Visalia City Council
September 6, 2022

These efforts may include the establishment of
criteria to implement transit improvements,
development of short and long range transit
service plans, evaluation and identification of
needed corridor improvements, transit centers,
and park-and-ride lots with amenities for bicyclists.

T-P-32 Work with transit operators to ensure that
adequate transit service facilities are provided,
including bus turn-outs along arterials when
needed, and bus stop amenities including, but
not limited to, lighted shelters, benches and
route information signs.

T-P-33 Work with transit operators to establish transit stops adjacent to community and regional parks, senior housing facilities, areas with a
high concentration of medical facilities, major
employment centers, and major retail and
commercial centers.

The Visalia Transit Center is the hub for all of Visalia’s bus routes, including the Visalia Towne Trolley and the Sequoia Shuttle.
4-36 Visalia General Plan
T-P-34 Develop design and development standards
to improve transit service in the community,
such as wider sidewalks to accommodate bus
stops and bus shelters at intersections; bus
pads with shelter and shading vegetation;
widened rights-of-way for buses; dedicated
bus lanes; on-site transit stops for commercial
public, institutional and industrial facilities;
and, bus facilities adjacent to day-care centers,
schools, and major residential areas.

T-P-35 Schedule public transportation improvement
projects in the Capital Improvements Pro-
gram.

T-P-36 Participate in the planning process for a
potential Cross Valley Rail Line, which could
provide east-west light rail service from Visa-
lia to Huron and potentially connect to a
future High Speed Rail system.

T-P-37 Evaluate the feasibility of a future local light rail system or bus rapid transit (BRT) system
in Visalia, which could connect to Tulare to
the south and points east and west.

The City should preserve right of way to support
the preliminary light rail corridor or BRT sys-
tem along Goshen Avenue, K Street, Santa Fe
Avenue, and other roadways, if either system is
judged financially feasible.

T-P-38 Support regional high-speed inter-city rail
development and service. Should California
High Speed Rail develop a station in Hanford
(or elsewhere in Kings or Tulare County),
work with the California High Speed Rail
Authority to develop local connections coordinated with the train schedule.

4.6Bicycles, Trails and
Pedestrian Circulation
Bicycling and walking are inexpensive, energy-con-
serving, healthful, and non-polluting modes of trans-
portation. Visalia’s flat topography and dry, moderate
climate make choosing to walk or bicycle an attrac-
tive transportation option during much of the year.

As pedestrian and bicycle travel is directly related
to perceived safety and convenience, providing a
safe and complete network of pedestrian and bicycle
facilities should continue to increase the use of these modes of travel, especially when crossing heavily traveled roads such as State Routes 63 and State Route 65.

Bikeways and Trails
From a bicyclist’s perspective, Visalia is an attractive location to travel. First, the many quiet, tree-shaded
side streets offer comfort and safety. Second, the size of the city makes practically all parts accessible by all residents within a 30-minute bicycle ride. During the
summer time, when intense summer sun and heat
are at their greatest, bicyclists and pedestrians may
be deterred. Otherwise, the flat topography and mild
rainfall are ideal for commuting and recreational
bicycle riding.

Once considered a primarily recreational activity,
bicycling is now recognized as a viable alternative
to the automobile. Benefits of increased bicycle use
include reduced traffic, reduced consumption of fuel
resources, improved air quality and reduced health
4-37
circulation
October 2014
care costs due to a healthier population. Bicycling is a vital component of improving environmental, traffic
and quality of life concerns for Visalia residents.

City of Visalia Bikeway Plan
The City of Visalia Bikeway Plan was adopted in
February 2011 and is intended to guide bikeway policies, programs and facility improvements to improve safety, comfort and convenience for all bicyclists in
the City of Visalia. The Bikeway Plan serves as a tool
for the City in implementing its goal to “provide the
means and support bicycling as an alternative mode
of transportation for work, errand and recreational
trips.”
The Bikeway Plan encourages the use of walking and
bicycling and recognizes three classes of bikeways:
• Bike Path (Class I Bikeway, including paseos and
public greenways). Provides a completely separated
right-of-way designated for the exclusive use
of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows by
motorists minimized.
• Bike Lane (Class II Bikeway). Provides a restricted
right-of-way designated for the exclusive or semiexclusive use of bicycles with through-travel by motor vehicles or pedestrians prohibited, but with
vehicle parking and crossflows by pedestrians and
motorists permitted.
• Bike Route (Class III Bikeway). Provides right-ofway designated by signs or permanent markings and shared with pedestrians and motorists.

While the City has yet to fully implement the network presented in the Bikeway Plan, several Class I, II and III facilities exist and are included in the standard cross-section specifications for the various street classifications.

Figure 4-5 shows the bikeway system, with the present facilities in solid lines and the proposed expansion of the system shown in dashed lines. Completion of this network would provide Visalia with a robust
bicycle and pedestrian network, linking neighborhoods to parks, schools, employment centers, and other destinations. In addition to the bicycle infrastructure, Visalia offers bicycle racks on buses for most of the Visalia Transit fleet. The bicycle racks
extend the bicycles ranges and offer connections to
the cities of Woodlake, Tulare, Exeter and Farmersville.

Visalia’s flat topography and mild rainfall are ideal
for commuting and recreational bicycle riding. The
Bikeway Plan encourages the use of walking and
bicycling and recognizes three classes of bikeways,
including Class I trails (top) and Class II bike lanes
(bottom).
4-38 Visalia General Plan
Persian Creek

CAMERON AVE
0 1 2
MILES
1/2
10 40
160 acres
Class I
Bike Lane
Class II
Bike Lane
Class I Future
Bike Lane
Class II Future
Bike Lane
Class III Future
Bike Lane
Sidewalk
Greenway
1/2 Mile Radius
1/4 Mile Radius
Figure 4-5:

General Plan Bikeways
Urban
Development
Boundary Tier 1
Urban
Development
Boundary Tier 2
Urban Growth
Boundary Tier 3
Planning Area
City Limits
S t Joh n s R i v e r N. COUNTY CENTER DR
W.RIGGIN AVE
ROAD 80

KELSEY ST
W. DOE AVE ROAD 88
ROAD 76
ROAD 86
W.FERGUSON AVE
ROAD 68
W. WALNUT AVE
N.SHIRK ST
W.HURLEY AVE

GOSHEN AVE
W.RIGGIN AVE
N. MOONEY BLVD

HALL ST
W. HOUSTON AVE E. HOUSTON AVE DINUBA BLVD

MURRAY AVE
S. AKERS ST

LOCUST ST
S. PLAZA DR

RIVER WAY DR

PRATT AVE
N. BURKE ST
RD 132 BEN MADDOX WAY
W. MAIN ST

MAIN ST

LOVERS LANE

MINERAL KING AVE
W.NOBLE AVE
S. MOONEY BLVD

NOBLE AVE

LOVERS LANE

IVANHOE DR
ROAD 148

BEN MADDOX WAY

TULARE AVE
S. COURT ST

SANTA FE ST

TULARE AVE
S. GIDDINGS ST

CENTER AVE

SANTA FE ST
N.DEMAREE ST

COURT ST

PINKHAM ST
S. DEMAREE ST

LINWOOD ST
N.CHINOWTH ST S. CHINOWTH ST
S. LINWOOD ST

WHITENDALE AVE
AVE 280 W. CALDWELL AVE
AVE 272
AVE 276 RD 92
ROAD 152 AVE 292ROAD 156
AVE 280
AVE 272
AVE 264
ROAD 108

ROEBEN ST
AVE 320 AVE 320
N. PLAZA DR

ST J OHNS PKWY
W. SHANNON PKWY
N.CAIN ST
RD 144 S. MCAULIFF ST
W. VISALIA PKWY

MC AULIFF ST

FERGUSON AVE
AVE 328

MINERAL KING AVE
W. FERGUSON AVE
E. K AVE

GOSHEN AVE

WALNUT AVE
S. COUNTY CENTER
RD 100
S. CONYER ST
ROAD 92
AVE 328
RD 148
N. AKERS ST
AVE 288

GOSHEN AVE

TRANSIT
CENTER
TCAT

TRANSFER
S.SHIRK ST
Figure 4-5: General Plan Bikeways
4-39
circulation
October 2014
Pedestrian Circulation
Walking is the most universal form of travel. Every
personal trip involves some element of walking,
whether it is a pure pedestrian trip or combined
with other modes of travel such as transit, driving
or cycling. A pedestrian is legally defined as a person who walks from one place to another either by foot or
using an assisted mobility device. Pedestrians include
citizens of Visalia and visitors of all ages and abilities.

The pedestrian circulation system in Visalia is mainly
comprised of sidewalks. Currently, the street environ-
ment is mostly auto-oriented with wide roadways and
discontinuous sidewalks. In some areas, there are no
existing sidewalks or they have fallen into disrepair.

Besides standard sidewalks that have been developed
in residential and non-residential areas, several multiuse (bike/pedestrian) trails are found throughout the city, including the St. John’s Parkway, Mill Creek,
Goshen Avenue, and others. Visalia Unified School
District and the City of Visalia are also actively
involved in pursuing federal and state Safe Routes to
School (SR2S) grant programs that promote adequate
pedestrian facilities in neighborhoods near schools.

In addition, the City of Visalia is committed to com-
plying with Americas with Disabilities Act (ADA)
standards with new development and bringing nonstandard ADA facilities into compliance.

While sidewalk capacity is generally not an issue, all
areas should be designed to a scale that accommo-
dates pedestrians and bicyclists (in areas where bike-
ways are unavailable). Improvements in areas within
the City that currently have undersized, damaged or
no pedestrian facilities should be prioritized so that
the pedestrian system will be better connected. The
new neighborhood centers should also be designed to
be pedestrian friendly. In these areas, wider sidewalks should be considered to accommodate increased
flows and to give preferential treatment to pedestri-
ans. Pedestrian-friendly facilities should also be pro- vided near transit stops and adjacent to medium and
higher density residential areas. Objectives
T-O-8 Encourage walking and bicycling in Visalia
for commuting and recreational purposes,
and for improvement of public and environ-
mental health.

T-O-9 Promote non-motorized accessibility through
development of a connected, convenient
pedestrian and bikeway network.

T-O-10 Create a safe and feasible pedestrian, trail and bikeway system (on- and off-street) for com-
muting, recreation and other trips, serving
pedestrians and cyclists of all levels.

T-O-11 *Recognize and meet the mobility needs of
persons using wheelchairs and those with
other mobility limitations.

Policies
Bicycle Transportation and Trails System
T-P-39 Develop bikeways consistent with the Visalia
Bikeway Plan and the General Plan’s Circula-
tion Element.
• Provide Class I bikeways (right-ofways for bicyclists and pedestrians separated from vehicles) along the
4-40 Visalia General Plan
St. Johns River, Cameron Creek,
Packwood Creek, Mill Creek, Modoc
Ditch, the Santa Fe Railroad rightof-way and the San Joaquin Railroad right-of-way;
• Provide Class II bikeways (striped
bike lanes) along selected collector
and arterial streets; and
• Provide Class III bikeways (shareduse bike routes) along selected local, collector, and arterial streets.

New bikeway segments should be designed to fit
together with existing bikeways to create a com-
prehensive, safe system including scenic routes for
recreational use.

T-P-40 Develop a community-wide trail system along
selected planning area waterways, consistent
with the Waterways and Trails Master Plan
and General Plan diagrams.

The system will feature greenway trail corridors
along the St. John’s River, Mill Creek, Pack-
wood Creek, and Cameron Creek, as well as segments of Modoc and Persian creeks. The waterway corridors will provide recreational opportunities, new links between neighborhoods, parks, and Downtown, and a new way of experiencing
the City and understanding its natural setting.

Waterway corridors will also provide enhanced
habitat and storm drainage, as described in the
Community Waterways section.

T-P-41 Integrate the bicycle transportation system
into new development and infill redevelop-
ment. Development shall provide short term
bicycle parking and long term bicycle storage facilities, such as bicycle racks, stocks, and rental bicycle lockers. Development also
shall provide safe and convenient bicycle and
pedestrian access to high activity land uses
such as schools, parks, shopping, employment, and entertainment centers.

T-P-42 Periodically update the City of Visalia Bike-
way Plan, as needed.

T-P-43 Develop and maintain an educational pro-
gram to promote bicycle use and safety.

T-P-44 Increase the safety of those traveling by bicycle by:
• Sweeping and repairing bicycle paths
and lanes on a regular basis;
• Ensuring that bikeways are signed
and delineated according to Caltrans
or City standards, and that lighting is
provided as needed;
• Providing bicycle paths and lanes on
bridges and overpasses;
• Ensuring that all new and improved
streets have bicycle-safe drainage
grates and are free of hazards such as
uneven pavement or gravel;
• Providing adequate signage and
markings warning vehicular traffic of
the existence of merging or crossing
bicycle traffic where bike lanes and
routes make transitions into or across
roadways.
4-41
circulation
October 2014
T-P-45 Require that collector streets that are identified to function as links for the bicycle transportation system be provided with Class II bikeways (bike lanes) or signed as Class III
bike route facilities.

In such cases, the City may accommodate cyclists
on these identified streets by widening the street
or eliminating on-street parking if this will not
significantly affect parking opportunities for
local shoppers or by clearly indicating that bicycles may share travel lanes with automobiles.

T-P-46 Cooperate with other agencies to provide connection and continuation of bicycle corridors between Visalia and surrounding areas.

T-P-47 Seek funding at the private, local, state, and
federal levels for the expansion of the bicycle
transportation system.

Pedestrian Circulation
T-P-48 Require construction of minimum sidewalk
widths and pedestrian “clear zones” consistent
with the Complete Streets cross-sections in
this General Plan and with the City’s Engineering and Street Design Standards for each designated street type.

T-P-49 *Work with the Visalia Unified School District, other school districts, and the County Superintendent of Education, to promote
creation of school attendance areas so as to
minimize students’ crossings of major arterial streets and facilitate students’ safe travel to school on foot.

T-P-50 *Provide pedestrian facilities that are accessible to persons with disabilities and ensure that roadway improvement projects address accessibility and use universal design concepts.

T-P-51 Locate sidewalks, pedestrian paths, and
appropriate crosswalks to facilitate access to
all schools and other areas with significant
pedestrian traffic. Whenever feasible, pedestrian paths shall be developed to allow for unobstructed pedestrian flow from within a
neighborhood.

T-P-52 Require, where security walls or fences are
proposed for residential developments along
arterial or collector streets, that pedestrian
access be provided between the arterial or collector and the subdivision to allow access to transit vehicles operating on an arterial or collector street.

4.7 Parking
Parking decisions affect land use and development
patterns, as well as travel behavior. The placement
and type of parking must accommodate the needs
of businesses, pedestrians, motorists, and residents,
while not overwhelming the urban design.

Parking regulations can help to provide accessible,
attractive, secured parking facilities as well as manage supply. New ideas about parking include shared parking, multi-use parking lots, and the use of pervious surfaces with water runoff filtering systems and the use of solar panels to provide shade as well as
energy production.

Pedestrian-friendly streets should be provided near
transit stops and adjacent to medium and higher
density residential areas (top).

Pedestrian access should be provided between
neighborhoods and adjacent arterials or collectors
to facilitate walking, including walking to transit
(bottom)..
4-42 Visalia General Plan
Downtown Parking
The City of Visalia is currently preparing a Downtown parking and circulation study. The study will analyze traffic patterns, biking, walking, parking
and how to improve traffic flow in the 70-block area
bounded by Oak Street on the north, Santa Fe Street
on the east, Noble Avenue on the south and Conyer
on the west. The study is still underway.

Among the items to be studied are: integration of
future development with a balanced street/transit/
bicycle network; level of service for vehicles on downtown streets; transit ridership; existing bike routes and bike facilities; walkability of Visalia’s downtown
and how downtown streets will handle growth into
2020 and 2030; and parking accommodations to
meet future demand. The study will also consider the
option of closing Willis and West streets to through
traffic, extending Burke Street, and widening Santa
Fe Street to four lanes between Noble and Race
streets.

Objectives
T-O-12 Provide adequate parking to accommodate
demand while avoiding excessive amounts of
surface parking that disrupts the urban fabric
of the city.

Policies
T-P-53 Develop flexible parking requirements in the
zoning ordinance for development proposals based on “best practices” and the proven potential to reduce parking demand.

These could include projects that integrate transit facilities, incorporate a mix of uses with differing peak parking demand periods (e.g., residential and office), incorporate shared parking or common area parking, or incorporate other
Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Strategies for residents or tenants (car-sharing,
requiring paid parking, etc.).

T-P-54 Discourage non-residential parking on residential streets by enforcing parking regulations and ensuring that businesses near residential areas are providing adequate on-site parking for their employees and customers.

T-P-55 If certain neighborhoods are particularly negatively affected by “spill-over” parking from businesses or institutions, consider establishing a residential permit parking program.

T-P-56 If needed, create public parking benefit assessment districts to fund consolidated public parking where supported by local businesses.

T-P-57 Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include
updated off-street parking and loading area
design standards that have multiple benefits
and reduce environmental impacts. Strategies
may include, but are not limited to:
• Require parking and loading to be
provided on the side of or behind
buildings, where feasible;
• Promote the use of time and/or
motion sensitive parking lot and
security lights, where feasible;
Following the Downtown parking and circulation
study, the City will develop flexible parking
requirements based on “best practices.”.
4-43
circulation
October 2014
• Establish specific standards for
perimeter landscaping for parking lots
and structures;
• Separate pedestrian pathways from
car lanes where feasible;
• Promote the use of porous pavement
and low impact drainage features, as
appropriate to the site; and
• Restrict use of vacant lots as vehicle
parking and outdoor storage of
commercial equipment, construction
equipment, and similar unless
screened from public view.

T-P-58 Continue to implement and update, as necessary, the latest Downtown Parking Management Plan.

A Downtown parking needs assessment and survey should be conducted periodically to determine the adequacy of the Downtown Parking Management Plan and to indicate when the
Plan should be updated and how needs might be
better balanced.

4.8 Goods Movement
Truck Routes
In addition to moving people, the roadway system in
Visalia carries a substantial number of trucks moving
goods. These routes are designed to allow truck traffic to pass through the City with minimal impact on residential neighborhoods as well as local vehicular
and pedestrian traffic.

Existing truck routes within Visalia were developed
to minimize neighborhood disturbance and consist primarily of freeways, select expressways, and a few arterial and collector streets. Section 3012 of the Municipal Code has designated certain streets within
the city as truck routes. Trucks may use other streets
for access to particular destinations, with the exception of certain streets from which they are expressly prohibited. Truck routes may be modified by resolution by the City Council as needed. Designated truck routes are shown in Figure 4-6.

Objectives
T-O-13 Provide a transportation system that effectively transports goods via trucks and rail with minimal disruption to residential areas.

Policies
T-P-59 Identify and sign designated truck routes in
Visalia, ensuring that clear signage is provided
from freeways to truck routes in the city.

T-P-60 Ensure that truck routes are designed according to the Surface Transportation Assistance Act standards for intersections, pavement,
and turning movements.

Truck routes have been identified to minimize
neighborhood disturbance, and consist primarily of
freeways, expressways, and a few arterial and collector streets.
4-44 Visalia General Plan
Persian Creek

CAMERON AVE
0 1 2
MILES
1/2
10 40
160 acres
Truck Routes
Railroad
1/2 Mile Radius
1/4 Mile Radius
Figure 4-6:

Truck Routes, Rail Lines, and Airport Facilities
Urban
Development
Boundary Tier 1
Urban
Development
Boundary Tier 2
Urban Growth
Boundary Tier 3
Planning Area
City Limits
S t Joh n s R i v e r N. COUNTY CENTER DR
W.RIGGIN AVE
ROAD 80
KELSEY ST W. DOE AVE ROAD 88
ROAD 76
ROAD 86
W.FERGUSON AVE
ROAD 68
W. WALNUT AVE
N.SHIRK ST
W.HURLEY AVE GOSHEN AVE
W.RIGGIN AVE
N. MOONEY BLVD
W. HOUSTON AVE E. HOUSTON AVE DINUBA BLVD

MURRAY AVE
S. AKERS ST
S

LOCUST ST
. PLAZA DR

RIVER WAY DR

PRATT AVE
N. BURKE ST
RD 132 BEN MADDOX WAY
W. MAIN ST

MAIN ST

LOVERS LANE

MINERAL KING AVE
W.NOBLE AVE
S. MOONEY BLVD

NOBLE AVE

LOVERS LANE

IVANHOE DR
ROAD 148

BEN MADDOX WAY

TULARE AVE
S. COURT ST

SANTA FE ST

TULARE AVE
S. GIDDINGS ST

CENTER AVE

SANTA FE ST
N.DEMAREE ST

COURT ST

PINKHAM ST
S. DEMAREE ST

LINWOOD ST
N.CHINOWTH ST S. CHINOWTH ST
S. LINWOOD ST

WHITENDALE AVE
AVE 280 W. CALDWELL AVE
AVE 272
AVE 276
RD 92
ROAD 152 AVE 292ROAD 156
AVE 280
AVE 272
AVE 264
ROAD 108

ROEBEN ST
AVE 320 AVE 320
N. PLAZA DR

ST J OHNS PKWY
W. SHANNON PKWY
N.CAIN ST
RD 144 S. MCAULIFF ST
W. VISALIA PKWY

MC AULIFF ST

FERGUSON AVE
AVE 328

MINERAL KING AVE
W. FERGUSON AVE
E. K AV

GOSHEN AVE

WALNUT AVE
S. COUNTY CENTER
RD 100
S. CONYER ST
ROAD 92
AVE 328
RD 148
N. AKERS ST
AVE 288

GOSHEN AVE
Burlington Northern Railroad
Burlington Northern Railroad
Burlington Northern Railroad
Union Pacific Railroad
Visalia
Municipal
Airport
Figure 4-6: Truck Routes, Rail Lines, and Airport Facilities 4-45
circulation
October 2014
T-P-61 Encourage high-security off-street parking
areas for tractor-trailer rigs in industrial areas.

