndale Ave to
Beverly Dr) Sidewalk infill Pedestrian collisions in roadway shoulder Sidewalk infill along west side of Blackstone to prevent pedestrians from walking in road Proposed
4C NE of Spruce St, Bardsley Ave Sidewalk infill in disconnected subdivisions. Major gaps force pedestrians into traffic; targeted for sidewalk installation.
Sidewalk infill along west side of Spruce to prevent pedestrians from walking in road
Proposed
4D
North along Sacramento St
and San Joaquin Ave to Cross
Ave
Sidewalk infill Pedestrian collision in roadway as no
existing pathway for peds Sidewalk infill along both sides of Sacramento to eliminate peds in roadway Proposed 4E
Inyo Ave and Gemini St (west
of Gemini)
(CalTrans)
Sidewalk infill Pedestrian collisions in roadway shoulder Sidewalk infill along both sides of Inyo Ave to eliminate peds in roadway Proposed 4F
North along E Tulare Ave
from just west of Cherry St
to existing sidewalk west of
Highland St
(CalTrans)
Sidewalk infill Pedestrian collisions in roadway shoulder Sidewalk infill along north side of Tulare Ave to eliminate peds in roadway Proposed Note: 4B is mentioned in CIP, and 4C is mentioned in CIP as well.
Active Transportation Plan
87 Sidewalk Gap Closures
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
Sidwewalk Infill
Sidewalk Gap Closure
Active Transportation Plan
88 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
5. Pedestrian Safety Lighting
No. Corridor / Neighborhood Project Type Justification Description ATP 2025 Recommendations
5A Blackstone St Install and upgrade street lighting Address low-light visibility conditions and nighttime pedestrian collision patterns
Install and upgrade street lighting throughout corridor to address collision areas
Proposed
5B Tulare Ave
(CalTrans) east of M St Install and upgrade street lighting Pedestrian collisions during night hours,
install sufficient (pedestrian-scale)
lighting
Install and upgrade street lighting throughout corridor to address collision areas
Proposed
5C Inyo Ave
(CalTrans) Install and upgrade street lighting
Pedestrian collisions during night hours,
install sufficient (pedestrian-scale)
lighting
Install and upgrade street lighting throughout corridor to address collision areas
Proposed
5D Bardsley Ave Install and upgrade street lighting
Pedestrian collisions during night hours,
install sufficient (pedestrian-scale)
lighting
Install and upgrade street lighting throughout corridor to address collision areas
Proposed
5E Blackstone St and Kern Ave
(south of Kern by Church) Upgrade Street Lighting Fatal Collision (Vehicle/ped) – ped hit illegally crossing at night Install and upgrade street lighting throughout corridor to address collision areas
Proposed
5F
Blackstone St and Kern Ave
(south of Kern by apartment
complex)
Additional lighting or street lighting
improvements
Pedestrian collisions in proximity to this
location crossing Blackstone at un marked
crossings
Install and upgrade street lighting throughout corridor to address collision areas
Proposed
Active Transportation Plan
89 Pedestrian Safety Lighting
K ST
J ST
M ST
O ST
LASPINA ST
I ST
TULARE AVE
F ST
CROSS AVE
INYO AVE
E ST
BLACKSTONE ST
L ST
KERN AVE
MORRISON ST
R ST
B ST
ALPINE AVE
PLEASANT AVE
GEM ST
HILLMAN ST
PRATT ST
CARTMILL AVE
PROSPERITY AVE
ROAD 84
PAIGE AVE
TEX DR
GAIL AVE
FOSTER DR IRWIN ST
OAKS ST
BARDSLEY AVE
MOONEY BLVD
WEST ST
SUNRISE ST
LYNORA ST
LA DAWNA ST
NELDER GROVE ST
PACIFIC AVE
HOSFIELD DR
ENTERPRISE ST
INDUSTRIAL PL
PARKS AVE
H ST
AVILA DR
MADALYN AVE
INVERNESS ST
DEER CREEK ST
OLSON AVE
BARDSLEY AVE
PRATT ST
GAIL AVE
MOONEY BLVD
PAIGE AVE
WEST ST
ÅÄ99
ÅÄ99
LEGEND
City of Tulare Limits
State Highway 99
Street
I
0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Parks
Install and Upgrade Street Lighting
Pedestrian Safety Lighting
Active Transportation Plan
90 Chapter 5 - Project and Program Recommendation
Active Transportation Plan
6. Trail Crossing Enhancements
Citywide Pedestrian Safety Improvements
No. Location Project Type Justification Description ATP 2025 Recommendations
6A Santa Fe Trail at Cherry St,
Laspina St, Mooney Blvd Crosswalk lighting, RRFBs, signage Ped/Bike Trail Master Plan (2005) Improve user safety at major trail crossings Proposed 6B Cartmill Avenue Trail Enhance connectivity to neighborhoods and commercial areas. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Improve access from residential to commercial Proposed 6C East Tulare Ave Trail
(CalTrans)
Planned corridor with a continuous multi-use
path along the arterial. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Multi-use path along the arterial for safety purposes Proposed 6D Santa Fe Trail at Blackstone St RRFBs Improve user safety at major trail crossing Improve user safety at major trail crossing Proposed Note: 6A is mentioned in the Pedestrian/Bike Trail Master Plan (2005), and County LRSP, 6B, and 6C are mentioned in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
Id Project Name Project Type Description Source Implementation Phase
C1 Sidewalk Gap Closure
Program Sidewalk Infill Construct missing sidewalk segments citywide, with priority to arterials, near schools, and bus/transit stops Gap Analysis Proposed C2 Pedestrian Lighting Program Lighting Improvements Add pedestrian-scale lighting at key corridors, schools, and park access points, especially in dark zones Collision Analysis; HIN Proposed
C3 Citywide High Visibility