T-P-62 Explore possible funding sources, includ-
ing truck user fees if feasible, to help finance
truck route improvements and truck parking
areas, at least in part.

T-P-63 Continue to improve and maintain the condi-
tion and safety of existing railroad crossings
by upgrading surface conditions and install-
ing signs and signals where warranted.

T-P-64 Explore possible funding sources, includ-
ing truck user fees if feasible, to help finance
truck route improvements and truck parking
areas, at least in part.

T-P-65 Prohibit the use of arterial streets for freight loading and unloading.

Rail
Union Pacific (UP), Burlington Northern & Santa Fe
(BNSF), and San Joaquin Valley Railroad (SJVRR)
provide freight service to Visalia, connecting the
city and Tulare County to major markets in California (Oakland/San Francisco/San Jose, Sacramento, and Los Angeles) and to other destinations. Routes
of principal rail lines in the county are identified in Figure 4-6. Freight terminals and service to specific
industries are located throughout the county. Though
the railroads are reluctant to provide information on
the amount of freight originating in the county, it is
likely that the predominant mode for freight move-
ments in the county will continue to be by truck in
the foreseeable future.

Passenger rail service (six round trips daily) in the
county is provided by Amtrak on its San Joaquin service, with the nearest rail station located in Hanford (Kings County). Amtrak provides bus connections
to and from Visalia (twice daily) and Goshen Junc-
tion (two times daily) to the Hanford station. Either
Orange Belt Stages or Greyhound provides service to
Amtrak from downtown Visalia.

Cross Valley Rail Project
The Cross Valley Rail improvement project was
completed in 2003. The line allows food processing
and industrial businesses to ship by rail as opposed
to heavy-duty trucks. Funding was made possi-
ble through funds from public and private entities,
including Congestion Management Air Quality
Improvement Program funds from Tulare, Kings,
and Fresno County councils of governments, contri-
butions from the Los Gatos Tomato Company and
the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Dis-
trict.

California High Speed Rail
The California High Speed Rail Authority is currently in the process of developing a high-speed rail system that would provide passenger transporta-
tion and goods movement services throughout Cali-
fornia with 800 miles of track and 24 stations. The
first segment of the route will be between Bakersfield
and Fresno. Through the EIR process, the preferred
alignment and a station has been identified in Kings
County.

This station will be the Kings/Tulare Regional Sta-
tion and will be located near the City of Hanford
(Kings County).
4-46 Visalia General Plan
The purpose of the high speed rail system is to provide a reliable mode of travel that links the major metro-
politan areas of the state and delivers predictable and consistent travel times. According to the Authority,
high-speed rail is projected to carry approximately
100 million passengers annually by 2030. Objectives
T-O-14Facilitate multi-modal freight access to maxi-
mize the range of use potential for large (40-
acres) industrial uses and developable parcels.

T-O-15 Develop and maintain a coordinated mass
transportation system that will encourage
increased transit and rail use through con-
venient, safe, efficient, and cost-effective services.

T-O-16 Provide a transportation system that effec-
tively transports goods via trucks and rail
with minimal disruption to residential areas.

T-O-17 Support continued rail freight service in
Tulare County.

Policies
T-P-66 Prior to the approval of subdivision maps or
development of identified properties in the
Industrial Park, the City shall explore with
the project applicant options for acquisition/
dedication of right-of-way for freight rail
spurs.

T-P-67 Participate in the planning process for a
potential Cross Valley Rail Line, which could
provide east-west light rail service from Visa-
lia to Huron and potentially connect to a
future High Speed Rail system.

T-P-68 Evaluate the feasibility of a future local light rail system or bus rapid transit (BRT) system
in Visalia, which could connect to Tulare to
the south and points east and west.

The City should preserve right of way to support
the preliminary light rail corridor or BRT sys-
tem along Goshen Avenue, K Street, Santa Fe
Street, and other roadways, as depicted on the
Land Use diagram if either light rail or BRT is
judged financially feasible.

T-P-69 Support regional high-speed inter-city rail
development and service. Should California
High Speed Rail develop a station in Hanford
(or elsewhere in Kings or Tulare County),
work with the California High Speed Rail
Authority to develop local connections coordinated with the train schedule.

T-P-70 Support continued freight service in Tulare
County, specifically development of freight
rail service within close proximity to agricul-
tural processing industries.

T-P-71 Continue to participate in and advocate for
collaborative efforts to improve railroad trans-
portation facilities and reduce conflicts with
the street system.
4-47
circulation
October 2014

4.9 Aviation
Visalia owns and operates the Visalia Municipal Airport (VIS). Located at the south east interchange of State Routes 198 and 99, VIS serves Tulare County,
and eastern Kings County. The airport provides commuter airline and general aviation services. The airport has four fixed base operators (FBO) that provide a variety of services including instruction, charter,
maintenance and corporate transport. The airport
is home to over 150 based aircraft. Those aircraft,
along with transient aircraft traffic, generate approximately 80,000 annual operations (take offs and landings). This includes commercial and non-commercial flights. Currently, the airport is primarily used for
general aviation operations, including local and itinerant services. Other Airport activities include air taxi service and government operations.

Two passenger air services in the county are provided at the Visalia Municipal Airport. These services include daily non-stop flights from VIS to/from Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and a daily
one-stop flight to/from Las Vegas McCarran International Airport (LAS).

The current facility has one runway (6,559 feet) which
is planned to be expanded to 8,000 feet. The airport
consists of two parallel taxiways, 17 enclosed hangars, 113 T-hangars, two terminals, aviation fueling station.

There are single-engine aircraft, multi-engine craft,
jets and gliders based at the facility. In addition to
office spaces, free parking is provided at the terminal.

Visalia offers two fixed based operators that offer full service maintenance and repair. Two charter service
operators are also located in Visalia. A flight school
(Western Air) and charter services are also available.

Objectives
T-O-18 Promote the growth and use of the Visalia
Municipal Airport to satisfy projected aviation demand for both commercial and noncommercial users.

Policies
T-P-72 Finance improvements to the Airport through
user fees and State or federal funds earmarked
for general aviation activities and other available financing mechanisms.

T-P-73 Continue to upgrade the service capacity of
the Visalia Municipal Airport, as funding
appropriations and revenues permit.

T-P-74 Maintain the airport’s current and future
functionality by limiting land uses and population densities surrounding the airport to those that are permitted under the Zoning
Ordinance, as amended for consistency with
this General Plan.

Rail right-of-way may allow opportunities to transition to passenger-carrying operations as a part of a
regional light rail system (top).

Visalia Municipal Airport is primarily used for general aviation operations, while also providing passenger air service (bottom).
4-48 Visalia General Plan

4.10 Regional Coordination
The transportation system of a community is vital to
its prosperity. Efficient circulation is important to the economic viability and the creation and preservation
of a quality of life and the environment. The transportation system is also multi-modal, meaning that it provides numerous alternatives to the automobile;
these other modes include transit, pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, rail facilities, airport facilities, etc., so that citizens and visitors can access and travel within the city using a number of transportation
options to reduce vehicle trips and improve air quality.

The City of Visalia works with other cities, the Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG), Caltrans and the federal government to assist in transportation planning efforts in the County of Tulare.

TCAG and state and federal agencies work with the
cities and communities in Tulare County to plan for
and fund transportation improvements beneficial to
all of its residents.

Objectives
T-O-19 Ensure compatibility between circulation and
transportation systems in Visalia and adjacent
jurisdictions.

T-O-20 Work with Caltrans to provide an efficient
system for regional travel that minimizes
impacts on local streets and arterials.

T-O-21 Strive to minimize the effects of local travel
on the regional highway system.

Policies
T-P-75 Work with Caltrans to achieve timely construction of programmed freeway, State highway, and interchange improvements.

T-P-76 Work with TCAG, the city of Tulare, and
Caltrans to plan and develop State highway
improvements between Visalia and Tulare for
regional circulation, consistent with Caltrans’
Transportation Concept Reports for individual state routes.

T-P-77 Work with TCAG to ensure that the Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) and Sustainable
Communities Strategy are consistent with
Visalia’s Land Use and Transportation policies.

T-P-78 Work with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and TCAG to implement Transportation Control Measures identified in the RTP and air quality implementation plans.

T-P-79 Update traffic study requirements, consistent with Policy T-P-18, to include analysis of impacts on the regional highway system and
criteria for mitigation, consistent with this
General Plan.

APPENDIX C
Wind Rose Graphics

APPENDIX D
ISR Fee Worksheets
Emissions Estimator Worksheet 9/30/2021
No q
Project
Phase Name
ISR
Phase
Construction
Start Date
Unmitigated
Baseline(1)
(TPY)
Mitigated
Baseline(2)
(TPY)
Achieved
On-site
Reductions(3)
(tons)
Required
Off-site
Reductions(4)
(tons)
Unmitigated
Baseline(1)
(TPY)
Mitigated
Baseline(2)
(TPY)
Achieved
On-site
Reductions(3)
(tons)
Required
Off-site
Reductions(4)
(tons)
ISR Phase NOx PM10
1 1 12/1/2021 3.7586 3.7586 0.0000 0.7517 1.1262 1.1262 0.0000 0.5068 1 0.0000 0.0000 2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2 0.0000 0.0000
3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3 0.0000 0.0000
4 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4 0.0000 0.0000
5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5 0.0000 0.0000
6 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6 0.0000 0.0000
7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7 0.0000 0.0000
8 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8 0.0000 0.0000
9 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9 0.0000 0.0000
10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 10 0.0000 0.0000
Total 3.7586 3.7586 0.0000 0.7517 1.1262 1.1262 0.0000 0.5068 Total 0.0000 0.0000 Project
Phase Name
ISR
Phase
Operation
Start Date
Unmitigated
Baseline(1)
(TPY)
Mitigated
Baseline(2)
(TPY)
Achieved
On-site
Reductions(3)
(tons)
Required
Off-site
Reductions(4)
(tons)
Total
Emission
Reductions
Required by
Rule(6)
Average
Annual
Emission
Reductions
Required by
Rule(7)
Unmitigated
Baseline(1)
(TPY)
Mitigated
Baseline(2)
(TPY)
Achieved
On-site
Reductions(3)
(tons)
Required
Off-site
Reductions(4)
(tons)
Total
Emission
Reductions
Required by
Rule(6)
Average
Annual
Emission
Reductions
Required by
Rule(7)
ISR Phase NOx PM10
1 1 1/1/2026 2.0492 2.0492 0.0000 5.1230 5.1230 0.5123 2.4424 2.4424 0.0000 12.2120 12.2120 1.2212 1 5.8747 12.7188 2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2 0.0000 0.0000 3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3 0.0000 0.0000 4 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4 0.0000 0.0000 5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5 0.0000 0.0000 6 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6 0.0000 0.0000 7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7 0.0000 0.0000 8 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 8 0.0000 0.0000 9 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 9 0.0000 0.0000 10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 10 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.0492 2.0492 0.0000 5.1230 5.1230 0.5123 2.4424 2.4424 0.0000 12.2120 12.2120 1.2212 Total 5.8747 12.7188

0.5068
Emission Reductions
Required by Rule(5)
Emission Reductions
Required by Rule(5)

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
Applicant/Business Name: Iron Ridge Development
Project Name:

Project Location:

District Project ID No.:

Iron Ridge Development
Visalia, CA
Total Required Off-Site Reductions (tons)
Total Achieved On-Site Reductions (tons)
NOx
Project Operations Emissions (Area + Mobile)
PM10

0.7517

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.7517

0.5068

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
NOx PM10
If applicant selected Construction Clean Fleet Mitigation Measure - Please select "Yes" from dropdown menu Project Construction Emissions
Notes:

TPY: Tons Per Year
(1) Unmitigated Baseline: The project's baseline emissions generated with no on-site emission reduction measures. (2) Mitigated Baseline: The project's baseline emissions generated after on-site emisison reduction measures have been applied. (3) Achieved On-site Reductions: The project's emission reductions achieved after on-site emission reduction measures have been applied. (4) Required Off-site Reductions: The project's remaining emission reductions required by Rule 9510 if on-site emission reduction measures did not achieive the required rule reductions. (5) Emission Reductions Required by Rule: The project's emission reductions required (20% NOx and 45% PM10) for construction from the unmitigated baseline. (6) Total Emission Reductions Required by Rule: The project's emission reductions required (33.3% NOx and 50% PM10) for operations from the unmitigated baseline over a 10-year period. (7) Average Annual Emission Reductions Required by Rule: The project's total emission reduction for operations required by Rule 9510 divided by 10 years.

Fee Estimator Worksheet 9/30/2021
NOTES:
(1) The start date for each ISR phase is shown in TABLE 1. (2) If you have chosen a ONE-TIME payment for the project, then the total amount due for ALL PHASES is shown under TABLE 2. (3) If you have chosen a DEFERRED payment schedule or would like to propose a DEFERRED payment schedule for the project, the total amount due for a specific year is shown in TABLE 3 according to the schedule in TABLE 1. * If you have not provided a proposed payment date, the District sets a default invoice date of 60 days prior to start of the ISR phase.

No q
TABLE 2 -
NO FDS TABLE 3 - APPROVED FEE DEFERRAL SCHEDULE (FDS) BY PAYMENT YEAR Project
Phase Name
ISR
Phase
Start Date
per Phase
Scheduled
Payment
Date*
Required Offsite Reductions
(tons) 2021 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029

5.8747 5.8747

12.7188 12.7188

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

5.8747 5.8747 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

12.7188 12.7188 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 $54,928 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$114,609 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Administrative Fee ($) $6,781.48 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Offsite Fee ($) $169,537.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Project Offsite Fee ($) $176,318.48
Year Nox PM10
2021 and Beyond $9,350 $9,011
Iron Ridge Development
Iron Ridge Development
Visalia, CA
If applicant selected Fee Deferral Schedule -
Please select "Yes" from dropdown menu
2 3
5 Applicant/Business Name:

Project Name:

Project Location:

District Project ID No.:
12/1/21
TABLE 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION
4 8
9 10
7 1
$0.00
Rule 9510 Fee Schedule ($/ton)
Offsite Fee by Pollutant ($)
TABLE 2 -
No Fee Deferral Schedule (FDS)

T O T A L
(tons)
NOx
PM10
NOx
PM10
Pollutant
NOx
PM10
NOx
PM10
NOx
PM10
NOx
PM10
NOx
PM10
PM10
NOx
PM10
NOx
NOx
PM10
NOx
PM10
NOx
PM10
1 FALSE
6 BIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS REPORT
D.R. HORTON, AMERICA’S BUILDER

IRON RIDGE PROJECT
SEPTEMBER 2021

BIOLOGIAL ANALYSIS REPORT

IRON RIDGE PROJECT
Prepared for:

D.R. Horton, America’s Builder
419 W Murray Avenue
Visalia, CA 93291
Contact Person: Corine Demetreos, Forward Planner
Phone: 559.631.6208
Consultant:
601Pollasky Avenue Suite 301
Clovis, CA 93612
Contact: Ernie Escobedo
Phone: 559.449.2400
September 2021
© Copyright by Quad Knopf, Inc.

Unauthorized use prohibited.

Project #210315
Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 1 - Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 - Project Location.......................................................................................................................................1-1

1.2 - Project Description.................................................................................................................................1-1

1.3 - Purpose, Goals, and Objectives ..........................................................................................................1-1 SECTION 2 - Methods ................................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.1 - Definition of Biological Study Area ..................................................................................................2-1

2.2 - Definition of Special-Status Species.................................................................................................2-1

2.3 - Literature Review and Database Analysis.....................................................................................2-1

2.4 - Reconnaissance-Level Field Surveys...............................................................................................2-2 SECTION 3 - Regulatory Setting............................................................................................................. 3-3 SECTION 4 - Environmental Setting ..................................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 - Physical Characteristics........................................................................................................................4-1

4.1.1 - Topography .............................................................................................................................4-1

4.1.2 - Climate.......................................................................................................................................4-1

4.1.3 - Land Use ...................................................................................................................................4-1

4.1.4 - Soils.............................................................................................................................................4-2

4.1.5 - Hydrology.................................................................................................................................4-2

4.2 - Vegetation and Other Land Cover.....................................................................................................4-2

4.2.1 - Urban .........................................................................................................................................4-7

4.2.2 - Deciduous Orchard...............................................................................................................4-7

4.2.3 - Barren........................................................................................................................................4-8

4.2.4 - Annual Grassland ..................................................................................................................4-8

4.3 - General Wildlife Observations ...........................................................................................................4-1 SECTION 5 - Sensitive Biological Resources ...................................................................................... 5-2

5.1 - Special-Status Species ...........................................................................................................................5-2

5.1.1 - Special-Status Plant Species..............................................................................................5-2

5.1.2 - Special-Status Animal Species..........................................................................................5-3

5.2 - Sensitive Natural Communities .........................................................................................................5-4

5.2.1 - Sensitive Plant Communities ............................................................................................5-5

5.2.2 - Critical Habitats .....................................................................................................................5-5

5.3 - Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources ......................................................................................................5-1

5.4 - Wildlife Movement.................................................................................................................................5-1

5.5 - Resources Protected by Local Policies and Ordinances...........................................................5-1

5.6 - Habitat Conservation Plans.................................................................................................................5-1 Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page ii
SECTION 6 - Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures ................................... 6-2

6.1 - Special-Status Species ...........................................................................................................................6-2

6.1.1 - Project Impacts to Special-Status Plant Species........................................................6-2

6.1.2 - Project Impacts to Special-Status Animal Species....................................................6-2

6.2 - Sensitive Natural Communities and Critical Habitat.................................................................6-8

6.3 - Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources ......................................................................................................6-8

6.4 - Wildlife Movement.................................................................................................................................6-8

6.5 - Local Policies and Ordinances............................................................................................................6-9

6.6 - Adopted or Approved Plans................................................................................................................6-9 SECTION 7 - Limitations, Assumptions, and Use Reliance ............................................................ 7-1 SECTION 8 - References ........................................................................................................................... 8-1 SECTION 9 - List of Preparers ................................................................................................................ 9-1 Appendices
Appendix A Regulatory Setting
Appendix B Representative Photographs
Appendix C Plants and Animals Observed On-Site
Appendix D Special-Status Species Evaluation Table
Appendix E U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of The Endangered SJKF Prior to or During Ground Disturbance

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page iii
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Regional Map ................................................................................................................................1-3 Figure 1-2 Project Location Map.................................................................................................................1-4 Figure 2-1 Biological Study Area.................................................................................................................2-2 Figure 4-1 Soils Mapped within the BSA..................................................................................................4-3 Figure 4-2 NWI and NHD Records of Aquatic Resources ..................................................................4-4 Figure 4-3 FEMA Flood Zone Map..............................................................................................................4-5 Figure 4-4 Vegetation Communities within the BSA...........................................................................4-6 Figure 5-1 Critical Habitat in the Project Vicinity ................................................................................5-6 List of Tables
Table 2-1 Reconnaissance Survey Personnel and Timing ................................................................2-2 Table 4-2 Habitat Acreages Observed On-Site.......................................................................................4-2 Table 5-1 Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur On-Site.................................................5-2

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page iv
Acronyms and Abbreviations
AMSL Above Mean Sea Level
BAR Biological Analysis Report
BIOS Biogeography Information and Observation System
BSA Biological Study Area
CAGS California Ground Squirrel
CCR California Code of Regulations
COB City of Bakersfield
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFGC California Fish and Game Code
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
CWA Clean Water Act
CWHR California Wildlife Habitat Relationships
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
IPaC Information for Planning and Construction
MBGP Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
MBHCP Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
NHD National Hydrography Dataset
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI National Wetlands Inventory
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SJKF San Joaquin Kit Fox
SWHA Swainson’s Hawk
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Biological Analysis Report Executive Summary

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Quad Knopf, Inc. (QK) has prepared this Biological Analysis Report (BAR) to evaluate the potential for sensitive biological resources to be impacted by the construction of the Iron Ridge I and Iron Ridge II subdivision projects (Project) within the City of Visalia, Tulare County, California.

The proposed project is located on the Central Valley floor in East Tulare County, California, two miles northeast of the Highway 99 and State Route 198 intersection. D.R. Horton, America’s Builder (the Applicant) proposes to develop approximately 50 acres to create residential lots and the appurtenant infrastructure consistent with the General Plan designation of Residential Low Density. Along the adjacent Shirk Street, a ten-foot-wide landscape strip with masonry wall and required building setbacks will serve as the buffer between residential development and Shirk Street as required by the of Visalia City Municipal Code. A 3.82-acre linear park will extend across the north edge of the Project site which will include an approximately 2,000-foot public trail with exercise stations.

A database review and reconnaissance site visit were completed by QK Environmental Scientists to characterize existing conditions and determine the potential for special-status species and other sensitive biological resources to occur on-site that may be impacted by the Project.

The sensitive biological resource database and literature search identified four (4) natural communities, 21 plant species, and 34 animal species with potential to occur on the Project.

Of those, all but three animal species were eliminated from consideration due to lack of habitat or otherwise unsuitable conditions. No special plant species or natural communities are expected to occur on or near the Project area.

Direct and indirect impacts of the Project to these and other potentially occurring species could include injury or mortality of individuals and loss of habitat. Avoidance minimization measures are recommended which, when implemented, would reduce Project impacts to biological resources to less than significant levels.

Biological Analysis Report Introduction

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 1-1
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION
Quad Knopf, Inc. (QK) has prepared this Biological Analysis Report (BAR) to evaluate the potential for sensitive biological resources to be impacted by the construction of the Iron Ridge I and Iron Ridge II subdivision projects (Project) within the City of Visalia, Tulare County, California.

1.1 - Project Location
The Iron Ridge Project is a 50.31-acre residential development project proposed to be constructed within the City of Visalia. The Project is located two miles northeast of the Highway 99 and State Route 198 intersection, west of North Shirk Road, east of Road 88, and

0.25 miles south of W Goshen Avenue (Figures 1-1 and 1-2). The Project is within Section 28, Township 18S, Range 24E, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian.

1.2 - Project Description
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder (the Applicant) proposes to develop approximately 50 acres to create residential lots and the appurtenant infrastructure consistent with the City of Visalia General Plan designation of Residential Low Density. The approximate density is 4.73 dwelling units per gross acre. The Project proposed to remove the Very Low Density Residential (and subsequent R-1-20 zone) and replace it with Low Density Residential (R-1- 5 zone) in order to create a homogenous neighborhood. The Project will be built in two Phases (Phase I and Phase II).

Phase I includes the 10-acre parcel in the northeast of the Project site and will include the construction of 41 residential lots, and Phase II includes the 40-acre parcel to the west and will include the construction of 197 residential lots. Along the adjacent Shirk Street and Road 88, ten-foot-wide landscape strips with masonry wall and required building setbacks will serve as buffers between residential development and Shirk Street and Road 88. A 3.82-acre linear park will extend across the north edge of the Project site which will include an approximately 2,000-foot public trail with exercise stations. The linear park and adjacent light industrial properties to the north will be separated by a 6-foot block wall as required by the City’s Municipal Code.

1.3 - Purpose, Goals, and Objectives
The purpose of this BAR is to identify where potential special-status biological resources may occur within the Project site, determine how those resources may be impacted by the proposed Project, and recommend avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to reduce the potential for impact to those resources to a less than significant level. This BAR has been prepared to support an analysis of biological conditions as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Information contained in this BAR would, at least partially, support an analysis of project effects required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and to support regulatory permit applications, if needed.

Biological Analysis Report Introduction

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 1-2
Biological Analysis Report Introduction

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 1-3

Figure 1-1
Regional Map
Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Biological Analysis Report Introduction

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 1-4

Figure 1-2
Project Location Map
Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Biological Analysis Report Methods

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 2-1
SECTION 2 - METHODS

2.1 - Definition of Biological Study Area
The Biological Study Area (BSA) consists of the proposed Project and a surrounding 250- foot buffer (Figure 2-1).

2.2 - Definition of Special-Status Species
Special-status species evaluated in this BAR include:
• Species listed as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA); species that are under review may be included if there is a reasonable expectation of listing within the life of the project,
• Species listed as candidate, threatened, or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA),
• Species designated as Fully Protected, Species of Special Concern, or Watch List by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW),
• Other species included on the CDFW’s Special Animals List, • Plant species with a California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR), and • Species designated as locally important by the Local Agency and/or otherwise protected through ordinance or local policy.

The potential for each special-status species to occur in the study area was evaluated according to the following criteria:
• No Potential to Occur. Habitat on and adjacent to the site is clearly unsuitable to meet the needs of the species (foraging, breeding, cover, substrate, elevation, hydrology, plant community, site history, disturbance regime), and species would have been identified on-site if present (e.g., oak trees).
• Yes, Potential to Occur. Conditions on the site may, in some way, support a portion of the species ecology (foraging, reproduction, movement/migration). Negative survey results independent of other information does not exclude the potential for a species to occur.
• Present. Species was observed on the site or has been recorded (e.g., California Natural Diversity Database, California Native Plant Society) on the site recently (within the last 5 years).

Biological Analysis Report Methods

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 2-2

Figure 2-1
Biological Study Area
Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Biological Analysis Report Methods

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 2-1

2.3 - Literature Review and Database Analysis
The following sources were reviewed for information on sensitive biological resources in the Project vicinity:
• CDFW’s California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2021a) • CDFW’s Biogeographic Information and Observation System (CDFW 2021b) • CDFW’s Special Animals List (CDFW 2021c)
• CDFW’s California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System (Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988)
• California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2021)
• USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation system (USFWS 2021a) • USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper (USFWS 2021b)
• USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2021c)
• USGS National Hydrography Dataset (USGS 2021a)
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood zone maps (FEMA 2021) • U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2021a)
• NRCS List of Hydric Soils (NRCS 2021b)
• Current and historical aerial imagery (Google LLC 2020, Netronline 2021) • Topographic maps (USGS 2021b)
For each of these data sources, the search was focused on the Visalia and Goshen USGS 7.5- minute quadrangles in which the Project is located, plus the surrounding ten (10) quadrangles: Monson, Ivanhoe, Exeter, Cairns Corner, Tulare, Paige, Traver, Burris Park, Remnoy, and Waukena.

The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) provides element-specific spatial information on individually documented occurrences of special-status species and sensitive natural communities. Some of the information available for review in the CNDDB is still undergoing review by the CDFW; these records are identified as unprocessed data. The CNPS database provides similar information as the CNDDB, but at a much lower spatial resolution.

Much of this information in these databases is submitted opportunistically and is often focused on protected lands or on lands where various developments have been proposed.

Neither database represents data collected during comprehensive surveys for special-status resources in the region. As such, the absence of recorded occurrences in these databases at any specific location does not preclude the possibility that a special-status species could be present. The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), National Hydrography Dataset (NHD), and Web Soil Survey provide comprehensive data, but at a low resolution that requires confirmation in the field. The CDFW Special Animals List and USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation system provide no spatial data on wildlife occurrences and provide only lists of species that might potentially be present.

Biological Analysis Report Methods

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 2-2
The results of database inquiries were reviewed to develop a comprehensive list of sensitive biological resources that may be present in the vicinity of the Project. This list was then evaluated against existing conditions observed during the site visit of the BSA to determine which sensitive resources are or could be present, and then the potential for impacts to those resources to occur from Project implementation.

2.4 - Reconnaissance-Level Field Surveys
A reconnaissance survey of the BSA was conducted on August 30, 2021, by QK Environmental Scientists Courtney Chaney and Shannon Gleason (Table 2.1). The survey consists of walking meandering pedestrian transects throughout the BSA, where feasible. A portion of the buffer was inaccessible because it overlapped with private residential and industrial properties. Those areas were surveyed visually with the aid of binoculars to gather a representative inventory of the plant and wildlife species present. The entire Project area was surveyed on foot.

Table 2-1
Reconnaissance Survey Personnel and Timing
Wonderful: Lost Hills Expansion Project, Kern County, California Date Personnel Time Weather Conditions Temperature
August 30, 2021 Courtney Chaney,
Shannon Gleason 1122-1305 Sunny, hazy 89.5-100.0°F
General tasks completed during the survey included an inventory of plant and animal species observed, characterization of vegetation associations and habitat conditions, evaluation for presence of wetlands and waters within the BSA, an assessment of the potential for federaland State- listed and special-status plant and wildlife species to occur on and near the Project site, and assessment for migratory birds and raptors to nest on and near the Project site. All locational data was recorded using ESRI Collector for ArcGIS software installed on an iPad and site conditions were documented with representative photographs.

Biological Analysis Report Regulatory Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 3-3
SECTION 3 - REGULATORY SETTING
Regulated or sensitive resources that were studied and analyzed include special-status plant and animal species, nesting birds and raptors, sensitive plant communities, jurisdictional waters and wetlands, wildlife movement areas, and locally protected resources such as protected trees. Regulatory authority over biological resources is shared by federal, State, and local authorities. Primary authority for regulation of general biological resources lies within the land use control and planning authority of local jurisdictions (in this instance, City of Visalia).

Potential impacts to biological resources were analyzed based on the following list of statutes. Summaries of these statues are provided in Appendix A. • CEQA
• FESA
• CESA
• Federal Clean Water Act
• California Fish and Game Code
• Migratory Bird Treaty Act
• The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
• Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
• City of Visalia General Plan
Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-1
SECTION 4 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This section identifies the regional and local environmental setting of the Project site and BSA and describes existing baseline conditions. The environmental setting of the BSA was obtained from various sources of literature, databases, and aerial photographs. Information on site conditions was gathered during a survey of the Project site conducted by QK biologists.

4.1 - Physical Characteristics
The BSA is in a region dominated by agricultural orchards and urban development. The BSA is located on the eastern San Joaquin Valley floor, west of the Sierra Nevada Mountain range.

Residential development is located to the east and south of the Project site, light industrial is located to the north, and agricultural land is located to the south and west. The Project is located on the west section of the City of Visalia, Tulare County, a census-designated place.

Land use within the Project site boundary contained two types of vegetative cover. The 40- acre parcel on the west portion of the Project site is currently contained an orchard of walnut trees. The 10-acre parcel on the east side of the Project site has been previously disturbed and is predominately barren but had sparse patches of non-native vegetation.

Representative photographs of the current conditions of the BSA are included in Appendix B.

4.1.1 - TOPOGRAPHY
The Project site is on the floor of the San Joaquin Valley west of the Sierra Nevada foothills.

The topography on the site is relatively flat, with an elevation range of approximately 300 to 320 feet above mean sea level.

4.1.2 - CLIMATE
The region in which the BSA is located is characterized by a Mediterranean climate of hot summers and wet, mild winters. Average high temperatures range from 56.0°F in January to

97.5°F in July, and it is not uncommon for temperatures to exceed 100°F during the summer (WRCC, 2021). Average low temperatures range from 36.8°F in December to 63.5°F in July.

Precipitation occurs primarily as rain, most of which falls between November and April.

Precipitation may also occur as dense fog during the winter known as Tule Fog. Rain rarely falls during the summer months and there have been numerous years of drought conditions for region resulting in lower-than-average rainfall.

4.1.3 - LAND USE
Land use surrounding the Project area consist of urban development, light industrial, fallow agriculture, orchards, non-native grassland, and barren land. Land use within the Project boundary consists of annual grassland, barren land, and deciduous orchards. The Project is bounded by paved and unpaved streets and private residences. The Project site is bounded by light industrial development to the north, North Shirk Road and residential development Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-2
to the east, an unnamed dirt road, residential, orchards, and fallow agriculture with nonnative grassland to the south, and Road 88 and fallow agriculture to the west.

4.1.4 - SOILS
The BSA is underlain by two soil types: Colpien loam and Akers-Akers (Figure 4-1).

The Colpien series consists of very deep, moderately well drained soils on terraces that formed in alluvium derived mainly from granitic rocks. These soils are artificially drained.

Slopes are 0 to 2 percent. The average annual precipitation is about 10 inches and the average annual temperature is about 63 degrees F. This soil is used for irrigated cropland to grow cotton, corn, wheat, grapes, stone fruits, walnuts, and alfalfa. It is also used for dairy and cattle production and building site development. This soil is considered nonhydric (NRCS 2021).

The Akers series consist of very deep, well drained soils formed in alluvium derived from granitic rock. Akers soils are on terraces. Slopes are 0 to 2 percent. The mean annual precipitation is about 10 inches, and the mean annual temperature is about 63 degrees F.

This soil is used for irrigated cropland to grow cotton, corn, wheat, table grapes, walnuts, plums, and alfalfa. It is also used for dairy and cattle production and building site development.

4.1.5 - HYDROLOGY
The NWI and NHD showed three waterways in the vicinity of the Project, and none were observed on site during the reconnaissance survey (USFWS 2021C; USGS 2021). One aquatic resource to the south, Mill Creek Ditch, was dry at the time of the survey. Two freshwater ponds to the north of the Project site were field verified to no longer be present. (Figure 4- 2) The Project is situated within areas of 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard and 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard as designated by FEMA (FEMA 2021) (Figure 4-3).

4.2 - Vegetation and Other Land Cover
Four habitat types were observed within the BSA: Orchard, Annual Grassland, Urban, and Barren (Figure 4-4). The habitats observed on-site have been described in the context of the CWHR (Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988).

Table 4-1
Habitat Acreages Observed On-Site
Habitat Type BSA Acreages
Orchard 42.80
Urban 28.09
Annual Grassland 18.29
Barren 6.80
Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-3

Figure 4-1
Soils Mapped within the BSA
Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-4

Figure 4-2
NWI and NHD Records of Aquatic Resources
Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-5

Figure 4-3
FEMA Flood Zone Map
Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-6

Figure 4-4
Vegetation Communities within the BSA
Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-7

4.2.1 - URBAN
Mayer and Laudenslayer (1988) describe Urban as a developed habitat with five types of vegetative structure including tree grove, street strip, shade tree/lawn, lawn, and shrub cover. Common in city parks, green belts, and cemeteries, tree groves vary in height, tree spacing, crown shape, and understory conditions, depending on species planted and landscape design. Street tree strips show variation in spacing of trees, depending upon species and design considerations, and are typically planted in grass. Shade trees/lawns are typical of residential areas and reminiscent of natural savannas. Lawns are structurally the most uniform vegetative units of the Urban habitat and shrub cover, including hedges, is more limited in distribution. Species composition in Urban habitats varies with planting design and climate and monoculture is commonly observed in tree groves and street tree strips. Three urban categories relevant to wildlife are distinguished: downtown, urban residential, and suburbia. Downtown has the lowest diversity comprised of over 90 percent avian density and biomass including rock dove, European starling, and house sparrow.

Wildlife that utilize urban residential scrub jay, mockingbird, house finch, raccoon, opossum, striped skunk, and California slender salamander. Wrentits, bushtits, plain titmouse, chestnut-backed chickadee, California quail, black-tailed deer, ringtail, black-tailed jackrabbit, gopher snake and western fence lizard typically occur in suburban areas. Urban habitat is the result of modifying pre-settlement vegetation and introducing new species.

They are not limited to any particular physical setting and occur throughout California.

The BSA contains urban habitat in the 250-foot buffer surrounding the Project site, consisting of light industrial development to the north and residential properties to the east.

There is a residential property on the Project site along its southern boundary.

4.2.2 - DECIDUOUS ORCHARD
Mayer and Laudenslayer (1988) describe Orchards as manmade habitats that are typically monoculture operations. Deciduous orchards include trees, such as, almonds, apples, apricots, cherries, figs, nectarines, peaches, pears, pecans, pistachios, plums, pomegranates, prunes, and walnuts. Trees range in height at maturity for many species from 15 to 30 feet, or 60 feet or more in pecans and walnuts. Crowns usually touch and are usually in a linear pattern. Spacing between trees is uniform depending on desired spread of mature trees.

Understory vegetation is usually composed of low-growing grasses, legumes, and other herbaceous plants, but may be managed to prevent understory growth totally or partially, such as along tree rows. Small mammals are often found along orchard rows or adjacent to fence posts. Nests in orchard trees are uncommon but birds may use orchards for perching or hunting. Other animals may traverse these lands, but limited foraging, breeding, and sheltering occurs here. Orchards are placed on both flat and sloped land and are often found adjacent to similar habitats. These habitats are extremely common across the Central Valley, the central coast, and parts of southern California.

Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-8
The 40-acre rectangular parcel on the western side of the Project site is dominated by Orchard habitat containing mature walnut trees. Limited understory vegetation was present at the time of survey consisting of low-lying grasses and herbs.

4.2.3 - BARREN
Mayer and Laudenslayer (1988) describe Barren habitat as a permanently non-vegetated habitat, which is any habitat with <2% total vegetation cover by herbaceous, desert, or nonwildland species and <10% cover by tree or shrub species is defined this way. Barren habitat may be found in combination with many different habitats, depending on the region of the state. Where there is little or no vegetation, structure of the non-vegetated substrate becomes a critical component of the habitat. Certain bird species including cormorants, hawks, and falcons nest on rock ledges and other species including plovers, stilts, avocets, gulls, terns, nighthawks, and poorwills rely on open ground covered with sand or gravel to construct scrape nests and bank swallows will use vertical cliffs along river corridors to nest and seek cover. Rocky canyon walls above open water are preferred foraging habitat for many species of bats. Some lizard species rely on open sandy soils in the desert for burrowing and laying eggs and some mammals rely on alpine talus slopes for cover. Barren habitat typically consists of an inhospitable environment for plants including extreme temperatures, near-vertical slopes, impermeable substrate, either natural or anthropogenic constant disturbances, or soil lacking or containing excessive organic matter or minerals.

Barren habitat can occur throughout California at any elevation.

Barren habitat exists in the 250-foot buffer to the west of the Project site, consisting of recently tilled fallow agricultural fields. The area consists of disturbed soil with little to no vegetation.

4.2.4 - ANNUAL GRASSLAND
Annual Grassland is described by Mayer & Laudenslayer (1988) as open grasslands composed primarily of annual plant species, which also will occur as understory plants in woodland habitats. Structure is dependent largely on weather patterns and livestock grazing, and large quantities of dead material can be found in summer months. Plant species found include introduced annual grasses such as brome (Bromus sp.) and wild oats (Avena sp.), and forbs such as red-stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium) and turkey mullein (Croton setigerus). Many wildlife species use annual grassland habitat for foraging, but some require special habitat features such as cliffs, ponds, and woodlands for breeding and refuge.

Characteristic species for annual grasslands includes; western fence lizard, western rattlesnake, California ground squirrel (CAGS), coyote, turkey vulture, burrowing owl, and horned lark.

Annual grassland habitat exists within the sparsely vegetated 10-acre rectangular section on the northeast side of the project site. Additionally, non-native grassland habitat exists within the 250-foot buffer to the south of the Project site, existing on abandoned agricultural land.

Biological Analysis Report Environmental Setting

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 4-1

4.3 - General Wildlife Observations
Wildlife occurring within the BSA was typical for the habitats that were present. A complete list of wildlife observations is included in Appendix C.

Biological Analysis Report Sensitive Biological Resources

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 5-2
SECTION 5 - SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Local, State, and federal agencies regulate special-status species and other sensitive biological resources and require an assessment of their presence or potential for presence to be on-site prior to the approval of proposed development on a property. This section discusses sensitive biological resources observed on the project site and evaluates the potential for the Project site to support additional sensitive biological resources.

Assessments for the potential occurrence of special-status species are based upon known ranges, habitat preferences for the species, species occurrence records from the CNDDB and CNPS, species occurrence records from other sites in the vicinity of the survey area, previous reports for the project site, and the results of surveys of the Project site.

5.1 - Special-Status Species
There were no special-status plant species identified within the Project site or survey buffer and based on historical disturbance and current conditions none are expected to occur.

However, three special-status animal species were determined to have potential to occur onsite and potentially be affected by the Project (Table 5-1). The complete list of species identified by the database search (CNDDB, IPaC CNPS, available literature, etc.) and evaluated for this Project is included in Appendix D. Each species with potential to occur on the site is further discussed in the subsections below.

Table 5-1
Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur On-Site
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
Fed/State ESA

CRPR/CDFW
Potentially Affected
by Project?
Yes/No
Viability Threat?
Yes/No
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
-/-
-/SSC
Yes No
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson’s hawk
-/ST
-/-
Yes No
Vulpes macrotis mutica
San Joaquin kit fox
FE/ST
-/-
Yes No

5.1.1 - SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES
The literature and database review identified twenty-one (21) special-status plant species known to occur or with potential to occur within the vicinity of the Project (See evaluation table in Appendix D). None of those species were determined to have potential to occur FE Federally Endangered
FT Federally Threatened
FC Federal Candidate Species
FS Federally Sensitive
SE State Endangered
ST State Threatened
SC State Candidate
SS State Sensitive
SSC State Species of Special Concern
SFP State Fully Protected
SR State Rare
Biological Analysis Report Sensitive Biological Resources

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 5-3
within the BSA because all areas have been previously disturbed and/or are developed and no longer support suitable habitat for those species, outside of the know range of the species, habitat that does not support the species, or other environmental conditions.

5.1.2 - SPECIAL-STATUS ANIMAL SPECIES
The literature review identified 32 special-status animal species known or with potential to occur in the vicinity of the project (see the evaluation table in Appendix D). Of those, three (3) were determined to have the potential to occur on-site.