Crosswalks Crosswalk Upgrades Upgrade existing crosswalks to high-visibility striping, especially along arterials and near schools Gap Analysis; Collision Analysis Proposed C4 School Zone Safety Program School Zone Enhancements Implement crosswalk upgrades, signage, bulb-outs, and RRFBs at all public schools citywide Collision Data, LRSP Proposed C5 Trail Crossing Treatment Trail/Pathway Crossings Adopt citywide guidance for trail crossings (Santa Fe Trail, Urban Green Trail, etc.) Trail Review Proposed C6 Pedestrian Signal Upgrade
Program Signal Enhancements Add pedestrian countdowns, APS (Accessible Pedestrian Signals), and leading pedestrian intervals citywide HIN; Design
Guidelines Proposed
C7 Midblock Crossing Midblock Treatment Strategy Develop and adopt criteria for midblock crossings and install RRFBs where warranted HIN; Gap Analysis Proposed C8 ADA Ramps Evaluation and
Upgrades Upgrade ADA Ramps Upgrade ADA Ramps and Sidewalk, Upgrade access, lane markings, and ADA pathways, Upgrade Curb Ramp Collision Data Citywide Pedestrian Safety Improvements
Note: Locations mentioned in Gap Analysis (GIS Layer-Missing/identified Sidewalks in Tulare). Improvements along corridors under Caltrans jurisdiction will require close coordination with Caltrans. While the City will work collaboratively with Caltrans to advance safety and multi modal enhancements in these areas.
Active Transportation Plan
91 Chapter 6 - Implementation and Funding
Active Transportation Plan
The City of Tulare will continue to build a strong and connected active transportation network using a variety of implementation strategies.
The Plan will be built over a number of years, depending on funding and staffing resources, focusing first on the near-term projects that have the highest potential to increase walking and biking. Throughout the implementation process, staff will continue to work with critical partners and the community to gather input. Implementation of the Plan will be incremental but is guided by established policy to continue to prioritize funding to support the City’s goals for increasing bicycling and walking.
POTENRIAL FUNDING SOURCES
To implement the bicycle and pedestrian projects, the City will need to identify additional funding sources beyond the City’s general funds. Most funding for the improvements recommended in this plan is likely to come from federal, state, and regional grant programs. These grant programs are often competitive and will require the City to compete against other municipalities for funding.
Tulare can leverage its partnerships with the Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG), the regional transportation planning agency, as well as other regional and state partners, to secure funding for planning, design, and construction of active transportation projects. The following summarizes key federal, state, and regional/local funding sources relevant to Tulare.
6. IMPLEMENTATION AND
FUNDING 06
Active Transportation Plan
92 Chapter 6 - Implementation and Funding
Active Transportation Plan
Federal Funding Programs
1. Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside (TA)
This program, authorized under the FAST Act, funds small-scale transportation projects that enhance mobility for non-drivers, such as sidewalks, bike lanes, Safe Routes to School infrastructure, and recreational trails. • Tulare Eligibility: Projects in Tulare are eligible through TCAG’s regional share of TA funds, typically programmed through the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). • Matching: Federal share is generally 88.5 percent, with a typical local match of 11.5 percent. Some safety projects may be fully federally funded.
2. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement
Program (CMAQ)
CMAQ funds transportation projects that help non-attainment and maintenance areas meet federal air quality standards by reducing vehicle emissions. The San Joaquin Valley, including Tulare County, qualifies due to persistent air quality challenges. • Eligible Tulare Projects include new or improved bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure, education/outreach programs, and active transportation incentives. • Matching typically 80 percent federal share; some safety projects qualify for 100 percent.
• Note: CMAQ is administered locally by TCAG, and funds are reimbursed after work is completed.
3. Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
HSIP provides funding for infrastructure projects that reduce traffic-related fatalities and injuries, including those affecting people walking or biking. • Tulare Opportunities: Crosswalk upgrades, pedestrian hybrid beacons, traffic calming, curb extensions, and lighting improvements. • Matching: Federal share is typically 90 percent; some scenarios may allow full funding.
State Funding Sources
1. Active Transportation Program (ATP)
California’s ATP is the primary funding source for bicycle and pedestrian projects, combining state and federal funds. The program promotes increased use of active modes, safety, and equity.
• Tulare Access: TCAG programs a portion of the ATP through its regional share (10 percent). The City of Tulare can also compete for statewide ATP funding.
• Competitive Advantage: Tulare’s disadvantaged and low-income neighborhoods can receive prioritization and equity scoring benefits under ATP. • Matching: No local match required, but leveraging additional funding is encouraged.
2. Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SCCP)
SCCP supports projects that reduce congestion and provide multimodal options. Projects that also improve safety, air quality, and access to economic opportunities are prioritized.
• Tulare Use Cases: Bicycle and pedestrian improvements along key corridors such as Tulare Avenue or Mooney Boulevard.
• Matching: No match required; leveraged funds are desirable.