Swainson’s Hawk

BUTEO SWAINSONI
Status: State Threatened
Swainson’s hawks occur in grassland, desert, and agricultural landscapes throughout the Central Valley and Antelope Valley (Bechard et al. 2010, Zeiner et al. 1990). Some hawks may be resident, especially in the southern portion of their range, while others may migrate between winter and breeding habitats. They prefer larger isolated trees or small woodlots for nesting, usually with grassland or dry-land grain fields nearby for foraging and have been known to nest in large eucalyptus trees along heavily traveled freeway corridors. Swainson’s hawks forage in grassland, open scrub, pasture, and dryland grain agricultural habitats, primarily for rodents. Swainson’s hawks exhibit a moderate to high nest site fidelity for successful nest sites.

The nearest occurrence was recorded in 2017, 1.2 miles west of the Project, where a stick nest was observed in an oak tree adjacent to agricultural fields and a commercial area (EONDX 109959; CDFW 2021b).

Based on information from the reconnaissance site visit, there are large walnut trees in the orchard on the western portion of the site that could potentially support nesting Swainson’s hawks, in addition to large planted trees in urban areas in the vicinity of the Project. The annual grassland on the Project site and within the BSA could potentially provide foraging opportunities for the Swainson’s hawk. However, the high density of residential neighborhoods, traffic, and lack of other potential foraging habitat in the area would decrease the likelihood of Swainson’s hawk nesting activity on the Project site.

Western Burrowing Owl

ATHENE CUNICULARIA
Status: CDFW Species of Special Concern
The western burrowing owl is a small ground-dwelling owl that can be found throughout western North America (Klute et al. 2003). This species can be found in a variety of habitat types including grasslands, deserts, or other open habitats where food resources are available and contain treeless areas with low vegetation cover and gently sloping terrain (Rodewald 2015). Burrowing owls use earthen burrows, typically relying on other fossorial mammals to construct their burrows such as CAGS or American badger (USFWS 1998). In Biological Analysis Report Sensitive Biological Resources

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 5-4
California, they are most often associated with CAGS Winchell 1994. They use a burrow throughout the year for temperature regulation, offspring rearing, shelter, and escape from predators. While burrows are most often earthen, they also use atypical burrows such as pipes, culverts, and other man-made structures, most often as shelter (Shuford and Gardali 2008). Burrowing owls can have several burrows close to one other that they may frequently move among to avoid predators.

The nearest CNDDB occurrence is from 1998 and was located approximately 5.6 miles northwest of the Project site (EONDX 35403). No western burrowing owl or diagnostic sign (e.g., burrows, whitewash, pellets, prey remains) were observed during the survey.

Burrowing owls are present year-round in the Central Valley and typically use multiple burrows within their ranges. Burrowing owls have also been known to occur in urban and agriculturally developed areas. The prey base (i.e., insects and lizards) within the Project site is marginal, however it is still possible that burrowing owls may become established in the existing CAGS burrows or pass through the Project site as transients.

San Joaquin kit fox

VULPES MACROTIS MUTICA
Status: Federally Endangered, State Threatened
The San Joaquin kit fox (SJKF) is a subspecies of kit fox that is endemic to the San Joaquin Valley, Carrizo Plain, and Cuyama Valley, as well as other small valleys in the western foothills of the Central Valley of California (USFWS 1998). They are only found west of the Sierra Nevada crest. They occupy arid to semi-arid grasslands, open shrublands, savannahs, and grazed lands with loose-textured soils. SJKF are well-established in some urban areas and are highly adaptable to human-altered landscapes. They generally avoid intensively maintained agricultural land but forage well into croplands from surrounding habitat. SJKF uses subterranean dens year-round for shelter and pup-rearing. They are nocturnally active but may be above ground near their dens during the day, particularly in the spring. They feed primarily on small mammals, but will consume a variety of prey, and will scavenge for human food.

The nearest CNDDB occurrence (EONDX 55307) is from 2003 and approximately 3.4 miles northwest of the Project and is presumed extant (CDFW 2021a). No SJKF were observed during the survey. No kit fox or diagnostic sign (e.g., tracks, scat, prey remains, or dens) were observed during the reconnaissance survey. This species is a highly mobile transient forager which preys on small burrowing mammals and has adapted well to urbanized settings, even feeding on anthropogenic food sources. Suitable foraging and denning habitat are present within the BSA and the species may pass through as a transient.

5.2 - Sensitive Natural Communities
Sensitive natural communities are designated by various resource agencies including the CDFW, USFWS, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, or are designated by local Biological Analysis Report Sensitive Biological Resources

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 5-5
agencies through policies, ordinances, and regulations. Sensitive natural communities generally have important functions or values for plants and wildlife or are recognized as declining in extent or distribution and warrant some level of protection

5.2.1 - SENSITIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES
The CNDDB search resulted in four sensitive natural communities occurring in the region of the Project: Northern Claypan Vernal Pool, Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool, Valley Sacaton Grassland, and Great Valley Oak Riparian Forest. None of these communities were determined to have potential to occur within the BSA because all areas have been previously disturbed and/or are developed and no longer support suitable habitat for those communities.

5.2.2 - CRITICAL HABITATS
Habitat may be designated as Critical Habitat by the USFWS, which are blocks of habitat that may or may not be currently occupied by species, but which are of the highest priority for the survival, conservation, and recovery of threatened or endangered species.

There are no mapped Critical Habitats on or near the Project. The nearest Critical Habitat is located approximately 10-miles north-northwest of the Project for the vernal pool fairy shrimp, vernal pool tadpole shrimp, and California tiger salamander. Further to the northeast is critical habitat for San Joaquin Orcutt grass and Hoover’s Spurge. None of these species are present on the Project site nor does the site provide suitable habitat for these species (Figure 5-2).

Biological Analysis Report Sensitive Biological Resources

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 5-6

Figure 5-1
Critical Habitat in the Project Vicinity
Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Biological Analysis Report Sensitive Biological Resources

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 5-1

5.3 - Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources
No water or wetland features are present on the Project site. The literature review, NHD, and NWI identified three Waters of the U.S. or wetland features in the vicinity of the Project site, however none were observed within the Project site during the reconnaissance survey. One aquatic resource to the south, Mill Creek Ditch, was dry at the time of the survey. Two freshwater ponds to the north of the Project site are no longer be present.

5.4 - Wildlife Movement
Wildlife movement corridors, also referred to as dispersal corridors or landscape linkages, are generally defined as linear features along which animals can travel from one habitat or resource area to another. Wildlife movement corridors can be large tracts of land that connect regionally important habitats that support wildlife in general, such as stop-over habitat that supports migrating birds or large contiguous natural habitats that support animals with very large home ranges (e.g., coyotes [Canis latrans], mule deer [Odocoileus hemionus californicus]). They can also be small scale movement corridors, such as riparian zones, that provide connectivity and cover to support movement at a local scale.

The literature review and database search did not identify any wildlife movement corridors on or near the Project site.

5.5 - Resources Protected by Local Policies and Ordinances The City of Visalia General Plan contains policies aimed at the preservation of biological resources and promotes coordination with federal and State resource agencies. These policies are listed in Appendix A. The General Plan outlines a work plan with implementation measure by which to uphold these policies, including biological resource review for proposed projects and development of mitigation measures for these projects. The City of Visalia Valley Oak Ordinance establishes policies for care, trimming, and removal of Valley Oaks.

5.6 - Habitat Conservation Plans
The Project is located within an area covered by the PG&E San Joaquin Valley Operation and Maintenance Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). This HCP applies to maintenance and operations of PG&E facilities only and does not apply to the Project.

Biological Analysis Report Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 6-2
SECTION 6 - IMPACT ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES This section provides an analysis of the potential for special-status biological resources to be impacted by the proposed Project. The analysis was developed using the CEQA Appendix G questions, but also provides sufficient information to support NEPA) documentation. In addition to the standard CEQA analysis topics, we have added another topic that could result in impacts to wildlife, which is an analysis of the quality of irrigation reuse water and the potential effect on wildlife of its reuse within the Land Application Area.

6.1 - Special-Status Species
The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Avoidance and minimization measures are designed to reduce or eliminate impacts to special-status species during Project construction activities. Detailed specific measures are outlined below for each special-status species that may occur on the Project footprint.

6.1.1 - PROJECT IMPACTS TO SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES There is no suitable habitat for any of the twenty-one (21) special-status plant species with potential to occur in the vicinity of the Project. Mitigation and minimization measures are not warranted for these species.

6.1.2 - PROJECT IMPACTS TO SPECIAL-STATUS ANIMAL SPECIES Thirty-two (32) special-status wildlife species have potential to occur within the BSA or in its vicinity. Of these, three were determined to potentially occur on the BSA based on current habitat conditions and literature review: western burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, and San Joaquin kit fox. Potential impacts to these species are described below.

Western Burrowing Owl
No burrowing owls or sign of the species was observed during the reconnaissance survey.

However, there is suitable habitat for the species within the BSA in the Annual Grassland within the BSA where there are also California ground squirrel burrows suitable for the species. The species is known to inhabit the region and may become an established resident in suitable habitat within the BSA or pass through as a transient at any time.

Direct and/or indirect impacts to burrowing owl could occur if there is an active burrow within the BSA during the period of construction activities. Construction activities could Biological Analysis Report Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 6-3
result in crushing or destroying a burrow, with or without a burrowing owl inside. Noise, vibration, and increased human activity resulting from Project construction activities could alter the daily behaviors of individual owls and affect foraging success, displace owls from their burrows, or lead to nest failure. Suitable nesting and foraging habitat would be lost as a result of the Project. Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, and BIO6 through BIO-8 as listed below, would reduce any potential impacts.

Swainson’s Hawk
No SWHA were observed during the survey. While not ideal habitat, the walnut orchard on site could provide possible nesting habitat for the SWHA. Additionally, suitable nesting sites are located within 0.5-mile associated with ornamental trees on surrounding residential areas and commercial landscaping. The current condition of the Project site provides marginal foraging habitat due to a low-volume prey base (i.e., insects, lizards, and CAGS).

Impacts to individual nesting SWHA outside of the Project site could occur if construction activities occur near an active nest. Noise and vibration from construction of the Project, and the presence of construction workers, could alter the normal behaviors of nesting adults and affect reproductive success within 0.5-mile of the nest site.

Implementation of Measures BIO-4 through BIO-8 would reduce impacts to this species.

San Joaquin Kit Fox
There is no evidence that San Joaquin kit fox is present within the BSA, but the Annual Grassland habitat could provide potential denning and foraging habitat. The presence of CAGS within the orchard could provide foraging habitat as well. Because this species is highly mobile, there is a potential that San Joaquin kit fox could become established in these areas or be present from time to time throughout the BSA as transient foragers.

Potential impacts to this species could occur if there is an active San Joaquin kit fox den or transient individual within or near the area of development during construction activities.

Potential direct impacts resulting in injury, death, or entrapment in dens, trenches, or pipes could occur if a San Joaquin kit fox occupies the construction area or travels through. Noise, vibration, and the presence of construction workers could alter normal behaviors if kit foxes are present, which could affect reproductive success and overall fitness. Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, BIO-7, and BIO-8 as listed below, would reduce any potential impacts to San Joaquin kit fox.

Nesting Birds
No bird nests were identified during the reconnaissance survey. However, the BSA supports several habitats for nesting birds, which may nest on trees and shrubs, man-made structures, and directly on the ground. Migratory birds could nest throughout the entire BSA.

Biological Analysis Report Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 6-4
Construction activities and vegetation removal could lead to the destruction of nests.

Construction-related vibration, noise, and dust production, and human presence could alter the normal behaviors of nesting birds in the vicinity of the Project and lead to nest failure.

To avoid and minimize impacts to migratory birds including special-status bird species, mitigation measures BIO-4 through BIO-8, listed below, should be implemented during construction to reduce impacts to nesting birds.

Avoidance and Minimization Measures
Implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures listed below would reduce impacts of the Project to special-status wildlife species to level that would be less than significant.

BIO-1 Avoidance of Burrows for Burrowing Owl and San Joaquin Kit Fox. Within 14 days prior to the start of Project ground-disturbing activities, a pre-activity survey with a 500-foot buffer, where land access is permitted, should be conducted by a qualified biologist knowledgeable in the identification of these species and approved by the CDFW. If dens/burrows that could support any of these species are discovered during the pre-activity survey, the avoidance buffers outlined below should be established. No work would occur within these buffers unless the biologist approves and monitors the activity.

Burrowing Owl (active burrows)
• Non-breeding season: September 1 – January 31 – 160 feet • Breeding season: February 1 – August 31 – 250 feet
American Badger/SJKF
• Potential or Atypical den – 50 feet
• Known den – 100 feet
• Natal Den –Contact CDFW for consultation
BIO-2 Burrowing Owl and San Joaquin Kit Fox Avoidance. A qualified biologist should remain on-call throughout the construction phase if a burrowing owl, American badger, or SJKF occurs on the site during construction. If one of these species occurs on-site, the biologist should be contacted immediately to determine whether biological monitoring or the implementation of avoidance buffers may be warranted.

BIO-3 Standard Avoidance and Minimization Measures for the protection of San Joaquin Kit Fox and Western Burrowing Owl.

The following avoidance and minimization measures should be implemented during all phases of the Project to reduce the potential for impact from the Project.

They are modified from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the Endangered SJKF Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (USFWS 2011, Appendix E).

Biological Analysis Report Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 6-5
a. All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps shall be disposed of in securely closed containers and removed at least once a week from the construction or Project Site.
b. Construction-related vehicle traffic shall be restricted to established roads and predetermined ingress and egress corridors, staging, and parking areas.

Vehicle speeds shall not exceed 20 miles per hour (mph) within the Project Site.
c. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit fox or other animals during construction, the contractor shall cover all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep at the close of each workday with plywood or similar materials. If holes or trenches cannot be covered, one or more escape ramps constructed of earthen fill or wooden planks shall be installed in the trench. Before such holes or trenches are filled, the contractor shall thoroughly inspect them for entrapped animals. All construction-related pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of four-inches or greater that are stored on the Project Site shall be thoroughly inspected for wildlife before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in anyway. If at any time an entrapped or injured kit fox is discovered, work in the immediate area shall be temporarily halted and USFWS and CDFW shall be consulted.
d. Kit foxes are attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipes and become trapped or injured. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods shall be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If a kit fox is discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe shall not be moved until the USFWS and CDFW have been consulted. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the pipe may be moved only once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has escaped.
e. No pets, such as dogs or cats, shall be permitted on the Project Sites to prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes, or destruction of dens. f. Use of anti-coagulant rodenticides and herbicides in Project Sites shall be restricted. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of kit foxes and the depletion of prey populations on which they depend. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other State and Federal legislation, as well as additional Project-related restrictions deemed necessary by the USFWS and CDFW. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used because of the proven lower risk to kit foxes.
g. A representative shall be appointed by the Project proponent who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured, or entrapped kit fox. The Biological Analysis Report Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 6-6
representative shall be identified during the employee education program and their name and telephone number shall be provided to the USFWS. h. The Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office of USFWS and CDFW shall be notified in writing within three working days of the accidental death or injury to a SJKF during Project-related activities. Notification must include the date, time, and location of the incident or of the finding of a dead or injured animal and any other pertinent information. The USFWS contact is the Chief of the Division of Endangered Species, at the addresses and telephone numbers below. The CDFW contact can be reached at (559) 243-4014 and [email protected]. i. All sightings of the SJKF shall be reported to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). A copy of the reporting form and a topographic map clearly marked with the location of where the kit fox was observed shall also be provided to the Service at the address below.
j. Any Project-related information required by the USFWS or questions concerning the above conditions, or their implementation may be directed in writing to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at: Endangered Species Division, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W 2605, Sacramento, California 95825-1846, phone:
(916) 414-6620 or (916) 414-6600.

BIO-4 Pre-activity Surveys for Swainson’s Hawk Nests. If Project construction activities must occur during the Swainson’s hawk nesting season (February 15 to August 31), pre-construction activity surveys should be conducted over the Project area and within 0.5-mile for Swainson’s hawk nests in accordance with the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley, Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee (CDFG 2000).

BIO-5 Swainson’s Hawk Nest Avoidance. If an active Swainson’s hawk nest is discovered at any time within 0.5-mile of active construction, a qualified biologist should complete an assessment of the potential for current construction activities to impact the nest. The assessment would consider the type of construction activities, the location of construction relative to the nest, the visibility of construction activities from the nest location, and other existing disturbances in the area that are not related to construction activities of this Project. Based on this assessment, the biologist will determine if construction activities can proceed, and the level of nest monitoring required. Construction activities should not occur within 500 feet of an active nest but depending upon conditions at the site this distance may be reduced. Full-time monitoring to evaluate the effects of construction activities on nesting Swainson’s hawks may be required. The qualified biologist should have the authority to stop work if it is determined that Project construction is disturbing the nest. These buffers may need to increase depending on the sensitivity of the nesting Swainson’s hawk to disturbances and at the discretion of the qualified biologist.

BIO-6 Pre-activity Surveys for Nesting Birds. If Project construction activities will be initiated during the nesting season (February 1 to September 15), a pre-activity Biological Analysis Report Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 6-7
nesting bird survey should be conducted within 14 days prior to the start of construction. The surveys should encompass the Project footprint and accessible areas or land visible from accessible areas within a 250-foot buffer for songbirds and a 500-foot buffer for raptors. If no active nests are found, no further action is required. However, existing nests may become active and new nests may be built at any time prior to and throughout the nesting season, including when construction activities are in progress.

If active nests are found during the survey or at any time during construction of the Project, an avoidance buffer ranging from 50 feet to 500 feet may be required, with the avoidance buffer from any specific nest being determined by a qualified biologist. The avoidance buffer will remain in place until the biologist has determined that the young are no longer reliant on the adults or the nest, or if breeding attempts have otherwise been unsuccessful. Work may occur within the avoidance buffer under the approval and guidance of the biologist, but full-time monitoring may be required. The biologist shall have the ability to stop construction if nesting adults show any sign of distress.

BIO-7 Preconstruction Clearance Survey. Within 14 days prior to the start of ground disturbance activities, a pre-activity survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist knowledgeable in the identification of all special-status plant and wildlife species with potential to occur in the vicinity of the Project. All suitable burrows that could support blunt-nosed leopard lizard, Tipton kangaroo rat, short-nosed kangaroo rat, Tulare grasshopper mouse, or other special-status wildlife species will be avoided during construction in accordance with BIO-5 and BIO-6, unless verification surveys have indicated that the species are not present.

Consultation with the USFWS and CDFW may be required if listed or fully protected species are detected during the survey.

BIO-8 Worker Environmental Awareness Training. Prior to the initiation of construction activities, all construction personnel should attend a Worker Environmental Awareness Training program developed by a qualified biologist. Any personnel associated with construction that did not attend the initial training shall be trained by the authorized biologist prior to working on the project site. Any employee responsible for the operations and maintenance or decommissioning of the project facilities shall also attend the Worker Environmental Awareness Training program prior to starting work on the project and on an annual basis.

The Program shall be developed and presented by the project qualified biologist(s) or designee approved by the qualified biologist(s). The program should include information on the life histories of special-status species with potential to occur on the Project, their legal status, course of action should these species be encountered on-site, and avoidance and minimization measures to protect these species. It shall include the components described below:
a. Information on the life history and identification of special-status species that may occur or that may be affected by Project activities. The program shall also Biological Analysis Report Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 6-8
discuss the legal protection status of each such species, the definition of “take” under the Federal Endangered Species Act and California Endangered Species Act, measures the Project proponent/operator shall implement to protect the species, reporting requirements, specific measures for workers to avoid take of special-status plant and wildlife species, and penalties for violation of the requirements outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act mitigation measures and agency permit requirements.
b. An acknowledgement form signed by each worker indicating that the Worker Environmental Awareness Training and Education Program has been completed shall be kept on file at the construction site. c. A copy of the training transcript and/or training video, as well as a list of the names of all personnel who attended the Worker Environmental Awareness Training and Education Program and signed acknowledgement forms shall be submitted to the City of Tulare Planning Department.
d. A copy of the training transcript, training video or informational binder for specific procedures shall be kept available for all personnel to review and be familiar with, as necessary.
e. A sticker shall be placed on hard hats indicating that the worker has completed the Worker Environmental Awareness Training and Education Program.

Construction workers shall not be permitted to operate equipment within the construction areas unless they have attended the Worker Environmental Awareness Training and Education Program and are wearing hard hats with the required sticker.

The construction crews and contractor(s) shall be responsible for preventing unauthorized impacts from project activities to sensitive biological resources that are outside the areas defined as subject to impacts by Project permits. Unauthorized impacts may result in project stoppage, and/or fines depending on the impact and coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and/or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

6.2 - Sensitive Natural Communities and Critical Habitat There are no sensitive natural communities present on the Project and there would be no impacts to sensitive natural communities.

6.3 - Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources
There are no identified water features or federal waters, or wetlands located on or near the Project. Therefore, the Project will result in no impacts to any waters or wetlands.

6.4 - Wildlife Movement
There are no identified movement corridors on or near the Project site. The Project site may be used by transient foragers such as SJKF. The open landscape creates a foraging habitat, which may be used from time to time by these species. The Project will result in no impacts to fish or wildlife movement corridors, linkages or nursey sites.

Biological Analysis Report Impact Analysis and Recommended Mitigation Measures

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 6-9

6.5 - Local Policies and Ordinances
The Project does not conflict with the City of Visalia General Plan, the Valley Oak Tree Ordinance, or any other local ordinances. Therefore, there are no impacts with respect to local policies and ordinance and no measures are warranted Adopted or Approved Plans.

6.6 - Adopted or Approved Plans
The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would:
b) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

The Project is located within an area covered by the PG&E San Joaquin Valley Operation and Maintenance HCP. This HCP applies only to PG&E’s activities and does not apply to this Project. No Project impacts related to adopted or approved plans would occur, and no measures are warranted.

Biological Analysis Report Limitations, Assumptions, and Use Reliance

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 7-1
SECTION 7 - LIMITATIONS, ASSUMPTIONS, AND USE RELIANCE
This Biological Analysis Report has been performed in accordance with professionally accepted biological investigation practices conducted at this time and in this geographic area. The findings and opinions conveyed in this report are based upon on-site field examinations, jurisdictional areas, and specified historical and literature sources. The biological investigation is limited by the scope of work performed. Biological surveys conducted as part of this assessment may not have been performed during a particular blooming period, nesting period, or particular portion of the season when positive identification of certain taxa would be expected if present, and therefore cannot be considered definitive. The biological surveys are limited also by the environmental conditions present at the time of the surveys. In addition, general biological (or protocol) surveys do not guarantee that the organisms are not present and will not be discovered in the future within the site. In particular, mobile animal species could occupy the site on a transient basis or re-establish populations in the future. No other guarantees or warranties, expressed or implied, are provided.

Biological Analysis Report References

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 8-1
SECTION 8 - REFERENCES
Calflora. 2021. Information on wild California plants for conservation, education, and appreciation. Berkeley CA. Updated online and accessed via: www.calflora.org.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2021a. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) – Commercial version dated November 1, 2018. Accessed August 30,2021, from https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx.

CDFW. 2021. Special Animals List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Natural Diversity Database. August 2021.

CDFW. 2021a. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Accessed August 30, 2021 from www.wildlife.ca.gov/data/BIOS
CDFW. 2021b. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Natural Diversity Database. August 2021.

California Native Plant Society. 2021. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. V.7-08cInterim 8-22-02. Updated online and accessed via: www.rareplants.cnps.org.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2018. FEMA flood map service center. Tulare County Unincorporated Areas.
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search#searchresultsanchor
Google LLC. 2021. Google Earth Pro.

Mayer, K. E., and W. F. Laudenslayer, Jr. 1988. A guide to wildlife habitat of California. State of California, Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA 166 pp.

U.S. Geological Survey. 2021. National Hydrography Dataset. https://www.usgs.gov/corescience-systems/ngp/national-hydrography United States Department of Agricultural, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2021a.

Web Soil Survey. Accessed August 2021. Soil Survey Area: Tulare County, California. Soil Survey Data: Version 8, August 27, 2009. Available at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2021b.

Lists of Hydric Soils. National Cooperative Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Accessed via: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1973. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.).

Biological Analysis Report References

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 8-2
USFWS. 2021a. Critical Habitat Portal. Available at:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html USFWS. 2021b. Information for Planning and Consultation online project planning tool.

Available at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
USFWS. 2021c. National Wetlands Inventory Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html
Western Regional Climate Center. 2021. Cooperative Climatological Data Summaries, NOAA Cooperative Station Visalia, California (049367). https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgibin/cliMAIN.pl?ca9367 Zeiner, D., W.F. Laudenslayer, Jr., and K.E. Mayer (May 1988). California’s Wildlife.

California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationship System, Volumes I, II, & III. California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Biological Analysis Report List of Preparers

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page 9-1
SECTION 9 - LIST OF PREPARERS
QK Inc.

Primary Author
• Courtney Chaney, Associate Environmental Scientist
Secondary Author
• Name, Title
Technical Review
• Name, Title
Graphics
• Karissa Denney, Associate Environmental Scientist
Production
• Name, Title
Field Reconnaissance Survey
• Courtney Chaney, Associate Environmental Scientist
• Shannon Gleason, Associate Environmental Scientist
Jurisdictional Evaluation
• Name, Title

APPENDIX A

REGULATORY SETTING

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page A-1
Regulatory Setting
Federal Laws and Regulations
FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973 (USC, TITLE 16, SECTIONS 1531 -1543) The federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) and subsequent amendments provide guidance for the conservation of endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The FESA defines species as threatened or endangered and provides regulatory protection for listed species. The FESA provides a program for the conservation and recovery of threatened and endangered species as well as the protection of designated critical habitat that USFWS determines is required for the survival and recovery of listed species.

Section 9 lists actions that are prohibited under the FESA. Although take of a listed species is prohibited, it is allowed when it is incidental to an otherwise legal activity. Section 9 prohibits take of listed species of fish, wildlife, and plants without special exemption. The definition of “harm” includes significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns related to breeding, feeding, or shelter. “Harass” is defined as actions that create the likelihood of injury to listed species by disrupting normal behavioral patterns related to breeding, feeding, and shelter significantly.

Section 7 of the FESA requires federal agencies, in consultation with and assistance from the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce, as appropriate, to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species or result in the destruction of adverse modification of critical habitat for these species. The USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) share responsibilities for administering the FESA. Regulations governing interagency cooperation under Section 7 are found in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 50, Part 402. If an activity could result in "take" of a listed species as an incident of an otherwise lawful activity, then a biological opinion can be issued with an incidental take statement that exempts the activity from FESA's take prohibitions.

Section 10 provides a means whereby a nonfederal action with the potential to result in take of a listed species can be allowed under an incidental take permit. Application procedures are found at CFR Title 50, Sections 13 and 17 for species under the jurisdiction of USFWS and CFR, Title 50, Sections 217, 220, and 222 for species under the jurisdiction of NMFS. Section 10 would apply to the Project if take of a species (as defined in Section 9) were determined to occur.

Section 4(a)(3) and (b)(2) of the FESA requires the designation of critical habitat to the maximum extent possible and prudent based on the best available scientific data and after considering the economic impacts of any designations. Critical habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) of the FESA: 1) areas within the geographic range of a species that are occupied by individuals of that species and contain the primary constituent elements (physical and biological features) essential to the conservation of the species, thus warranting special

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page A-2
management consideration or protection; and 2) areas outside of the geographic range of a species at the time of listing but that are considered essential to the conservation of the species.

MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT (USC, TITLE 16, SECTIONS 703 - 711) The MBTA, first enacted in 1918, is a series of treaties that the United State has with Great Britain (on behalf of Canada), Mexico, Japan, and the former Soviet Union that provide for international migratory bird protection. The MBTA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to regulate the taking of migratory birds. The act provides that it shall be unlawful, except as permitted by regulations, “to pursue, take, or kill any migratory bird, or any part, nest or egg of any such bird” (U.S. Code Title 16, Section 703). The MBTA currently includes several hundred species and includes all native birds.

BALD AND GOLDEN EAGLE PROTECTION ACT OF 1940 (USC, TITLE 16, SECTION 668) The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) of 1940 protects bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) by prohibiting the taking, possession, and commerce of these species and established civil penalties for violation of this act. Take of bald and golden eagles includes to “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb.” To disturb means to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, 1) injury to an eagle, 2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially inferring with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior. (Federal Register [FR], volume 72, page 31132; 50 CFR 22.3).

FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT (USC, TITLE 33, SECTIONS 1521 - 1376) The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) provides guidance for the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. Section 401 requires that a Project applicant that is pursuing a federal license or permit allowing a discharge to waters of the U.S. to obtain State Certification of Water Quality, thereby ensuring that the discharge will comply with provisions of the CWA. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) administers the certification program in California. Section 402 establishes a permitting system for the discharge of any pollutant (except dredged or fill material) into waters of the U.S. Section 404 establishes a permit program administered by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) that regulates the discharge of the dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands. The USACA implementing regulations are found in CFR, Title 33, Sections 320 and 330. Guidelines for implementation are referred to as the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, which were developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in conjunction with USACE (40 CFR 230). The guidelines allow the discharge of dredged or fill material into the aquatic system only if there is no practicable alternative that would have less adverse impacts.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page A-3
Applicable State Laws and Regulations

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE, SECTIONS 21000 - 21178, AND TITLE 14 CCR, SECTION 753, AND CHAPTER 3, SECTIONS 15000 - 15387) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is California's broadest environmental law.

CEQA helps guide the issuance of permits and approval of projects. Courts have interpreted CEQA to afford the fullest protection of the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutes. CEQA applies to all discretionary projects proposed to be conducted or approved by a State, County, or City agency, including private projects requiring discretionary government approval.

The purpose of CEQA is to disclose to the public the significant environmental effects of a proposed discretionary project; prevent or minimize damage to the environment through development of project alternatives, mitigation measures, and mitigation monitoring; disclose to the public the agency decision making process to approve discretionary projects; enhance public participation in the environmental review process; and improve interagency coordination.

State CEQA Guidelines Section 15380(b) provides that a species not listed on the federal or State list of protected species nonetheless may be considered rare or endangered for purposed of CEQA if the species can be shown to meet certain specified criteria. These criteria have been modeled after the definition in FESA and the section of the California Fish and Game Code dealing with rare or endangered plants or animals.

CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 2050 ET SEQ.)
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) establishes the policy of the State to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance threatened or endangered species and their habitats. The CESA mandates that State agencies should not approve Projects that would jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species if reasonable and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid jeopardy. For Projects that would result in take of a species listed under the CESA, a project proponent would need to obtain a take permit under Section 2081(b). Alternatively, the CDFW has the option of issuing a Consistency Determination (Section 2080.1) for Projects that would affect a species listed under both the CESA and the FESA, as long as compliance with the FESA would satisfy the “fully mitigate” standard of CESA, and other applicable conditions.

PORTER-COLOGNE WATER QUALITY CONTROL ACT
Under Section 401 of the CWA, the RWQCB must certify that actions receiving authorization under Section 404 of the CWA also meet State water quality standards. The RWQCB regulates waters of the State under the authority of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter Cologne Act). The RWQCB requires Projects to avoid impacts to wetlands whenever feasible and requires that Projects do not result in a net loss of wetland acreage or a net loss

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page A-4
of wetland function and values. The RWQCB typically requires compensatory mitigation for impacts to wetlands and/or waters of the State. The RWQCB has jurisdiction over waters deemed ‘isolated’ or not subject to Section 404 jurisdiction under the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) decision. Dredging, filling, or excavation of isolated waters constitutes a discharge of waste into waters of the State, and such discharges are authorized through an Order of Waste Discharge (or waiver of discharge) from the RWQCB.

VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE AND FISH AND GAME CODE Section 460 and Sections 4000-4003
Chapter 5 of the California Fish and Game Code (FGC) describes regulations concerning the take of furbearing mammals, including defining methods of take, seasons of take, bag and possession limits, and areas of the State where take is allowed. Section 4000-4003 defines furbearing mammals, and the issuance of permits by the Department. Sections 460 and 4000 identifies fisher, marten, river otter, desert kit fox and red fox as furbearing mammals, and Section 460 prohibits take of these species at any time. This section of the California Fish and Game Code (FGC) has historically been interpreted to apply to restriction on furbearer trapping permit but has recently been expanded by CDFW to apply to any forms of take and treated as if these species were listed under CESA.

Sections 1600 through 1616
Under these sections of the FGC, a Project operator is required to notify CDFW prior to any Project that would divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow, bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake. Pursuant to the California Code of Regulations, a “stream” is defined as a body of water that flows at least periodically, or intermittently, through a bed or channel having banks and supporting fish or other aquatic life. Based on this definition, a watercourse with surface or subsurface flows that supports of has supported riparian vegetation is a stream and is subject to CDFW jurisdiction. Altered or artificial watercourses valuable to fish and wildlife are subject to CDFW jurisdiction. CDFW also has jurisdiction over dry washes that carry water during storm events. Preliminary notification and Project review generally occur during the environmental process. When an existing fish or wildlife resource may be substantially adversely affected, CDFW is required to propose reasonable Project changes to protect the resource. These modifications are formalized in a Streambed Alteration Agreement.

Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515
The protection of fully protected species is described in Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 of the FGC. These statues prohibit take or possession of fully protected species. CDFW is unable to authorize incidental take of fully protected species, except as allowed for in an approved Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP), or through direct legislative action.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page A-5
Sections 1900 through 1913 - Native Plant Protection Act California’s Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) requires all State agencies to use their authority to carry out programs to conserve endangered and rare native plants. Provision of the NPPA prohibit that taking of listed plants from the wild and require notification of CDFW at least ten days in advance of any change in land use. This allows CDFW to salvage listed plant species that otherwise would be destroyed. A Project proponent is required to conduct botanical inventories and consult with CDFW during Project planning to comply with the provisions of this act and sections of CEQA that apply to rare or endangered plants.

Local and Regional Laws, Regulations, and Policies

CITY OF VISALIA GENERAL PLAN
The Visalia General Plan is a document required under State law to address issues related to physical development and conservation of resources. The plan also includes local, regional, State, and federal programs and regulation as well as a comprehensive set of guiding and implementation policies. The City of Visalia Valley Oak Ordinance establishes policies for the care, trimming and removal of Valley Oaks. The City of Visalia General Plan sets forth the following goals and policies relevant to biological resources; OSC-P-27 Establish a “no net loss” standard for sensitive habitat acreage, including wetlands and vernal pools potentially affected by development.

OSC-P-30 Require assessments of biological resources prior to approval of any discretionary development projects involving riparian habitat, wetlands, or special status species habitat.

Early in the development review process, consult with California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other agencies.

APPENDIX B

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page B-1
Photograph 1: View of the northeast section of the Project site.

36.338193, -119.367892 facing west
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Photograph 2: View of 10-acre parcel in the northeast section of the Project site.

36.336930, -119.367973 facing north
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page B-2
Photograph 3: View of 10-acre parcel in the northeast section of the Project site.

36.336930, -119.367973 facing west
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Photograph 4: View of 10-acre parcel in the northeast section of the Project site.

36.337492, -119.369125 facing west
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page B-3
Photograph 5: Walnut orchard habitat in the 40-acre parcel in the western side of the Project site.

36.337330, -119.371253 facing south
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Photograph 6: Walnut orchard habitat in the 40-acre parcel in the western side of the Project site.

36.337329, -119.374045 facing east
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page B-4
Photograph 7: Project boundary. Project site with orchard to the right, buffer area to the left.

36.335458, -119.372422 facing west
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Photograph 8: View of the fallow agricultural field west of the Project site.

36.335583, -119.376573 facing west
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page B-5

Photograph 9: Representative small mammal burrows observed within the orchard.

36.336751, -119.372436
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

Photograph 10: California ground squirrel burrows located along the dirt road south of the orchards.

36.335466, -119.375790
Photograph taken by Courtney Chaney on August 30, 2021.

APPENDIX C

PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES OBSERVED WITHIN THE BIOLOGICAL STUDY AREA

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page C-1
Table C-1
Plant Species Observed within the Biological Study Area on 08/30/2021 Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Scientific Name Common Name Status Native or Introduced Trees
Juglans nigra Black walnut None Introduced
Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm None Introduced-Cal-IPC Moderate
Juglans regia English walnut None Introduced
Nerium oleander oleander None Introduced
Shrubs
Helianthus gracilentus Slender sunflower None Native
Datura wrightii Jimson weed None Native
Herbs
Salsola tragus Russian thistle None Introduced- Cal-IPC Limited
Chenopodium album Lambs quarters None Introduced
Amsinckia sp. fiddleneck None Native
Lactuca serriola Prickly lettuce None Introduced
Tribulus terrestris puncturevine None Introduced- Cal-IPC Limited Erodium cicutarium red-stemmed filaree None Introduced- Cal-IPC Limited Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed None Introduced
Sisymbrium irio London rocket None Introduced- Cal-IPC Limited Melilotus indicus Annual yellow clover None Introduced
Portulaca oleracea Common purslane None Introduced
Erigeron canadensis horseweed None Native
Malva parviflora cheeseweed None Introduced
Grasses
Bromus diandrus Ripgut brome None Introduced- Cal-IPC
Moderate
Avena fatua Wild oat None Introduced
Digitaria sanguinalis crabgrass None Introduced
Bromus madritensis
ssp. Rubens
Red brome None Introduced- Cal-IPC High
Polypogon sp. Beard grass None Introduced- Cal-IPC Limited Sorghum halepense Johnson grass None Introduced
*Cal-IPC = California Invasive Plant Council.

Rating system: High = several ecological impacts; Moderate = substantial but not severe ecological impacts; Limited = minor ecological impacts or not enough information to justify higher score; Alert = species ranked as High or Moderate with limited distribution, but potential to spread; Watch = could pose a high risk of becoming invasive in the future.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page C-2
Table C-2
Animal Species Observed within the Biological Study Area on 08/30/2021 Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Scientific Name Common Name Status Native or Introduced Reptiles
Uta Side-blotched lizard None Native
Sceloporus occidentalis
Western fence
lizard
None Native
Birds
Tyto alba Barn owl None Native
Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe None Native
Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker None Native
Picoides villosus Hairy woodpecker None Native
Aphelocoma californica California scrub jay None Native Zenaida macroura Mourning dove None Native
Buteo jamaicensis Red tailed hawk None Native
Mammals
Procyon lotor Racoon* None Native
Canis lupus familiaris Domestic dog* None Introduced
Felis catus Domestic cat* None Introduced
Otospermophilus beecheyi
California ground
squirrel
None Native

APPENDIX D

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-1

Table D-1
Special-Status Plant Species in the Regional Vicinity of the Project Site Iron Ridge, Visalia, California
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
Fed/State ESA

CRPR/CDFW
Habitat Requirements
Potential to
Occur
Rationale
Sensitive Natural Communities
Northern Claypan Vernal
Pool
-/-
-/-
This community consists of a low,
herbaceous community dominated by
annual herbs and grasses. Germination
and growth begin with winter rains,
often continuing even when inundated.

Rising spring temperatures evaporate
the pools, leaving concentric bands of
vegetation. Claypan vernal pools are
typically small and contain less cover
than northern hardpan vernal pools.

No Habitat to support this community is
absent from the Project site.

Northern Hardpan Vernal
Pool
-/-
-/-
This community occurs on old, very
acidic, Fe-Si cemented hardpan soils
(Redding, San Joaquin, and similar
series). The microrelief on these soils
typically is hummocky, with mounds
intervening between localized
depressions. Winter rainfall perches on
the hardpan, forming pools in the
depressions. Evaporation (not runoff)
empties pools in the spring.

No Habitat to support this community is
absent from the Project site.

Valley Sacaton Grassland -/-
-/-
This community is dominated by alkali
sacaton, a tuft formed grass. It is found
in areas with fine textured, poorly
drained, and usually alkaline soils with
high water tables, or that are flooded
during winter months.

No Habitat to support this community is
absent from the Project site.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-2
Great Valley Valley Oak
Riparian Forest
-/-
-/-
This community occurs in relatively
fine-textured alluvium, somewhat back
from active river channels. These sites
experience overbank flooding (with
abundant alluvial deposition and
groundwater recharge) without severe
physical battering or erosion.

No Habitat to support this community is
absent from the Project site.

Plants
Amaranthus watsonii
Watson’s amaranth
Atriplex cordulata var.
cordulata
heartscale
-/-
1B.2
This endemic annual herb blooms from
April to October. It occurs on saline and
alkaline soils in chenopod scrub,
meadows and seeps, and valley foothill
grassland habitats at elevations from
approximately sea level to 1,835 feet. It
is threatened by competition from nonnative plants and grazing.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Atriplex cordulata var.
erecticaulis
Earlimart orache
-/-
1B.2
This annual herb blooms from August
to September, sometimes into
November. It occurs in low-lying,
sparsely vegetated valley and foothill
grasslands and on mounds between
vernal pools at elevations between
approximately 130 and 330 feet. It is
known primarily from the valley floor
in Kings, Kern, and Tulare counties and
is threatened by vehicles and possibly
development and competition from
non-native plants.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Atriplex depressa
brittlescale
-/-
1B.2
This is an annual herb that is endemic
to California and blooms April to
October. It occurs on alkaline and clay
soils in chenopod scrub, meadows and
seeps, playas, vernal pools, and valley
and foothill grassland. It occurs at
elevations ranging from sea level to
1,050 feet and is known to occur in
No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-3
Alameda, Contra Costa, Colusa, Fresno,
Glenn, Kern, Merced, Solano, Stanislaus,
Tulare, and Yolo counties. It is
threatened by development, grazing,
and trampling; documented on Central
Valley floor, foothills, and lower
mountains.