3. Local Partnership Program (LPP)
Funded by Senate Bill 1 (SB1), LPP supports jurisdictions with voter-approved taxes or developer fees for transportation. Funds may be used for active transportation projects.
• Tulare Note: If Tulare County initiates or joins a transportation sales tax district in the future, the City of Tulare would qualify for LPP funds.
• Matching: 1:1 match for both competitive and formulaic programs.
4. Clean Mobility Options Voucher Pilot Program
CARB manages this program, which funds shared mobility projects (e.g., bike share, car share) in disadvantaged communities. • Applicable Tulare Projects: Bike-share, e-bike libraries, ride-share services, and micro-transit pilots.
• Matching: 20 percent local contribution required.
5. Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grants
OTS funds education and enforcement programs targeting roadway safety for all users, with a focus on vulnerable populations. • Tulare Eligibility: Schools, police departments, and nonprofits in Tulare can apply for programs related to bike safety, helmet use, and driver awareness.
• Matching: No match required.
6. Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants
Administered by Caltrans, these grants support planning efforts such as ATPs, complete streets plans, and feasibility studies. • Tulare Use: These grants can fund updates or new plans if the City of Tulare seeks to refine its ATP over time.
• Matching: Typically 11.47 percent for competitive and formula grants; up to 20 percent for strategic partnerships.
7. Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities
(AHSC)
AHSC funds housing and transportation projects that improve access to jobs and services while reducing vehicle miles traveled. Projects often include bike/pedestrian improvements near affordable housing developments.
• Tulare Opportunities: Affordable housing sites with safe walk/bike connections to transit and key destinations can qualify. • Matching: Projects must secure additional committed funds covering 90 percent of remaining development costs.
Active Transportation Plan
93 Chapter 6 - Implementation and Funding
Active Transportation Plan
Regional And Local Funding Programs
1. TCAG Competitive and Formulaic ATP Funding
Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG) administers regional ATP funds through both competitive and formula processes.
The City of Tulare is eligible to apply through TCAG’s calls for projects. • Eligible Uses: Trail segments, bikeways, pedestrian crossings, and Safe Routes to School projects within the City.
• Matching: No minimum match required; however, additional funding improves scoring.
2. Measure R (Potential Future)
Although Tulare County does not currently have a dedicated transportation sales tax, regional discussions have explored the possibility of pursuing a future voter-approved “Measure R”–style local transportation tax measure. If enacted, this type of countywide sales tax would create a stable and flexible source of funding for transportation priorities, including bicycle and pedestrian projects. A Measure R program could provide Tulare with annual local-return revenue for planning, design, construction, and maintenance of active transportation facilities, while also strengthening the City’s ability to compete for state and federal grants by supplying the required local match. While no measure is currently scheduled, continued coordination with Tulare County and regional partners will be important should future self-help funding opportunities move forward.
3. Local Revenue and Developer Fees
Local impact fees and transportation funds can support design and construction of sidewalks, curb ramps, lighting, and educational programs. These may be used to meet match requirements for federal and state grants.
• Common Sources: Development impact fees, gas tax allocations (SB1 RMRA), and general fund appropriations.
4. Private and Nonprofit Grants
Foundations and nonprofits such as AARP, America Walks, California Endowment, and California Wellness Foundation provide small grants for walkability, safe streets, and senior mobility improvements. • Tulare Engagement: City staff and community-based organizations can apply for these to support demonstration projects, engagement activities, or pilot programs.
MAINTENANCE
The City of Tulare is committed to maintaining its street infrastructure to ensure that bicycle and pedestrian facilities remain safe, accessible, and comfortable for all users. Regular upkeep of traffic control devices, streetlights, signage, and pavement surfaces helps prevent hazards and supports the long-term usability of active transportation infrastructure. Cracked pavement, overgrown vegetation, broken glass, and debris can create significant barriers to walking and biking. To address these challenges, the City will develop a dedicated maintenance plan that includes proactive inspections, routine cleaning, vegetation trimming, and timely repairs of sidewalks, crosswalks, bike lanes, and shared-use paths. By prioritizing the ongoing care of these facilities, Tulare aims to enhance mobility, reduce safety risks, and encourage more residents to walk and bike as part of their daily travel.
Active Transportation Plan
94 References
U.S. Census Bureau (2023) American Community Survey 5-year estimates Population, commuting, and demographic data | https://data.census.gov
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, LEHD, 2023 & U.S.
Census Bureau (2023) American Community Survey 5-year estimates.