Atriplex minuscula
lesser saltscale
-/-
1B.1
This annual herb blooms from May to
October. It occurs on alkaline, sandy
soils in chenopod scrub, playas, and
valley and foothill grassland at
elevations between approximately 50
and 655 feet. It has been documented
primarily on Central Valley floor, with
some lower foothill occurrences. It is
threatened by agriculture and solar
energy development.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Atriplex persistens
Vernal pool smallscale
-/-
1B.2
This is an annual herb that blooms from
June to August, sometimes as late as
October. It is restricted to alkaline
vernal pools on the floor of the San
Joaquin Valley and is endemic to
California. It occurs at elevations
ranging from approximately 30 to 375
feet and is known to occur in Colusa,
Glenn, Madera, Merced, Solano,
Stanislaus, and Tulare counites. This
species is threatened by agriculture and
flood control activities. It is
documented primarily on Central
Valley floor.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Atriplex subtilis
Subtle orache
-/-
1B.2
This is an annual herb that is endemic
to California and blooms June, August,
September, and possibly October. It
occurs on alkaline soils in valley and
foothill grassland habitats. It occurs at
elevations ranging from approximately
130 to 330 feet and is known to occur
in Butte, Fresno, Kings, Kern, Madera,
No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-4
Merced, Stanislaus, and Tulare counties.

This species is threatened by
agriculture and possibly solar energy
development and is documented
primarily on Central Valley floor.

Caulanthus californicus
California jewelflower
FE/SE
1B.1
This annual herb blooms from February
to May. It occurs in slightly alkaline,
sandy soils in chenopod scrub, valley
and foothill grassland, and pinyon and
juniper woodland at elevations from
approximately 200 to 3,280 feet. It is
found in the San Joaquin Valley, Carrizo
Plain, and Cuyama Valley from Fresno
County south to Santa Barbara County.

Many documented occurrences are now
presumed extirpated due to
development, grazing, and competition
from non-native plants.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Delphinium recurvatum
recurved larkspur
-/-
1B.2
This perennial herb blooms from March
to June. It occurs in alkaline conditions
in chenopod scrub, cismontane
woodland, and valley and foothill
grassland at elevations from
approximately 10 to 2,590 feet. It
occurs throughout the Central Valley
and Coast Ranges from Butte County
southwards. It is threatened by
agriculture and competition from nonnative plants.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Delphinium hansenii ssp.

Ewanianum
Ewan’s larkspur
-/-

4.2 This is a perennial herb that blooms
from March to May. It occurs on rocky
soils in cismontane woodland and
valley and foothill grassland. It occurs
at elevations ranging from
approximately 196 to 1,970 feet.

Populations are very local and is
documented primarily in Sierra Nevada
foothills. This species is threatened by
development.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-5
Eryngium spinosepalum
Spiny-sepaled button-celery
This annual or perennial herb is
endemic to California and blooms from
April to June. It occurs in vernal pools
and moist areas in valley and foothill
grasslands at elevations between 260
and 3,200 feet. It has been documented
primarily in the foothills of the Sierra
Nevada mountains with scattered
occurrences on the Central Valley floor
and western foothills and lower
mountains. The species is threatened
by development, grazing, road
maintenance, hydrological alterations,
and agriculture.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Euphorbia hooveri
Hoover’s spurge
-/-
1B.2
This annual herb is endemic to
California and blooms from July to
September, occasionally into October. It
is found in vernal pool habitats at
elevations between 80 and 820 feet.

There are scattered occurrences of the
species throughout the Central Valley,
mostly on the valley floor or
surrounding foothills. The species is
threatened by grazing, agriculture, and
non-native plants.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Helianthus winteri
Winter’s sunflower
-/-
1B.2
This is a perennial shrub that blooms
from January to December. It occurs in
openings on relatively steep southfacing slopes, granitic, often rocky, roadsides, cismontane woodland, valley
and foothill grassland. It is endemic to
California and occurs at elevations from
approximately 410 to 8,415 feet. It is
threatened by grazing, agriculture, road
maintenance, and habitat loss.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Hordeum intercedens
Vernal barley
-/-

3.2 This is an annual herb that blooms from
March to June. It occurs on costal
dunes, costal scrub, Valley and foothill
grassland (saline flats and
No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-6
depressions), and vernal pools. It
occurs at elevations from
approximately 15 to 3,280 feet. It is
threatened by development, habitat
loss, road construction, and non-native
plants.

Imperata brevifolia
California satintail
This perennial rhizomatous herb
blooms between September and May. It
occurs in chaparral, coastal scrub,
Mojavean desert scrub, meadows and
seeps, and riparian scrub on mesic or
alkali soils. It is found at elevations
from approximately sea level up to
3,985 feet. The species is threatened by
development and agriculture.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Lasthenia chrysantha
Alkali-sink goldfields
-/-
1B.1
This annual herb blooms from February
to June. It occurs in alkaline, vernal
pool, and wet saline flats habitat at
elevations of 330 feet and under.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Lasthenia glabrata ssp.
coulteri
Coulter's goldfields
-/-
1B.1
This annual species flowers between
February and June. It is found in coastal
marshes and swamps, and playas and
vernal pools in the interior of California
at elevations between sea level and
4,000 feet.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Orcuttia inaequalis
San Joaquin Valley Orcutt
grass
-/-
2B.2
This is an annual herb endemic to
California that blooms from April to
September. It occurs in vernal pools at
elevations from approximately 32 to
2,500 feet. It is documented primarily
on the eastern Central Valley floor and
foothills from Visalia north and is
seriously threatened by agricultural,
development, overgrazing,
channelization, and non-native plants.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Pseudobahia peirsonii
San Joaquin adobe sunburst
-/-
1B.1
This is an annual herb endemic to
California that blooms from March to
April. It occurs on adobe clay in
cismontane woodland and valley and
No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-7
foothill grasslands at elevations from
approximately 295 to 2,625 feet. More
than half of the known occurrences are
in very small areas. It is seriously
threatened by agriculture, grazing,
development, non-native plants, road
construction, and flood control
activities and is possibly threatened by
road maintenance.

Puccinellia simplex
California alkali grass
FE/SE
1B.1
This is an annual herb that blooms from
March to May. It usually occurs on
sinks, flats, and lake margins in vernally
moist, alkaline conditions of chenopod
scrub, meadows and seeps, valley and
foothill grassland, and vernal pools. It
occurs at elevations from
approximately 5 to 3,050 feet. It is
threatened by hydrological alterations,
urbanization, agricultural conversion,
development, and habitat
fragmentation, disturbance alteration
and loss. It is potentially threatened by
solar energy development and is
possibly threatened by grazing and
proximity to roads.

No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA
Sagittaria sanfordii
Sanford’s arrowhead
-/-
1B.2
This is an emergent perennial
rhizomatous herb endemic to California
that blooms from May to October, and
sometimes into November. It occurs in
sandy loam and clay soils of assorted
shallow freshwater marshes and
swamps and slow-moving waterways.

It occurs at elevations from
approximately sea level to 2,130 feet. It
is thought to be extirpated from
southern California and mostly
extirpated from the Central Valley. It is
threatened by grazing, development,
recreational activities, non-native
No Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-8
plants, road widening, and channel
alteration and maintenance.

Invertebrates
Andrena macswaini
An andrenid bee
This bee species occurs in deep sandy
soil. It is an oligolectic bee of morningopening, yellow-flowered species of Camissonia. It is the only species in the
subgenus Diandrena with aggregated
nests associated with depressions.

Distribution ranges from Kern to
Madera counties and the Central Valley
and adjacent foothills.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA. The are no
CNDDB occurrences within 10 miles
of the Project.

Bombus crotchii
Crotch bumble bee
-/SC
-/-
This bee occurs in relatively warm and
dry environments, including the inner
Coast Range of California and the
margins of the Mojave Desert. It
inhabits grassland and scrub habitats,
where it nests in abandoned rodent
burrows, occasionally nesting above
ground in tufts of grass, rock piles, or
cavities in dead trees. This species is
classified as a short-tongued species,
whose food plants include Asclepias,
Chaenactis, Lupinus, Medicago,
Phacelia, and Salvia. The species is
threatened by habitat loss and
degradation, including agricultural
intensification and rapid urbanization.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA. There are no
recent CNDDB occurrences within 10
miles of the Project site. There is one
CNDDB occurrence from 1961
Located 3 miles east of the Project
site (EONDX 98758).

Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
FT/-
-/-
Occur a variety of vernal pool habitats
that range from small, clear pools to
large, turbid and alkaline pools; more
common in pools less than 0.05 acre,
typically as part of larger vernal pool
complexes; adults active from early
December to early May; pools must
hold water for at least 18 days, the
minimum to complete the life cycle if
temperatures are optimal; eggs laid in
No There is no vernal pool habitat to
support this species within the BSA.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-9
spring and persist through dry season
as cysts; current California distribution
includes the Central Valley and coast
ranges; threatened by habitat loss,
degradation, and fragmentation, and
interference with vernal pool
hydrology.

Desmocerus californicus
dimorphus
Valley elderberry longhorn
beetle
FT/-
-/-
This beetle species is closely associated
with elderberry shrubs (Sambucus sp.)
for food and reproduction. This species
usually occur along rivers and streams
and eggs are laid on the bark of
elderberry shrubs and larvae hatch and
burrow into the stems. Adults eat
elderberry leaves and flowers. Stem
diameter must be a minimum of one
inch and exit holes in stems are the
most common methods for
identification. This species ranges from
southern Shasta County to Fresno
County.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA. The are no
CNDDB occurrences within 10 miles
of the Project.

Talanites moodyae
Moody’s gnaphosid spider
This arachnid species occurs in leaf
litter, in moist coastal habitats and
grasslands, generally in serpentine
soils, and a nocturnal hunter. This
species in endemic to California and has
been documented in Fresno and Tulare
counties. There is little to no published
information on the life history of this
species.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA. The are no
CNDDB occurrences within 10 miles
of the Project.

Lepidurus packardi
Vernal pool tadpole shrimp
FE/-
-/-
This species occurs in a wide variety of
ephemeral wetland habitats ranging
from 6.5 square feet to 88 acres in size.

The majority of occurrences have been
found on high terrace landforms on
Redding and Corning soils. This species
requires a minimum of 25 days to
mature and the average age to
reproduction is 54 days. Eggs are laid in
No There is no vernal pool habitat to
support this species within the BSA.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-10
spring and persist through the dry
season as cysts. Its current distribution
is in the Central Valley and San
Francisco Bay area. This species is
threatened by habitat loss, degradation,
and fragmentation and interference
with vernal pool hydrology.

Linderiella occidentalis
California linderiella
This species is the most widely
distributed fairy shrimp in California
and can be found in vernal pools from

10.8 square feet to 13 acres supported
by most landforms, geologic
formations, and soil types. This species
requires a minimum of 31 days to
maturity with average 43 days to
reproduce. Eggs are laid in spring and
persist through the dry season as cysts.

The current distribution is from the
Central Valley and coast ranges. This
species is threatened by habitat loss,
degradation, fragmentation, and
interference with vernal pool
hydrology.

No There is no vernal pool habitat to
support this species within the BSA.

Lytta hoppingi
Hopping’s blister beetle
FC/-
-/-
This beetle species occurs in the
foothills of the southern end of the
Central Valley. Adults have often been
found on flowers and have been
collected from late March through June.

Like other members of the Lytta genus,
females excavate shallow burrows to
oviposit. Lytta larvae are nest parasites
of solitary bees.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA. There are no
recent CNDDB occurrences within 10
miles of the Project site. There is one
CNDDB occurrence from the 1900’s
Located 3 miles east of the Project
site (EONDX 8142).

Fish
Hypomesus transpacificus
delta smelt
FT/SE
-/-
Small fish endemic to the San Francisco
Estuary and the larger Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta; moves between
freshwater and low salinity water
throughout year; most spawning
No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from BSA. There are no
CNDDB records within 10 miles of
the Project.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-11
happens in tidally influenced backwater
sloughs and channel edge waters;
historical distribution did not extend
beyond Mossdale on the San Joaquin
River and Sacramento on the
Sacramento River.

Amphibians
Ambystoma californiense
California tiger salamander
FE/ST
/-/-
This stocky salamander spends the
majority of its life aestivating in upland
habitat in abandoned small mammal
burrows, such as those of ground
squirrels. After a sufficient winter rain
event, adults emerge to breed in
ephemeral pools or artificial ponds,
which must remain inundated for at
least 12 weeks for reproductive
success. Young hatch as larvae with
external gills and feed on benthic
invertebrates and smaller tadpoles;
adults feed on a variety of terrestrial
invertebrates, small fish, and small
mammals. Upland habitat typically
consists of valley and foothill
grasslands but can also include oak
woodlands and uncommonly riparian
habitats. The species is found in the
Central Valley and Central Coast at
elevations up to 3,200 feet. Threatened
by habitat loss, predation by larger
amphibians and fish, and hybridization
with other tiger salamander species.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from BSA. The nearest
CNDDB occurrence is 7 miles
northeast of the Project (EONDX
7033).

Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
FT/-
SSC
Occurs primarily in and near ponds in
forests, woodlands, grasslands, coastal
scrub, and stream sides with plant
cover. Breeding habitat may be
permanent or ephemeral. Adults
estivate in animal burrows or other
moist refuges when aquatic habitat is
No
There is no suitable breeding habitat
within or near the BSA. There are no
CNDDB records within 10 miles of
the Project.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-12
dry, up to several miles from an aquatic
resource. It is found throughout coastal
California from Mendocino County
south. Its inland distribution includes
the northern Sacramento Valley and the
foothills of the Sierra Nevada south to
Tulare County (possibly Kern County)
at elevations up to 5,000 feet.

Lithobates pipiens
Northern leopard frog
-/-
SSC
This is a highly aquatic frog that occurs
in quiet aquatic habitats with
permanent or semi-permanent water in
a variety of upland habitats. Shoreline
cover and/or presence of submerged
and emergent vegetation is an
important factor in habitat suitability.

Individuals may travel a mile or more
from a water body over upland habitat
to disperse and to forage. The species is
uncommon and localized in California,
breeding in emergent wetlands in
Modoc County and possibly eastern
Lassen County and along the Colorado
River and irrigated areas in Imperial,
Tulare, and Kern Counties, at elevations
up to 7,000 feet. There are suspected
introduced populations within the
Central Valley.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from BSA. The nearest
CNDDB occurrence is 8.6 miles
northeast of the Project (EONDX
74694).

Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
-/-
SSC
This species is found primarily in
grasslands, sometimes valley-foothill
woodlands, chaparral, and alkali flats,
throughout the Central Valley and its
foothills and the Coast Ranges, at
elevations from sea level up to 4,460
feet. Spadefoot toads spend the
majority of their lives underground in
self-constructed burrows or rodent
burrows. They emerge in late winter or
spring after rainfall to breed in
No
Breeding habitat to support this
species is absent from BSA. The
nearest CNDDB occurrence is
approximately 2.5 miles south of the
Project (EONDX 55262), found in
2004.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-13
ephemeral pools or other shallow
bodies of water.

Reptiles
Actinemys [=Emys]
marmorata
western pond turtle
-/-
SSC
Highly aquatic and diurnally active;
found in ponds, lakes, rivers, streams,
creeks, marshes, and irrigation ditches
with vegetation and rocky/muddy
bottoms; wide variety of habitats; need
basking areas near water (logs, rocks,
vegetation mats, banks); may enter
brackish water and even seawater; digs
nest on land near water; range from
north of San Francisco Bay area south,
including Central Valley.

No Suitable habitat is absent from the
BSA.

Gambelia silus [=sila]
blunt-nosed leopard lizard
FE/SE
SFP
This species occurs in semiarid
habitats within the southern Central
Valley and Cuyama Valley. Occupied
habitats are flat and have large open
areas with scattered shrubs for refuge.

Blunt-nosed leopard lizards use small
mammal burrows for shelter and spend
most of the year underground,
surfacing in spring or early summer to
breed and forage. Hatchlings emerge in
late summer through the fall to forage
and may interbreed with long-nosed
leopard lizard in Cuyama Valley. The
species is threatened by habitat loss
and fragmentation, and drought. It is
usually found at elevations between
100 and 2,400 feet.

No
Suitable habitat is absent from the
BSA. There are no CNDDB
occurrences within 10 miles of the
project site.

Anniella pulchra
Northern California legless
lizard
-/-
SSC
This secretive species burrows in moist,
warm, loose soils with sparse
vegetation in areas of beach dunes,
chaparral, pine-oak woodlands, desert
scrub, sandy washes, and stream
terraces with sycamores, cottonwoods,
No
Suitable habitat is absent from the
BSA. The nearest CNDDB occurrence
is from 1934 and is located 2 miles
east of the Project site (EONDX
107010).

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-14
or oaks. Individuals can be found under
leaf litter from trees and shrubs or
under objects such as rocks, boards,
driftwood, and logs. Soil moisture is an
important characteristic of suitable
habitat. Breeding occurs between early
spring and July, with live young born
between September and November.

Thamnophis gigas
giant gartersnake
FT/ST
-/-
Highly aquatic snake found in marshes
and sloughs, drainage canals, and
irrigation ditches; prefers vegetation
close to water for basking; does not
venture more than 200 feet from
aquatic habitat; elevation from sea level
to 400 feet; endemic to California;
currently ranges from Glenn County to
southern edge of San Francisco Bay
Delta, and from Merced County to
northern Fresno County.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA. There are no
CNDDB occurrences within 10 miles
of the Project.

Birds
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
-/ST
-/-
Colonial breeder that prefers
freshwater, emergent wetlands with
tall, dense cattails or tules, but also
thickets of willow, blackberry, wild
rose, and tall herbs; breeding colonies
composed of a minimum of 50 pairs;
forages in pastures, grain fields, and
similar habitats near breeding areas.

No
Habitat to support this species is
absent from the BSA. There are no
CNDDB occurrences within 10 miles
of the Project.

Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
-/-
SSC
Occupies variety of open, semi-arid to
arid habitats throughout central and
southern California, including desert
regions; prefers open habitats with few
shrubs or trees; most active around
sunrise and sunset; utilizes burrows
constructed by mammals year-round
for shelter and nesting; well
documented in urban areas where
patches of undeveloped areas are
Yes
There is suitable foraging and nesting
habitat for this species within the
BSA, although no individuals or sign
of the species were observed during
the survey. The nearest CNDDB
occurrence is from 1998,
approximately 5.6 miles northwest of
the Project (EONDX 35403).

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-15
present (e.g., canals, airports, drainage
basins), and in areas of dense
agricultural development where,
particularly where canals provide
burrow habitat; forages primarily for
rodents and insects within several
miles of burrow, usually in open grassy
habitats if available; has been observed
hunting bats and insects around
parking lot lights; threats include
development resulting in habitat
loss/fragmentation.

Buteo swainsoni
Swainson’s hawk
-/ST
-/-
Occurs in grassland, desert and
agricultural landscapes in the Central
Valley and Antelope Valley; hawks may
be resident or migrant; breeds in
stands with few trees in juniper-sage
flats, riparian areas, and oak savannah;
also observed breeding in large
eucalyptus trees along freeways and in
trees over rural residences surrounded
by agriculture; may nest on ground if
no suitable trees are available; nests
are platform of sticks, bark, and fresh
leaves at or near top of trees; breeds
from late March to late August; forages
in grassland, open scrub, and grain
fields, primarily for rodents.

Yes
There is suitable foraging habitat
throughout the BSA. There are
suitable nesting trees within 0.5-mile
of the Project. No individuals or sign
of the species were observed during
the survey. The most recent, nearest
CNDDB occurrence was in 2017,
approximately 1.2 mile west of the
Project (EONDX 109959). A stick
nest with chick was observed in an
oak tree adjacent to agricultural
fields.

Coccyzus americanus
occidentalis
Western yellow-billed
cuckoo
FT/SE
This migratory species nests in open
riparian woodlands along broad lower
flood bottoms of larger river systems. It
prefers willows, often mixed with
cottonwood, with understory of
blackberry, nettles or wild grape. Its
nest is most often placed in willows
with cottonwoods used extensively for
foraging and also occasionally nests in
orchards adjacent to river bottoms.

No
Habitat to support this species is not
present within the BSA. No CNDDB
occurrences are present within 10
miles of the Project site.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-16
Lanius ludovicianus
Loggerhead shrike
-/-
SSC
Common resident in lowlands and
foothills throughout California; prefers
open grassland/pasture habitats with
scattered trees, fence posts, utility lines,
shrubs, and other perches; primarily
consumes large insects but will
predator other small animals; nests in
densely foliaged shrub or tree less than
50 feet above ground.

No
Habitat to support this species is not
present within the BSA. There is one
CNDDB occurrence within 10 miles of
the project site from 1992 located 6.7
miles north of the Project site
(EONDX 87281).

Chlidonias niger
Black tern
-/-
SSC
This is a small dark tern of freshwater
marshed and lakes. Frequents
freshwater lakes, rivers, and other
interior wetlands during spring and fall
migration. In winter black terns are
largely marine.

No
Habitat to support this species is not
present within the BSA. No CNDDB
occurrences are present within 10
miles of the Project site.

Aechmophorus clarkii
Clark’s grebe
-/-
-/-
This is a large water bird that is rarely
found away from aquatic habitats. Most
of California, except for the coast, can
be a breeding ground for the species if
freshwater is nearby. It creates floating
nests in large freshwater lakes and
marshes with emergent vegetation (i.e.
reeds and rushes). It forages for fish,
salamanders, crustaceans, marine
worms, and aquatic insects and larvae.

No
Habitat to support this species is not
present within the BSA. No CNDDB
occurrences are present within 10
miles of the Project site.

Picoides nuttallii
Nuttall’s woodpecker
-/-
-/-
A California year-round resident in oak
woodlands at elevation ranges between
984 to 5,577 feet. They forage on
beetles, beetle larvae, ants, termites
found on oaks, cottonwood, and willow.

Occasionally, they eat fruit from poison
oak, blackberry, and elderberry. Nests
are created in holes of dead trucks or
limbs of willows, cottonwoods,
sycamores, oaks, and alder.

No
Project site is below known elevation
range for this species. No CNDDB
occurrences are present within 10
miles of the Project site.

Baeolophus inornatus
Oak titmouse
-/-
-/-
This species lives in a restricted range,
from southwest Oregon to northwest
Baja California. They occur in warm,
open, dry oak or oak-pine woodlands
No
Project site is outside the known
range for this species. No CNDDB
occurrences are present within 10
miles of the Project site.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-17
using scrub oaks or other brush within
distance of woodlands. They eat seeds,
other plant materials, insects, and
invertebrates. The nest is built in a tree
cavity up to 40 feet off the ground,
occasionally they will use a nest box.

Mammals
Antrozous pallidus
Pallid bat
-/-
SSC
Occurs throughout California in wide
variety of habitats: grasslands,
shrublands, woodlands, forests up
through mixed conifer; most common
in open, dry habitats with rocky areas
for roosting; yearlong resident; feeds
mainly on insects and arachnids on the
ground or by gleaning; day roosts in
caves, crevices, mines, and occasionally
hollow trees and buildings, including
bridges; night roosts in more open
sites; maternity colonies form early
April with young flying by July or
August; needs water; very sensitive to
disturbance of roosting sites.

No
This species may forage within the
BSA but there is no suitable roosting
habitat. This species was not
observed during the survey. There
are no CNDDB occurrences within 10
miles of the Project.

Dipodomys nitratoides exilis
Fresno kangaroo rat
FE/SE
-/-
This is a subspecies of the San Joaquin
kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides)
that occurs on bare alkaline clay-based
soils typically within alkali desert scrub
and open grassland. Historically, this
species occurred on the valley floor in
Kings, Fresno, Madera, and Merced
counties, but may be extirpated within
most of the historical range. This
species is nocturnal that excavates
burrows for temperature regulation,
litter-rearing, shelter, and escape from
predators typically with tunnels
approximately 12 to 15 inches below
ground. It eats seeds of annual forbs
No
Habitat to support this species is not
present within the BSA. No CNDDB
occurrences are present within 10
miles of the Project site.

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-18
and grasses. It is threatened by
predation and disease.

Dipodomys nitratoides
nitratoides
Tipton kangaroo rat
FE/SE
-/-
Inhabits valley saltbush scrub, valley
sink scrub, and grasslands; historical
known to occur in the southern San
Joaquin Valley from southern margins
on Tulare lake bed near Lemoore and
Hanford, and on the valley floor in
Tulare and Kern counties; found only
east of the California Aqueduct;
population distribution is not
continuous and occurs only in small
isolated patches; nocturnal foraging
species; burrows used for temperature
regulation, litter-rearing, shelter, and
escape from predators; threatened by
habitat loss, fragmentation,
degradation; also threatened by land
conversions to agricultural, industrial,
and urban developments; can quickly
inhabit fallow ag fields if a source
population is nearby.

No
Habitat to support this species is not
present within the BSA. No CNDDB
occurrences are present within 10
miles of the Project site.

Eumops perotis californicus
Western mastiff bat
-/-
SSC
This species occurs in open, semi-arid
to arid habitats throughout
southeastern San Joaquin Valley and
Coast Ranges from Monterey County
southward. It can also occur in urban
areas. It feeds on insects captured in
flight and roosts in cliff faces, high
buildings, trees, and tunnels. The
maternity season begins in March with
young typically volant by September.

Nursery roosts most often occur in tight
rock crevices or crevices in buildings.

No
This species may forage within the
BSA but there is no suitable roosting
habitat. This species was not
observed during the survey. The
nearest CNDDB occurrence is 4 miles
southeast of the Project site (EONDX
61278).

Taxidea taxus
American badger
-/-
SSC
This species occurs mostly in open,
drier stages of shrub, forest, and
herbaceous habitats, with friable soils.

It feeds mostly on fossorial rodents. It
No
Habitat to support this species is not
present within the BSA. There is one
CNDDB occurrence within 10 miles of
the Project site from 1994 located 9.9

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-19

digs burrows for cover and
reproduction and can dig a new den
each night. Litters are typically born in
March and April. This species can be
somewhat tolerant of human activities
but generally avoids cultivated
agricultural habitats.
miles from the Project site (EONDX
56600).

Vulpes macrotis mutica
San Joaquin kit fox FE/ST
This fox species is endemic to the
Central Valley and primarily occurs in
arid to semi-arid grasslands, open
shrublands, savannahs, and grazed
lands with loose-textured soils within
the San Joaquin Valley, Carrizo Plain,
Salinas Valley, Cuyama Valley, and
other small valleys in western foothills.

Intensively maintained agricultural
areas are typically avoided. It is highly
adaptable and documented in urban
developed areas. It uses burrows yearround for shelter, escape from predators, and rearing young and it will
use man-made structures, such as
pipes, for denning. Kit fox feed
primarily on small mammals, but will
also consume birds, reptiles, insects,
and scavenge for human food. It is
threatened by habitat loss and
fragmentation, vehicle strikes, and
disease such as the current mange
outbreak in urban population in
Bakersfield and in nearby natural areas.

Yes
Species may be a transient forager in
the vicinity and may potentially
become established in the annual
grassland habitat. No potential dens
and very few burrows that would
provide a prey base were identified
on site during the survey. There are
multiple CNDDB occurrences within
10 miles of the Project site. The most
recent from 2003 is 3.4 miles
northwest of the Project site (EONDX
55307).

CRPR (California Rare Plant Rank):
1A Presumed Extinct in California
1B Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere 2A Plants presumed extirpated in California, but more common elsewhere 2B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere CRPR Threat Code Extension:

FE Federally Endangered
FT Federally Threatened
FC Federal Candidate Species
FS Federally Sensitive
SE State Endangered
ST State Threatened
SC State Candidate
SS State Sensitive

Iron Ridge September 2021
D.R. Horton, America’s Builder Page D-20
.1 Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat)
.2 Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened) .3 Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened) SSC State Species of Special Concern
SFP State Fully Protected
SR State Rare
WL Watch List

APPENDIX E
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE STANDARDIZED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROTECTION OF

THE ENDANGERED SJKF PRIOR TO OR DURING GROUND DISTURBANCE STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 1
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

STANDARDIZED RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR PROTECTION OF THE ENDANGERED SAN JOAQUIN KIT FOX

PRIOR TO OR DURING GROUND DISTURBANCE

Prepared by the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office
January 2011

INTRODUCTION
The following document includes many of the San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) protection measures typically recommended by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), prior to and during ground disturbance activities. However, incorporating relevant sections of these guidelines into the proposed project is not the only action required under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) and does not preclude the need for section 7 consultation or a section 10 incidental take permit for the proposed project.

Project applicants should contact the Service in Sacramento to determine the full range of requirements that apply to your project; the address and telephone number are given at the end of this document. Implementation of the measures presented in this document may be necessary to avoid violating the provisions of the Act, including the prohibition against "take" (defined as killing, harming, or harassing a listed species, including actions that damage or destroy its habitat). These protection measures may also be required under the terms of a biological opinion pursuant to section 7 of the Act resulting in incidental take authorization (authorization), or an incidental take permit (permit) pursuant to section 10 of the Act. The specific measures implemented to protect kit fox for any given project shall be determined by the Service based upon the applicant's consultation with the Service.

The purpose of this document is to make information on kit fox protection strategies readily available and to help standardize the methods and definitions currently employed to achieve kit fox protection. The measures outlined in this document are subject to modification or revision at the discretion of the Service.

IS A PERMIT NECESSARY?
Certain acts need a permit from the Service which includes destruction of any known (occupied or unoccupied) or natal/pupping kit fox dens. Determination of the presence or absence of kit foxes and /or their dens should be made during the environmental review process.

All surveys and monitoring described in this document must be conducted by a qualified biologist and these activities do not require a permit. A qualified biologist (biologist) means any person who has completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. In addition, the biologist(s) must be able to identify coyote, red fox, STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 2
gray fox, and kit fox tracks, and to have seen a kit fox in the wild, at a zoo, or as a museum mount. Resumes of biologists should be submitted to the Service for review and approval prior to an6y survey or monitoring work occurring.

SMALL PROJECTS
Small projects are considered to be those projects with small foot prints, of approximately one acre or less, such as an individual in-fill oil well, communication tower, or bridge repairs. These projects must stand alone and not be part of, or in any way connected to larger projects (i.e., bridge repair or improvement to serve a future urban development). The Service recommends that on these small projects, the biologist survey the proposed project boundary and a 200-foot area outside of the project footprint to identify habitat features and utilize this information as guidance to situate the project to minimize or avoid impacts. If habitat features cannot be completely avoided, then surveys should be conducted and the Service should be contacted for technical assistance to determine the extent of possible take.

Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin kit fox. Kit foxes change dens four or five times during the summer months, and change natal dens one or two times per month (Morrell 1972). Surveys should identify kit fox habitat features on the project site and evaluate use by kit fox and, if possible, assess the potential impacts to the kit fox by the proposed activity. The status of all dens should be determined and mapped (see Survey Protocol). Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys must be received by the Service within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground disturbance and/or construction activities.

If a natal/pupping den is discovered within the project area or within 200-feet of the project boundary, the Service shall be immediately notified and under no circumstances should the den be disturbed or destroyed without prior authorization. If the preconstruction/preactivity survey reveals an active natal pupping or new information, the project applicant should contact the Service immediately to obtain the necessary take authorization/permit.

If the take authorization/permit has already been issued, then the biologist may proceed with den destruction within the project boundary, except natal/pupping den which may not be destroyed while occupied. A take authorization/permit is required to destroy these dens even after they are vacated. Protective exclusion zones can be placed around all known and potential dens which occur outside the project footprint (conversely, the project boundary can be demarcated, see den destruction section).

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 3

OTHER PROJECTS
It is likely that all other projects occurring within kit fox habitat will require a take authorization/permit from the Service. This determination would be made by the Service during the early evaluation process (see Survey Protocol). These other projects would include, but are not limited to: Linear projects; projects with large footprints such as urban development; and projects which in themselves may be small but have far reaching impacts (i.e., water storage or conveyance facilities that promote urban growth or agriculture, etc.).

The take authorization/permit issued by the Service may incorporate some or all of the protection measures presented in this document. The take authorization/permit may include measures specific to the needs of the project and those requirements supersede any requirements found in this document.

EXCLUSION ZONES
In order to avoid impacts, construction activities must avoid their dens. The configuration of exclusion zones around the kit fox dens should have a radius measured outward from the entrance or cluster of entrances due to the length of dens underground. The following distances are minimums, and if they cannot be followed the Service must be contacted. Adult and pup kit foxes are known to sometimes rest and play near the den entrance in the afternoon, but most above-ground activities begin near sunset and continue sporadically throughout the night. Den definitions are attached as Exhibit A.

Potential den** 50 feet
Atypical den** 50 feet
Known den* 100 feet
Natal/pupping den Service must be contacted
(occupied and unoccupied)
*Known den: To ensure protection, the exclusion zone should be demarcated by fencing that encircles each den at the appropriate distance and does not prevent access to the den by kit foxes.

Acceptable fencing includes untreated wood particle-board, silt fencing, orange construction fencing or other fencing as approved by the Service as long as it has openings for kit fox ingress/egress and keeps humans and equipment out. Exclusion zone fencing should be maintained until all construction related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the dens.

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 4
**Potential and Atypical dens: Placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from the den entrance(s) will suffice to identify the den location; fencing will not be required, but the exclusion zone must be observed.

Only essential vehicle operation on existing roads and foot traffic should be permitted.

Otherwise, all construction, vehicle operation, material storage, or any other type of surfacedisturbing activity should be prohibited or greatly restricted within the exclusion zones.

DESTRUCTION OF DENS
Limited destruction of kit fox dens may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative, provided the following procedures are observed. The value to kit foxes of potential, known, and natal/pupping dens differ and therefore, each den type needs a different level of protection.

Destruction of any known or natal/pupping kit fox den requires take authorization/permit from the Service.

Destruction of the den should be accomplished by careful excavation until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den should be fully excavated, filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period. If at any point during excavation, a kit fox is discovered inside the den, the excavation activity shall cease immediately and monitoring of the den as described above should be resumed. Destruction of the den may be completed when in the judgment of the biologist, the animal has escaped, without further disturbance, from the partially destroyed den.

Natal/pupping dens: Natal or pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the Service. Therefore, project activities at some den sites may have to be postponed.

Known Dens: Known dens occurring within the footprint of the activity must be monitored for three days with tracking medium or an infra-red beam camera to determine the current use. If no kit fox activity is observed during this period, the den should be destroyed immediately to preclude subsequent use.

If kit fox activity is observed at the den during this period, the den should be monitored for at least five consecutive days from the time of the observation to allow any resident animal to move to another den during its normal activity. Use of the den can be discouraged during this period by partially plugging its entrances(s) with soil in such a manner that any resident animal can escape easily. Only when the den is determined to be unoccupied may the den be excavated under the direction of the biologist. If the animal is still present after five or more consecutive days of plugging and monitoring, the den may have to be excavated when, in the judgment of a biologist, it is temporarily vacant, for example during the animal's normal foraging activities.

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 5
The Service encourages hand excavation, but realizes that soil conditions may necessitate the use of excavating equipment. However, extreme caution must be exercised.

Potential Dens: If a take authorization/permit has been obtained from the Service, den destruction may proceed without monitoring, unless other restrictions were issued with the take authorization/permit. If no take authorization/permit has been issued, then potential dens should be monitored as if they were known dens. If any den was considered to be a potential den, but is later determined during monitoring or destruction to be currently, or previously used by kit fox (e.g., if kit fox sign is found inside), then all construction activities shall cease and the Service shall be notified immediately.

CONSTRUCTION AND ON-GOING OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Habitat subject to permanent and temporary construction disturbances and other types of ongoing project-related disturbance activities should be minimized by adhering to the following activities. Project designs should limit or cluster permanent project features to the smallest area possible while still permitting achievement of project goals. To minimize temporary disturbances, all project-related vehicle traffic should be restricted to established roads, construction areas, and other designated areas. These areas should also be included in preconstruction surveys and, to the extent possible, should be established in locations disturbed by previous activities to prevent further impacts.

1. Project-related vehicles should observe a daytime speed limit of 20-mph throughout the site in all project areas, except on county roads and State and Federal highways; this is particularly important at night when kit foxes are most active. Night-time construction should be minimized to the extent possible. However if it does occur, then the speed limit should be reduced to 10-mph. Off-road traffic outside of designated project areas should be prohibited.

2. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes or other animals during the construction phase of a project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than 2-feet deep should be covered at the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials. If the trenches cannot be closed, one or more escape ramps constructed of earthen-fill or wooden planks shall be installed. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they should be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. If at any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, the Service and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) shall be contacted as noted under measure 13 referenced below.

3. Kit foxes are attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipes and become trapped or injured. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of 4-inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods should be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If a kit fox is STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 6
discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe should not be moved until the Service has been consulted. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the pipe may be moved only once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has escaped.

4. All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps should be disposed of in securely closed containers and removed at least once a week from a construction or project site.

5. No firearms shall be allowed on the project site.

6. No pets, such as dogs or cats, should be permitted on the project site to prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes, or destruction of dens.

7. Use of rodenticides and herbicides in project areas should be restricted. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of kit foxes and the depletion of prey populations on which they depend. All uses of such compounds should observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other State and Federal legislation, as well as additional project-related restrictions deemed necessary by the Service. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide should be used because of a proven lower risk to kit fox.

8. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped kit fox. The representative will be identified during the employee education program and their name and telephone number shall be provided to the Service.

9. An employee education program should be conducted for any project that has anticipated impacts to kit fox or other endangered species. The program should consist of a brief presentation by persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative protection to explain endangered species concerns to contractors, their employees, and military and/or agency personnel involved in the project. The program should include the following: A description of the San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat needs; a report of the occurrence of kit fox in the project area; an explanation of the status of the species and its protection under the Endangered Species Act; and a list of measures being taken to reduce impacts to the species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet conveying this information should be prepared for distribution to the previously referenced people and anyone else who may enter the project site.

10. Upon completion of the project, all areas subject to temporary ground disturbances, including storage and staging areas, temporary roads, pipeline corridors, etc. should be STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 7
re-contoured if necessary, and revegetated to promote restoration of the area to preproject conditions. An area subject to "temporary" disturbance means any area that is disturbed during the project, but after project completion will not be subject to further disturbance and has the potential to be revegetated. Appropriate methods and plant species used to revegetate such areas should be determined on a site-specific basis in consultation with the Service, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and revegetation experts.

11. In the case of trapped animals, escape ramps or structures should be installed immediately to allow the animal(s) to escape, or the Service should be contacted for guidance.

12. Any contractor, employee, or military or agency personnel who are responsible for inadvertently killing or injuring a San Joaquin kit fox shall immediately report the incident to their representative. This representative shall contact the CDFG immediately in the case of a dead, injured or entrapped kit fox. The CDFG contact for immediate assistance is State Dispatch at (916)445-0045. They will contact the local warden or Mr. Paul Hoffman, the wildlife biologist, at (530)934-9309. The Service should be contacted at the numbers below.

13. The Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office and CDFG shall be notified in writing within three working days of the accidental death or injury to a San Joaquin kit fox during project related activities. Notification must include the date, time, and location of the incident or of the finding of a dead or injured animal and any other pertinent information.

The Service contact is the Chief of the Division of Endangered Species, at the addresses and telephone numbers below. The CDFG contact is Mr. Paul Hoffman at 1701 Nimbus Road, Suite A, Rancho Cordova, California 95670, (530) 934-9309.

14. New sightings of kit fox shall be reported to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). A copy of the reporting form and a topographic map clearly marked with the location of where the kit fox was observed should also be provided to the Service at the address below.

Any project-related information required by the Service or questions concerning the above conditions or their implementation may be directed in writing to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at: Endangered Species Division
2800 Cottage Way, Suite W2605
Sacramento, California 95825-1846
(916) 414-6620 or (916) 414-6600
STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 8
EXHIBIT “A” - DEFINITIONS
"Take" - Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) prohibits the "take" of any federally listed endangered species by any person (an individual, corporation, partnership, trust, association, etc.) subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. As defined in the Act, take means " . . . to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct". Thus, not only is a listed animal protected from activities such as hunting, but also from actions that damage or destroy its habitat. "Dens" - San Joaquin kit fox dens may be located in areas of low, moderate, or steep topography.

Den characteristics are listed below, however, the specific characteristics of individual dens may vary and occupied dens may lack some or all of these features. Therefore, caution must be exercised in determining the status of any den. Typical dens may include the following: (1) one or more entrances that are approximately 5 to 8 inches in diameter; (2) dirt berms adjacent to the entrances; (3) kit fox tracks, scat, or prey remains in the vicinity of the den; (4) matted vegetation adjacent to the den entrances; and (5) manmade features such as culverts, pipes, and canal banks.
"Known den" - Any existing natural den or manmade structure that is used or has been used at any time in the past by a San Joaquin kit fox. Evidence of use may include historical records, past or current radiotelemetry or spotlighting data, kit fox sign such as tracks, scat, and/or prey remains, or other reasonable proof that a given den is being or has been used by a kit fox. The Service discourages use of the terms ”active” and “inactive” when referring to any kit fox den because a great percentage of occupied dens show no evidence of use, and because kit foxes change dens often, with the result that the status of a given den may change frequently and abruptly.
"Potential Den" - Any subterranean hole within the species’ range that has entrances of appropriate dimensions for which available evidence is insufficient to conclude that it is being used or has been used by a kit fox. Potential dens shall include the following: (1) any suitable subterranean hole; or (2) any den or burrow of another species (e.g., coyote, badger, red fox, or ground squirrel) that otherwise has appropriate characteristics for kit fox use. "Natal or Pupping Den" - Any den used by kit foxes to whelp and/or rear their pups.

Natal/pupping dens may be larger with more numerous entrances than dens occupied exclusively by adults. These dens typically have more kit fox tracks, scat, and prey remains in the vicinity of the den, and may have a broader apron of matted dirt and/or vegetation at one or more entrances.

A natal den, defined as a den in which kit fox pups are actually whelped but not necessarily reared, is a more restrictive version of the pupping den. In practice, however, it is difficult to distinguish between the two, therefore, for purposes of this definition either term applies.