Tulare General Plan | Transportation Element (2014) |
http://generalplan.co.tulare.ca.us/
City of Tulare Capital Improvement Program | (FY 2023/2024 thru 2027/2028) | https://www.tulare.ca.gov/
City of Tulare Streets | https://www.tulare.ca.gov/government/departments/ public-works/streets
City of Tulare Traffic Data Volume | https://www.tulare.ca.gov/government/ departments/engineering/traffic/traffic-volume-data
City of Tulare Transit | https://www.tulare.ca.gov/residents/transit CalEnviroScreen 4.0 – Tool for identifying Disadvantaged Communities Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen
California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS)
https://www.ots.ca.gov/
City of Tulare General Plan and Municipal Code | Land use and zoning regulations Transportation policies | https://www.tulare.ca.gov/ Street Story – UC Berkeley SafeTREC Community Reporting Tool https://streetstory.berkeley.edu/
REFERENCES
Active Transportation Plan
END OF DOCUMENT
Active Transportation Plan
A
APPENDIX A:
GOALS AND POLICIES OF EXISITING
PLANNING EFFORTS
Active Transportation Plan
B
APPENDIX B:
LIST OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Active Transportation Plan
C
APPENDIX C:
COLLISION DATA SET (2019-2023)
Active Transportation Plan
D
APPENDIX D:
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY COLLISION DATA SET
(2019-2023)
Active Transportation Plan
E
APPENDIX E:
INTERACTIVE MAP INPUT DATA AND
POP-UP EVENT DATA SET
Active Transportation Plan
F
APPENDIX F:
BICYCLE SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS
& COST ESTIMATES
RESOLUTION 2026-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TULARE
ADOPTING AN ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
WHEREAS, the State Legislature encourages the establishment of bicycle and pedestrian transportation systems, and authorizes cities to prepare their own Active Transportation Plan; and
WHEREAS, adoption of the Active Transportation Plan will assist the City in meeting the needs of commuter and recreation bicycle users and pedestrians, and will assist the City in efforts to obtain local, state, and federal funds for bikeways, sidewalks, and related facilitates; and WHEREAS, the Active Transportation Plan will help meet the transportation needs of bicyclists and pedestrians in the years ahead and will encourage the use of bicycles and sidewalks as a viable mode of travel, thereby improving air quality and reducing traffic congestion on roadways and parking facilities; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public meeting considering the adoption of the Active Transportation Plan was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City; and WHEREAS, following publication a hearing was held by the City of Tulare which provided an opportunity to receive and respond to public comments on the Active Transportation Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Tulare, as follows:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Tulare does hereby find that the adoption of the 2026 Active Transportation Plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.20.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Tulare does hereby adopt the Active Transportation Plan as a City guideline for prioritizing future bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects, grant applications, and bicycle and pedestrian project funding options.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tulare this 2nd day of June 2026, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Abstain:
Patrick Isherwood, President of the Council
and Ex-Officio Mayor
ATTEST:
Marc Mondell, City Clerk
By Melissa Wilcox, Chief Deputy City Clerk
The presence of an electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the Tulare City Council.
Staff Report
Meeting: City Council
Date: June 2, 2026
Department: City Manager
Submitted by: Melissa Wilcox, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Agenda Title: Actions Related to the 2026 Municipal General Election
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Adopt a resolution calling the General Municipal Election, requesting and consenting to consolidation with the statewide general election on November 3, 2026, and requesting election services from the Tulare County Registrar of Voters.
2. Adopt a resolution calling an election and submitting to voters an additional one-cent Transactions and Use Tax Measure for general purposes.
3. Introduce and authorize the submission to voters of an ordinance amending Tulare Municipal Code Chapter 5.78 to increase the Transactions and Use Tax by one cent, contingent upon majority voter approval.
4. Adopt a resolution of intention conveying the Council’s intended use of revenue from the additional one-cent general sales tax measure.
SUMMARY
The City of Tulare is required to conduct its regular General Municipal Election in even-numbered years concurrent with the statewide general election. The next such election will occur on November 3, 2026.
Two City Council seats will be on the ballot:
• District 2, Full Term (2026-2030)
• District 4, Full Term (2026-2030)
In addition, the City is pursuing a general sales tax measure to increase the Transactions and Use Tax one percent (or one cent), intended to provide locally controlled revenue for essential City services.
Election Consolidation
The California Elections Code allows and encourages consolidation with the statewide election where feasible (EC Sections 10400-10418). Consolidation ensures:
• Cost savings
• Efficient administration
• Compliance with statutory publication, ballot materials, and voter information requirements The Tulare County Registrar of Voters would provide election services such as filing of nomination papers, ballot preparation, voter information guides, vote-by-mail services, canvass, and certification.
The City will reimburse the County for actual costs.
Sales Tax Measure Overview
The proposed measure would increase Tulare’s Transactions and Use Tax from 0.5% to 1.5% and is projected to generate approximately $16 million annually in unrestricted General Fund revenue.
The measure is intended to support community priorities such as:
• Maintaining 911 emergency, fire, paramedic, and police response • Preventing crime and gang activity
• Recruiting and retaining public safety personnel
• Keeping parks, roads, and public areas clean and safe • Addressing homelessness
Item #: 10.1
General Business
• Protecting drinking water sources
• Supporting local businesses
As a general tax, the measure requires approval by a simple majority of Tulare voters and must appear on a statewide general election ballot at which Council seats are elected (Cal. Const. Art. XIIIC, Sec. 2(b)).
Ballot Language
The ballot question, as proposed in the resolution reads:
“Shall the measure funding City of Tulare general services, such as maintaining 911 emergency/fire/paramedic/police response; preventing crime and gang activity; recruiting/retaining police, firefighters, paramedics; keeping public areas/parks clean/safe; repairing roads/potholes; addressing homelessness; protecting local drinking water sources; retaining/attracting local businesses, by increasing the existing sales tax by 1¢, providing approximately $16,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring independent audits, public spending disclosure, all funds used locally, be adopted?” Resolution Conveying Council’s Intent Regarding Use of Revenue In addition to calling the election and submitting the sales tax measure to voters, the Council may choose to adopt an optional resolution of intention conveying its intended priorities for the use of revenue generated by the proposed one-cent general sales tax measure.
The draft resolution states that:
• The City Council formally acknowledges its funding priorities for revenue generated from the proposed one-cent Transactions and Use Tax measure (left blank to indicate specific priorities). • These funding priorities are not legally binding on future City Councils but represent a policy statement by the current seated Council.
• The resolution reiterates that the measure is anticipated to generate approximately $16 million annually in general fund revenue to support community priorities. • The City will maintain independent financial audits and annual community reports to ensure transparency and responsible use of funds.
This resolution provides voters with additional clarity about the Council’s priorities without converting the measure into a special tax.
FISCAL IMPACT & FUNDING SOURCES
The cost of the consolidated election will be billed by Tulare County based on actual expenses and is included in the Fiscal Year 2027 Budget. Tulare County estimates the cost of the election to be $54,500.
If approved by voters, the measure is projected to generate approximately $16 million annually in unrestricted revenue for general government purposes.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.
LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney reviewed the resolutions and ordinance.
PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the agenda.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
1. Approve with changes
2. Deny
3. Table
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution Calling the Election and Requesting Consolidation
2. Resolution Calling Election and Submitting Sales Tax Measure
3. Ordinance
4. Resolution of Intention
Reviewed/Approved: TG
RESOLUTION 2026-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TULARE
CALLING THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION, REQUESTING AND CONSENTING TO
CONSOLIDATION OF ELECTIONS, SETTING SPECIFICATIONS OF THE ELECTION ORDER, AND
REQUESTING THE TULARE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PERMIT THE TULARE
COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO RENDER SPECIFIED SERVICES TO THE CITY RELATING
TO THE CONDUCT OF THE ELECTION
WHEREAS, California Elections Code requires a general district election be held in each district to choose a successor for each elective officer whose term will expire on the first Friday in December following the election to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in each evennumbered year; and WHEREAS, Section 11 of the Tulare City Charter requires that regular municipal elections be held in even-numbered years at the same time as the general election for the state offices for the State of California, in accordance with the Elections Code of the State of California as amended from time to time; and
WHEREAS, a statewide election is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2026; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Elections Code Section 10400, other elections may be held in whole or in part of the territory of the district, and it is to the advantage of the district to consolidate; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Elections Code Section 10400 et seq., the governing body of any city may, by resolution, request the Board of Supervisors of the county to permit the County Registrar of Voters to render specified services to the city relating to the conduct of an election; and WHEREAS, California Elections Code Section 10520 requires each district involved in a general election to reimburse the county for the actual costs incurred by the county elections official in conducting the election for that district; and
WHEREAS, California Elections Code Section 13307(f) requires that, before the nominating period opens, the governing body must determine whether a charge shall be levied against each candidate submitting a candidate’s statement to be sent to the voters; and WHEREAS, California Elections Code Section 12112 requires the elections official of the principal county to publish a notice of the election once in a newspaper of general circulation in the district.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Tulare, as follows:
Section 1. Call of Election: An election shall be held for the City of Tulare on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, for the purpose of electing successors for the following offices:
District 2 City Councilmember, Full Term, December 2026-December 2030 District 4 City Councilmember, Full Term, December 2026-December 2030 Section 2. Request to Consolidate: The Council of the City of Tulare hereby requests and consents to the consolidation of this election with other elections which may be held in whole or in part of the territory of the city, as provided in Elections Code Section 10400. The Council acknowledges that the election will be held and conducted according to procedures in the Elections Code, including Section 10418.
Resolution 2026-XXX
Section 3. Request for County Services: Pursuant to Section 10002 of the Elections Code, the Council of the City of Tulare requests the Board of Supervisors of Tulare County to permit the Registrar of Voters to render services to the City of Tulare relating to the conduct of the November 3, 2026 General Municipal Election as follows:
a. Distribute and file nomination papers and candidate statements for the candidates for city offices.
b. Make all required publications.
c. Prepare, print, and mail to the qualified electors of the city sample ballots and voter pamphlets.
d. Provide Vote by Mail ballots for said Municipal Election for use by the qualified electors who may be entitled to Vote by Mail ballots in the manner provided by law. e. Order consolidation of precincts, appoint precinct boards, designate polling places, and instruct election officers concerning their duties.
f. Conduct and canvass the returns of the election and certify the votes cast to the city. g. Receive and process Vote by Mail ballot voter applications. h. Prepare, print, and deliver to the polling places supplies, including the official ballots and a receipt for said supplies.
i. Recount votes, if requested, in accordance with State Law. j. Conduct the above election duties in accordance with the Voting Rights Act of 1975, as amended.
k. Perform all other pertinent services required to be performed for said election other than the requirements of the Fair Political Practices Commission; said Fair Political Practices Commission requirements to be performed by the City Clerk.
Section 4. Consolidation of Measures: The City Council of the City of Tulare requests the Tulare County Registrar of Voters to include on the ballots and sample ballots all qualified measures submitted by the City of Tulare to be ratified by the qualified electors of the City of Tulare.
Section 5. Designated Hours: The City of Tulare, in accordance with California Elections Code Section 10242, hereby designates that polling places shall be open at 7:00 a.m. and remain open until 8:00 p.m. on the day of the election.
Section 6. Candidate Statement: The City Council of the City of Tulare has determined that the candidate shall pay for the Candidate’s Statement. The Candidate’s Statement shall be limited to 200 words.
Section 7. Contract Authority: The City of Tulare will reimburse the Tulare County Registrar of Voters for the actual cost incurred in conducting the election upon receipt of a bill stating the amount due as determined by the elections official provided that no fees shall be charged for services which the Registrar of Voters is otherwise required by law to perform.
Section 8. Notice of Election Publication: The City of Tulare requests the Registrar of Voters publish the Notice of Election in the Tulare Advance Register/Visalia Times Delta, which is a newspaper of general circulation that is regularly circulated in the city.
Section 9. Transmittal of Resolution: The City Clerk shall submit a certified copy of this resolution to the Tulare County Board of Supervisors and the Tulare County Registrar of Voters.
Resolution 2026-XXX
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tulare this 2nd day of June 2026, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Abstain:
Patrick Isherwood, President of the Council
and Ex-Officio Mayor
ATTEST:
Marc Mondell, City Clerk
By Melissa Wilcox, Chief Deputy City Clerk
The presence of an electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the Tulare City Council.
RESOLUTION 2026-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TULARE
CALLING AN ELECTION IN THE CITY OF TULARE TO BE CONSOLIDATED WITH THE CITY’S NEXT GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 3, 2026 AND SUBMITTING TO THE ELECTORS A BALLOT MEASURE TO INCREASE THE CITY’S SALES AND USE TAX BY ONE PERCENT (ONE CENT) BY AMENDING CHAPTER 5.78 (TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX FOR
GENERAL PURPOSES), ESTABLISHING THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR SUCH AN
ELECTION, REQUESTING THAT TULARE COUNTY PROVIDE ELECTION SERVICES, DIRECTING
THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING
OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENT
WHEREAS, the health and safety of all residents in the City of Tulare is the City’s top priority; and WHEREAS, as part of the City’s effort to meet the needs of the community, the City has been exploring the addition of a General Sales Tax measure to the November 3, 2026 election ballot; and WHEREAS, the City proposes an increase in the amount of one percent (one cent) to the existing Transactions and Use Tax (Sales Tax) as directed by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the proposed, locally enacted Sales Tax measure is projected to generate general fund revenue of approximately $16,000,000 annually; and WHEREAS, money raised by this measure would be used for community priorities; and WHEREAS, local, voter-approved funding for essential services will provide a guaranteed source of funding for the City of Tulare; and
WHEREAS, the City will continue its high standards for fiscal accountability and transparency regarding this measure to include independent financial audits and yearly reports to the community to ensure City funds are spent responsibly for the community’s priorities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7285.9, the City of Tulare has the authority to levy a Transactions and Use (“Sales”) Tax for general purposes, and subject to voter approval; and
WHEREAS, Article XIIIC, Section 2(b) of the California Constitution requires that any general tax, such as the Sales Tax, must be approved by a majority vote of the voters voting on the issue; and WHEREAS, Article XIIC, Section 2(b) of the California Constitution requires that an election by the voters to approve a general tax must be consolidated with a statewide general election at which members of the City Council will be elected; and
WHEREAS, November 3, 2026 is the date of the statewide general election at which members of the City Council will be elected; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that it is in the best interests of the City of Tulare to submit the proposed one percent (one cent) upward adjustment to the Sales Tax to the voters of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Tulare, as follows:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Tulare hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct.
Resolution 2026-XXX
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Tulare hereby calls an election at which it shall submit to the qualified voters of the City of Tulare a measure that, if approved, would increase the Transactions and Use Tax by one percent (1%) or one cent to fund general services in the City. This measure shall be designated by letter by the Tulare County Registrar of Voters.
Section 3. The ballot language for the proposed measure shall be as follows:
CITY OF TULARE SERVICES MEASURE
Shall the measure funding City of Tulare general services, such as maintaining 911 emergency/fire/paramedic/police response; preventing crime and gang activity; recruiting/retaining police, firefighters, paramedics; keeping public areas/parks clean/safe; repairing roads/potholes; addressing homelessness; protecting local drinking water sources; retaining/attracting local businesses, by increasing the existing sales tax by 1¢, providing approximately $16,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring independent audits, public spending disclosure, all funds used locally, be adopted?
YES
NO
Section 4. The proposed measure to be submitted to the voters is more completely described in the ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The City Council hereby approves the proposed ordinance, in the form thereof, and its submission to the voters of the City at the November 3, 2026 election. The full text of the measure shall be printed in the ballot materials and be available for inspection in the City Clerk’s office and on the City’s website at www.tulare.ca.gov.
Section 5. Pursuant to Section 10400 et seq. of the California Elections Code, the Tulare County Board of Supervisors is requested to consolidate the election with other elections held on the same day in the same territory or in the territory that is part of the same.
Section 6. The Tulare County Board of Supervisors is authorized to canvass the returns of the election pursuant to Section 10411 of the California Elections Code.
Section 7. The Tulare County Board of Supervisors is requested to permit the Tulare County Registrar of Voters to render all services specified in Section 10418 of the California Elections Code relating to the election, for which services the City agrees to reimburse the County of Tulare, in accordance with current County pro-rations and allocation procedures.
Section 8. The City Clerk shall file a certified copy of this resolution with the Tulare County Board of Supervisors and Tulare County Registrar of Voters.
Section 9. The City Attorney shall prepare an impartial analysis of the measure. Any person or persons may file an argument either for or against the ballot measure. An argument for or against the measure shall not exceed 300 words in length. If more than one argument is submitted for the measure, or more than one argument against the measure, the City Clerk shall select the argument to be included with the ballot materials. Rebuttal arguments shall be permitted pursuant to applicable law.
Resolution 2026-XXX
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tulare this 2nd day of June 2026, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Abstain:
Patrick Isherwood, President of the Council
and Ex-Officio Mayor
ATTEST:
Marc Mondell, City Clerk
By Melissa Wilcox, Chief Deputy City Clerk
The presence of an electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the Tulare City Council.
ORDINANCE 2026-XX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TULARE
AMENDING CHAPTER 5.78 OF TITLE 5 OF THE TULARE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR
AN INCREASE TO THE CURRENT TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX RATE FROM ONE-HALF
CENT TO ONE-AND-ONE-HALF CENT FOR GENERAL PURPOSES
WHEREAS, at the June 2, 2026 Tulare City Council meeting, the City Council approved a resolution consolidating the General Municipal Election with the State General Election on November 3, 2026 to include this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the health and safety of all residents in the City of Tulare is the City’s top priority; and WHEREAS, as part of the City’s effort to meet the needs of the community, the City has been exploring the addition of a General Sales Tax measure to the November 3, 2026 election ballot; and WHEREAS, the City proposes an increase in the amount of one percent (one cent) to the existing Transactions and Use Tax (Sales Tax) as directed by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the proposed, locally enacted Sales Tax measure is projected to generate general fund revenue of approximately $16,000,000 annually; and WHEREAS, money raised by this measure would be used for community priorities; and WHEREAS, local, voter-approved funding for essential services will provide a guaranteed source of funding for the City of Tulare; and
WHEREAS, the City will continue its high standards for fiscal accountability and transparency regarding this measure to include independent financial audits and yearly reports to the community to ensure City funds are spent responsibly for the community’s priorities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7285.9, the City of Tulare has the authority to levy a Transactions and Use (“Sales”) Tax for general purposes, and subject to voter approval; and
WHEREAS, Article XIIIC, Section 2(b) of the California Constitution requires that any general tax, such as the Sales Tax, must be approved by a majority vote of the voters voting on the issue; and WHEREAS, Article XIIC, Section 2(b) of the California Constitution requires that an election by the voters to approve a general tax must be consolidated with a statewide general election at which members of the City Council will be elected; and
WHEREAS, November 3, 2026 is the date of the statewide general election at which members of the City Council will be elected; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that it is in the best interests of the City of Tulare to submit the proposed one percent (one cent) upward adjustment to the Sales Tax to the voters of the City.
WHEREAS, proposed revisions to Chapter 5.78 of the Tulare Municipal Code, set forth below, NOW, THEREFORE, subject to approval by an affirmative, simple majority vote of the people as required by law, the People of the City of Tulare do ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. CODE AMENDMENT. Chapter 5.78 of Title 5 of the Tulare Municipal Code is ORDINANCE 202X-XX
hereby amended to read as follows:
CHAPTER 5.78
TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX FOR GENERAL PURPOSES
Sections
5.78.010 Purpose.
5.78.020 Operative DateDefinitions.
5.78.030 Contract with State.
5.78.040 Imposition of Transactions Tax.
5.78.050 Presumption as to Place of Sales.
5.78.060 Imposition of Use Tax.
5.78.070 Adoption of Certain Sections of California Revenue & Taxation Code by Reference.
5.78.080 Limitations on Adoption of State Law and Collection of Use Taxes.
5.78.090 Permit Not Required.
5.78.100 Exemptions and Exclusions.
5.78.110 Amendments.
5.78.120 Enjoining Collection Prohibited.
5.78.010 Purpose.
This Ordinance shall be known as the Transactions and Use Tax for General Purposes Ordinance. The City of Tulare shall hereinafter be called City. This Ordinance shall be applicable in the incorporated territory of the City. This Ordinance of the Tulare Municipal Code has been adopted for the following (and other) purposes and directs that the provisions hereof be interpreted in order to accomplish those purposes:
(a) To impose a retail transactions and use tax in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Section 7285.9 of Part 1.7 of Division 2 which authorizes the City to adopt this tax ordinance which shall be operative if a majority of the electors voting on the measure vote to approve the imposition of the tax at an election called for that purpose.
(b) To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that incorporates provisions identical to those of the Sales and Use Tax Law of the State of California insofar as those provisions are not inconsistent with the requirements and limitations contained in Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
(c) To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that imposes a tax and provides a measure therefor that can be administered and collected by the State Board of Equalization in a manner that adapts itself as fully as practical to, and requires the least possible deviation from, the existing statutory and administrative procedures followed by the State Board of Equalization in administering and collecting the California State Transactions and Use Taxes. (d) To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that can be administered in a manner that will, to the degree possible consistent with the provisions of Parts 1.6 and 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, minimize the cost collecting City transactions and use taxes, and at the same time, minimize the burden of record keeping upon persons subject to taxation under the provisions thereof.
(e) To provide a source of revenue to be used by the city for general purposes. There shall be no legal obligation created by this chapter for use of the funds for specific purposes.
5.78.020 Operative DateDefinitions.
For the purpose of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates ORDINANCE 202X-XX
or requires a different meaning.
CITY. The City of Tulare.
OPERATIVE DATE. The first day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than 110 days after November 3, 2026, the adoption date of chapter, the date of such adoption being set forth below.this Ordinance, November 3, 2026, pursuant to Taxation and Revenue Code Section 7265. The provisions of this Ordinance shall not take effect until the operative date.
ORDINANCE. The Transactions and Use Tax for General Purposes Ordinance.
STATE. The State of California.
5.78.030 Contract with State.
Prior to the operative date, the city shall contract with the state’s Board of Equalization to perform all functions incident to the administration and operation hereof. If the city has not contracted with the state’s Board of Equalization prior to the operative date, it shall nevertheless so contract and in such a case the operative date shall be the first day of the first calendar quarter following the execution of such a contract.
The Council may make any technical amendments to this chapter required by the state’s Board of Equalization, except for any changes affecting the tax rate, its manner of collection, or the purpose for which the revenue from the tax may be used.
5.78.040 Imposition of Transactions Tax.
For the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail, a tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers in the incorporated territory of the city at the rate of 0.5%1.5% of the gross receipts of any retailer from the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in the City of Tulare on and after the operative date of this chapter. The City Council is authorized to establish a tax rate of 0.5% by resolution. This tax is imposed in addition to the tax imposed pursuant to Chapter 5.08 of this code. The City Council may, by resolution after public notice and public hearing, reduce the tax to 0.25%.
5.78.050 Presumption as to Place of Sales.
For the purposes of this chapter, all retail sales are consummated at the place of business of the retailer, unless the tangible personal property sold is delivered by the retailer or his agent to an out-of-state destination or to a common carrier for delivery to an out-of-state destination. The gross receipts from such sales shall include delivery charges, when such charges are subject to the state sales and use tax, regardless of the place to which delivery is made. In the event a retailer has no permanent place of business in the state or has more than one place of business, the place or places at which the retail sales are consummated shall be determined under rules and regulations to be prescribed and adopted by the Board of Equalization.
5.78.060 Imposition of Use Tax.
An excise tax is hereby imposed on the storage, use or other consumption in the City of Tulare of tangible personal property purchased from any retailer on or after the operative date of this chapter, at the rate of
0.50%1.5% of the sales price of the property subject to the tax. The sales price shall include delivery charges when the charges are subject to state transactions or use tax regardless of the place to which delivery is made. The City Council is authorized to establish a tax rate of 0.5% by resolution. The tax imposed is in addition to the tax imposed pursuant to Chapter 5.08 of this code. The City Council may, by resolution after public notice and public hearing, reduce the tax to 0.25%.
5.78.070 Adoption of Certain Sections of California Revenue & Taxation Code by Reference.
Except as hereinafter provided, and except insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of Cal.
Revenue and Taxation Code Parts 1.6 and 1.7 of Division 2, all of the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the code, as amended and in force and effect on the operative date of this chapter, applicable to use Formatted: Font: Not Bold, Not Italic
ORDINANCE 202X-XX
taxes are hereby adopted and made a part of this section as though fully set forth herein.
5.78.080 Limitations on Adoption of State Law and Collection of Use Taxes.
In adopting the provisions of Cal. Revenue and Taxation Code Part 1 of Division 2:
(A) Wherever the State of California is named or referred to as the taxing agency, the name of this city shall be substituted therefortherefore. However, the substitution shall not be made when:
(1) The word “State” is used as a part of the title of the State Controller, State Treasurer, State Board of Control, State Board of Equalization, State Treasury or the Constitution of the State of California. (2) The result of that substitution would require action to be taken by or against this city or any agency, officer or employee thereof rather than by or against the state’s Board of Equalization, in performing the functions incident to the administration or operation of this chapter. (3) In those sections, including, but not necessarily limited to sections referring to the exterior boundaries of the State of California, where the result of the substitution would be to: provide an exemption from this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not otherwise be exempt from this tax while such sales, storage, use or other consumption remain subject to tax by the state under the provisions of Cal. Revenue and Taxation Code Part 1 of Division 2; or impose this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not be subject to tax by the state under the provision of that code.
(4) In Cal. Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 6701, 6702 (except in the last sentence thereof), 6711, 6715, 6737, 6797 or 6828.
(B) The word “city” shall be substituted for the word “state” in the phrase “retailer engaged in business in this state” in Section 6203 and in the definition of that phrase in Section 6203.
5.78.090 Permit Not Required.
If a seller’s permit has been issued to a retailer under Cal. Revenue and Taxation Code Section 6067, an additional transactor’s permit shall not be required by this chapter.
5.78.100 Exemptions and Exclusions.
(A) There shall be excluded from the measure of the transactions tax and the use tax the amount of any sales tax or use tax imposed by the State of California or by any city, city and county, or county pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law or the amount of any stateadministered transactions or use tax. (B) There are exempted from the computation of the amount of transactions tax the gross receipts from:
(1) Sales of tangible personal property, other than fuel or petroleum products, to operators of aircraft to be used or consumed principally outside the county in which the sale is made and directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of persons or property under the authority of the laws of this state, the United States or any foreign government. (2) Sales of property to be used outside the city, which is shipped to a point outside the city, pursuant to the contract of sale, by delivery to the point by the retailer or his or her agent, or by delivery by the retailer to a carrier for shipment to a consignee at such point. For the purposes of this division, delivery to a point outside the city shall be satisfied:
(a) With respect to vehicles (other than commercial vehicles) subject to registration ORDINANCE 202X-XX