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS 9
"Atypical Den" - Any manmade structure which has been or is being occupied by a San Joaquin kit fox. Atypical dens may include pipes, culverts, and diggings beneath concrete slabs and buildings.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Date: September 20, 2021
Project: Cultural resources records search- Iron Ridge II Ranch Project, Tulare County, CA To: Jaymie Brauer, Principal Planner
From: Robert Parr, MS, RPA, Senior Archaeologist
Subject: Cultural Resources Records Search Results (RS#21-331) Background
A cultural resources records search (RS #21-331) was conducted at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center, CSU Bakersfield for the above referenced in Visalia, Tulare County, to determine whether the proposed project would impact cultural resources.

Project Location
The Project is located in Tulare County, California (Attachment A: Figures 1-4). The Project site (APNs 081-030-046 and 081-030-080.) is within the southeast ¼ of the northwest ¼ of Section 28, T.18S, R.24E (MDB&M) (Figures 1-4).

Project Description
The proposed project includes developing the 50 acres into a cohesive residential subdivision. In order to achieve this, the following entitlements would be required:
• Tentative Subdivision Map: will allow for the properties to be subdivided. • General Plan Amendment: to change the Residential Very Low Density to Residential Low Density.
• A change of the existing R-1-20 zone district to R-1-5 • Annexation of parcel APN 081-030-036 to be developed within the City limits.

Results
The records search covered an area within one-half mile of the Project and included a review of the National Register of Historic Places, California Points of Historical Interest, California Registry of Historic Resources, California Historical Landmarks, California State Historic Resources Inventory, and a review of cultural resource reports on file.

The records search indicated that the subject property had never been surveyed for cultural resources and it is not known if any exist on it.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Three cultural resource studies have been conducted within a half mile of the project (Williams 1974; Cantwell 1978; Love and Tang 2002a, 2002b, 2002c).

Only one cultural resource property has been recorded within a half mile of the proposed project, the historic route of the Southern Pacific/San Joaquin Valley Railroad (P-54-004626). The Project will not impact this cultural resource.

A Sacred Lands File request was also submitted to the Native American Heritage Commission. A response dated August 30, 2021 indicates negative results (see Attachment C).

Conclusions
Based on the results of cultural records search findings and the lack of historical or archaeological resources previously identified within a half mile radius of the proposed Project, the potential to encounter subsurface cultural resources is minimal. Additionally, the Project construction would be conducted within the partially developed and previously disturbed parcel. The potential to uncover subsurface historical or archaeological deposits would be considered unlikely.

However, there is still a possibility that historical or archaeological materials may be exposed during construction. Grading and trenching, as well as other ground-disturbing actions have the potential to damage or destroy these previously unidentified and potentially significant cultural resources within the project area, including historical or archaeological resources. Disturbance of any deposits that have the potential to provide significant cultural data would be considered a significant impact. To reduce the potential impacts of the Project on cultural resources, the following measures are recommended to be included as Conditions of Approval. With implementation of CUL-1 and CUL-2, the Project would have a less than significant impact related to cultural resources.

CUL-1: If prehistoric or historic-era cultural materials are encountered during construction activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall halt until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the find and make recommendations. Cultural resource materials may include prehistoric resources such as flaked and ground stone tools and debris, shell, bone, ceramics, and fire-affected rock as well as historic resources such as glass, metal, wood, brick, or structural remnants. If the qualified archaeologist determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant cultural resource, additional investigations may be required to mitigate adverse impacts from Project implementation. These additional studies may include avoidance, testing, and evaluation or data recovery excavation. Implementation of the mitigation measure below would ensure that the proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
CUL-2: If human remains are discovered during construction or operational activities, further excavation or disturbance shall be prohibited pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. The specific protocol, guidelines, and channels of communication outlined by the Native American Heritage Commission, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code (Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1982, Senate Bill 297), and Senate Bill 447 (Chapter 44, Statutes of 1987), shall be followed. Section 7050.5(c) shall guide the potential Native American involvement, in the event of discovery of human remains, at the direction of the county coroner.

Robert E. Parr, MS, RPA
Senior Archaeologist
Attachment A- Figures
Attachment B- Sacred Lands File Response by the Native American Heritage Commission

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
References
(all reports on file at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center, California State University, Bakersfield)
Cantwell, R. J.
1978 Archaeological and Historical Survey report for Avenue 288 from Road 84 to Road 100. (TU00221) Love, Bruce and Bai “Tom” Tang
2002a Historic Property Survey Report: Cross Valley Rail Corridor Project Between the Cities of Visalia and Huron, Tulare, Kings, and Fresno Counties, California. (TU-01081) 2002b Archaeological Survey Report: Cross Valley Rail Corridor Project Between the Cities of Visalia and Huron, Tulare, Kings, and Fresno Counties, California. (TU-01082) 2002c Historic Study Report/Historical Resources Evaluation Report: Cross Valley Rail Corridor Project Between the Cities of Visalia and Huron, Tulare, Kings, and Fresno Counties, California. (TU01083)

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Attachment AFigures
Iron Ridge II Ranch
Figure - 1
Regional Location
Iron Ridge II Ranch
Figure - 2
Project Area
Iron Ridge II Ranch
Figure - 3
PLSS/USGS Quad
Iron Ridge II Ranch
Figure - 4
Topo

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Attachment BSacred Lands File Response by the
Native American Heritage Commission
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

October 5, 2021
Jaymie Brauer
Quad Knopf, Inc.

Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Native American Consultation, Pursuant to Senate Bill 18 (SB18), Government Codes §65352.3 and §65352.4, as well as Assembly Bill 52 (AB52), Public Resources Codes §21080.1, §21080.3.1 and §21080.3.2, Iron Ridge II Ranch Project, Kings County Dear Ms. Brauer:

Attached is a consultation list of tribes with traditional lands or cultural places located within the boundaries of the above referenced counties or projects.

Government Codes §65352.3 and §65352.4 require local governments to consult with California Native American tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the purpose of avoiding, protecting, and/or mitigating impacts to cultural places when creating or amending General Plans, Specific Plans and Community Plans.

Public Resources Codes §21080.3.1 and §21080.3.2 requires public agencies to consult with California Native American tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the purpose of avoiding, protecting, and/or mitigating impacts to tribal cultural resources as defined, for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) projects.

The law does not preclude local governments and agencies from initiating consultation with the tribes that are culturally and traditionally affiliated within your jurisdiction. The NAHC believes that this is the best practice to ensure that tribes are consulted commensurate with the intent of the law.

Best practice for the AB52 process and in accordance with Public Resources Code §21080.3.1(d), is to do the following:

Within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or a tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation pursuant to this section.

The NAHC also recommends, but does not require that lead agencies include in their notification letters, information regarding any cultural resources assessment that has been completed on the area of potential affect (APE), such as:

CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño

VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

SECRETARY
Merri Lopez-Keifer
Luiseño

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk

COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache

COMMISSIONER
Julie TumamaitStenslie
Chumash

COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]

COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]

COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo

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

1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to:
• A listing of any and all known cultural resources have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE, such as known archaeological sites;
• Copies of any and all cultural resource records and study reports that may have been provided by the Information Center as part of the records search response; • Whether the records search indicates a low, moderate or high probability that unrecorded cultural resources are located in the APE; and
• If a survey is recommended by the Information Center to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.

2. The results of any archaeological inventory survey that was conducted, including:
• Any report that may contain site forms, site significance, and suggested mitigation measures.

All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for public disclosure in accordance with Government Code Section 6254.10.

3. The result of the Sacred Lands File (SFL) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission was negative.

4. Any ethnographic studies conducted for any area including all or part of the potential APE; and

5. Any geotechnical reports regarding all or part of the potential APE.

Lead agencies should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS is not exhaustive, and a negative response to these searches does not preclude the existence of a tribal cultural resource. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding the existence of a tribal cultural resource.

This information will aid tribes in determining whether to request formal consultation. In the event, that they do, having the information beforehand well help to facilitate the consultation process.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance we can assure that our consultation list remains current.

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

Sincerely,
Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
Kings River Choinumni Farm
Tribe
Stan Alec,
3515 East Fedora Avenue
Fresno, CA, 93726
Phone: (559) 647 - 3227
Foothill Yokut
Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi
Yokut Tribe
Leo Sisco, Chairperson
P.O. Box 8
Lemoore, CA, 93245
Phone: (559) 924 - 1278
Fax: (559) 924-3583
Southern Valley
Yokut
Table Mountain Rancheria
Brenda Lavell, Chairperson
P.O. Box 410
Friant, CA, 93626
Phone: (559) 822 - 2587
Fax: (559) 822-2693
[email protected]
Yokut
Tule River Indian Tribe
Neil Peyron, Chairperson
P.O. Box 589
Porterville, CA, 93258
Phone: (559) 781 - 4271
Fax: (559) 781-4610
[email protected]
Yokut
Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom
Valley Band
Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson
1179 Rock Haven Ct.

Salinas, CA, 93906
Phone: (831) 443 - 9702
[email protected]
Foothill Yokut
Mono
1 of 1
This list is current only as of the date of this document and is based on the information available to the Commission on the date it was produced. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

This list is applicable only for consultation with Native American tribes under Government Code Sections 65352.3, 65352.4 et seq. and Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1 for the proposed Iron Ridge II Ranch Project, Kings County.

PROJ-2021-
005003
10/05/2021 01:17 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Tribal Consultation List
Kings County
10/5/2021
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
BAC Job # 2021-133
Prepared For:

Quad Knopf, Inc.

Prepared By:

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc.

Dario Gotchet, Principal Consultant
March 29, 2022
Attn: Ernie Escobedo
601 Pollasky Avenue, Suite 301
Clovis, CA 93612
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. ● P.O. Box 7968, Auburn, CA. 95604 ● Phone: (530) 537-2328 ● bacnoise.com Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

CEQA Checklist
NOISE AND VIBRATION –
Would the Project Result in:

NA – Not
Applicable
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the project
in excess of standards established in
the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
X
c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
X
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Introduction
The Iron Ridge Development I & II (project) is located south of W. Goshen Avenue, between Road 88 (Clancy Road) and Road 92 (Shirk Road) in Visalia, California. The project proposes the development of residential uses on two parcels totaling 50-acres. Existing land uses in the project vicinity include light industrial to the north, and a combination of agricultural and residential in all other directions. The project site location with aerial imagery is provided as Figure 1. The project concept lotting plan is shown in Figure 2.

The purposes of this assessment are to quantify the existing noise and vibration environments, identify potential noise and vibration impacts resulting from the project, identify appropriate mitigation measures, and provide a quantitative and qualitative analysis of impacts associated with the project. Specifically, impacts are identified if project-related activities would cause a substantial increase in ambient noise levels at existing sensitive uses in the project vicinity, or if traffic, industrial, or project-generated noise or vibration levels would exceed applicable federal, state, or local (City of Visalia) standards at existing or proposed sensitive uses.

Noise and Vibration Fundamentals
Noise
Noise is often described as unwanted sound. Sound is defined as any pressure variation in air that the human ear can detect. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), they can be heard and are designated as sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound and is expressed as cycles per second, or Hertz (Hz). Definitions of acoustical terminology are provided in Appendix A.

Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals of pressure) as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to the reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB. Another useful aspect of the decibel scale is that changes in decibel levels correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness. Noise levels associated with common noise sources are provided in Figure 3.

The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable and can be approximated by filtering the frequency response of a sound level meter by means of the standardized A-weighting network. There is a strong correlation between A-weighted sound levels (expressed as dBA) and community response to noise. For this reason, the A-weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. All noise levels reported in this section are in terms of A-weighted levels.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the all-encompassing noise level associated with a given noise environment. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient noise level is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq).

The Leq is the foundation of the day-night average noise descriptor, DNL (or Ldn), and shows very good correlation with community response to noise. DNL is based upon the average noise level over a 24-hour day, with a +10-decibel weighting applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours. The nighttime penalty is based upon the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures.

Because DNL represents a 24-hour average, it tends to disguise short-term variations in the noise environment. DNL-based noise standards are commonly used to assess noise impacts associated with traffic, railroad, and aircraft noise sources.

Vibration
Vibration is like noise in that it involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. While vibration is related to noise, it differs in that noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, while vibration is usually associated with transmission through the ground or structures. As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person’s response to vibration will depend on their individual sensitivity as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source.

Vibration can be described in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration in terms of velocity in inches per second peak particle velocity (IPS, PPV) or root-mean-square (VdB, RMS). Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration in terms of peak particle velocity as well as RMS velocities. As vibrations travel outward from the source, they excite the particles of rock and soil through which they pass and cause them to oscillate. Differences in subsurface geologic conditions and distance from the source of vibration will result in different vibration levels characterized by different frequencies and intensities. In all cases, vibration amplitudes will decrease with increasing distance. The maximum rate, or velocity of particle movement, is the commonly accepted descriptor of the vibration “strength”.

Human response to vibration is difficult to quantify. Vibration can be felt or heard well below the levels that produce any damage to structures. The duration of the event has an effect on human response, as does frequency. Generally, as the duration and vibration frequency increase, the potential for adverse human response increases.

According to the Caltrans Transportation and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual (April 2020), operation of construction equipment and construction techniques generate ground vibration. Traffic traveling on roadways can also be a source of such vibration. At high enough amplitudes, ground vibration has the potential to damage structures and/or cause cosmetic damage. Ground vibration can also be a source of annoyance to individuals who live or work close to vibration-generating activities. However, traffic, rarely generates vibration amplitudes high enough to cause structural or cosmetic damage.

Legend
0 500 Figure 1
Scale (Feet)
250
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Project Area
Project Boundary (Approximate)
Long-term Noise Measurement Locations
Road 92
Road 88
1 2 3 4
W Hurley Ave
Pershing Ave
W Grove Ave
Light-Industrial Uses
Legend
0 200 Figure 2
Scale (Feet)
100
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Project Concept Lotting Plan
Proposed 6’ Traffic Noise Barrier
Light-Industrial Uses
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Figure 3
Noise Levels Associated with Common Noise Sources
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Regulatory Setting: Criteria for Acceptable Noise and Vibration Exposure
Federal
There are no federal noise or vibration criteria which would be directly applicable to this project.

However, the City of Visalia does not currently have established criteria for assessing noise impacts associated with increases in ambient noise levels from project-generated noise sources.

As a result, the following federal noise criteria was applied to the project.

Federal Interagency Commission on Noise
The Federal Interagency Commission on Noise (FICON) has developed a graduated scale for use in the assessment of project-related noise level increases. The criteria shown in Table 1 was developed by FICON as a means of developing thresholds for impact identification for project-related noise level increases. The FICON standards have been used extensively in recent years in the preparation of the noise sections of Environmental Impact Reports that have been certified in many California cities and counties.

The use of the FICON standards is considered conservative relative to thresholds used by other agencies in the State of California. For example, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) requires a project-related traffic noise level increase of 12 dB for a finding of significance, and the California Energy Commission (CEC) considers project-related noise level increases between 5 to 10 dB significant, depending on local factors. Therefore, the use of the FICON standards, which set the threshold for finding of significant noise impacts as low as 1.5 dB, provides a very conservative approach to impact assessment for this project.

Table 1
Significance of Changes in Cumulative Noise Exposure
Ambient Noise Level Without Project (DNL or CNEL) Change in Ambient Noise Level Due to Project <60 dB +5.0 dB or more
60 to 65 dB +3.0 dB or more
>65 dB +1.5 dB or more
Source: Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON)
Based on the FICON research, as shown in Table 1, a 5 dB increase in noise levels due to a project is required for a finding of significant noise impact where ambient noise levels without the project are less than 60 dB DNL. Where pre-project ambient conditions are between 60 and 65 dB DNL, a 3 dB increase is applied as the standard of significance. Finally, in areas already exposed to higher noise levels, specifically pre-project noise levels in excess of 65 dB DNL, a 1.5 dB increase is considered by FICON as the threshold of significance.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

State of California
California Environmental Quality Act
The State of California has established regulatory criteria that are applicable to this assessment.

Specifically, Appendix G of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines are used to assess the potential significance of impacts pursuant to local General Plan policies, Municipal Code standards, or the applicable standards of other agencies. According to Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines, the project would result in a significant noise or vibration impact if the following occur:

A. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or other applicable standards of other agencies; or B. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; or C. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

It should be noted that audibility is not a test of significance according to CEQA. If this were the case, any project which added any audible amount of noise to the environment would be considered significant according to CEQA. Because every physical process creates noise, the use of audibility alone as significance criteria would be unworkable. CEQA requires a substantial increase in noise levels before noise impacts are identified, not simply an audible change.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
The City of Visalia does not currently have adopted standards for groundborne vibration. As a result, the vibration impact criteria developed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) was applied to the project. The Caltrans criteria applicable to damage and annoyance from transient and continuous vibration typically associated with construction activities are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Equipment or activities typical of continuous vibration include:
excavation equipment, static compaction equipment, tracked vehicles, traffic on a highway, vibratory pile drivers, pile-extraction equipment, and vibratory compaction equipment. Equipment or activities typical of single-impact (transient) or low-rate repeated impact vibration include impact pile drivers, blasting, drop balls, “pogo stick” compactors, and crack-and-seat equipment (California Department of Transportation 2020).

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 2
Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV (inches/second)
Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10
Historic and some old buildings 0.50 0.25
Older residential structures 0.50 0.30
New residential structures 1.00 0.50
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.00 0.50
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls.

Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

PPV = Peak Particle Velocity
Source: Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2020) Table 3
Guideline Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria
Human Response
Maximum PPV (inches/second)
Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Barely perceptible 0.40 0.01
Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly perceptible 0.90 0.10
Severe 2.00 0.40
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls.

Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

PPV = Peak Particle Velocity
Source: Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2020) Local
Visalia General Plan
The Safety and Noise Element of the Visalia General Plan contains objectives and policies to ensure that city residents are not subjected to noise beyond acceptable levels. The General Plan objectives and policies which would be most applicable to this project are reproduced below.

Objectives
N-O-1 Strive to achieve an acceptable noise environment for present and future residents of Visalia.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

N-O-2 Protect the City’s economic base by preventing the encroachment of incompatible land uses near known noise producing industries, railroads, airports, and other sources.

N-O-3 Protect noise-sensitive land uses such as schools, hospitals, and senior care facilities from encroachment of and exposure to excessive levels of noise.

Policies
N-P-1 Update the City’s Noise Ordinance as needed to be in conformance with the General Plan.

N-P-2 Promote the use of noise attenuation measures to improve the acoustic environment inside residences where existing single-family residential development is located in a noise-impacted environment such as along an arterial street or adjacent to a noiseproducing use.

N-P-4 Where new development of industrial, commercial or other noise-generating land uses (including roadways, railroads, and airports) may result in noise levels that exceed the noise level exposure criteria established by Tables 8-3 and 8-4 (Tables 4 and 5 of this report), require a noise study to determine impacts, and require developers to mitigate these impacts in conformance with Tables 8-3 and 8-4 (Tables 4 and 5 of this report) as a condition of permit approval through appropriate means.

Noise mitigation measures may include but are not limited to:
 Screen and control noise sources, such as parking and loading facilities, outdoor activities, and mechanical equipment;
 Increase setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings;  Retain fences, walls, and landscaping that serve as noise buffers;  Use soundproofing materials and double-glazed windows;  Use open space, building orientation and design, landscaping and running water to mask sounds; and
 Control hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup, to minimize noise impacts.

Alternative acoustical designs that achieve the prescribed noise level reduction may be approved, provided a qualified acoustical consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative designs will achieve and maintain the specific targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces. As a last resort, developers may propose to construct noise walls along state highways and arterials when compatible with aesthetic concerns and neighborhood character. This would be a developer responsibility, with no City funding.

N-P-5 Continue to enforce applicable State Noise Insulation Standards (California Administrative Code, Title 24) and Uniform Building Code (UBC) noise requirements.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 4
Transportation Noise Sources
Noise-Sensitive Land Use
Outdoor Activity Areas (dBA) Interior Spaces (dBA)
DNL/CNEL2 DNL/CNEL2 Leq
3 Residential 65 45 --
Transient Lodging 65 45 --
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 65 45 --
Theatres, Auditoriums, Music Halls -- -- 35
Churches, Meeting Halls 65 -- 45
Office Buildings -- -- 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums -- -- 45
1 Outdoor activity areas generally include backyards of single-family residences and outdoor patios, decks or common recreation areas for multi-family developments.
2 The CNEL is used for quantification of aircraft noise exposure as required by CAC Title 21. 3 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.

Source: Visalia General Plan, Safety and Noise Element, Table 8-3 Table 5
Stationary Noise Sources1
Noise Level Descriptor
Daytime
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Equivalent Sound Level, Leq (dBA) 50 45
Maximum Sound Level, Lmax (dBA) 70 65
1 As determined as the property line of the receiving noise-sensitive use.

Source: Visalia General Plan, Safety and Noise Element, Table 8-4 Visalia Municipal Code
The provisions of the Visalia Municipal Code which would be most applicable to this project are reproduced below.

Chapter 8.36 Noise

8.36.040 Exterior noise standards – fixed noise sources.

A. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any noise, on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person which causes the exterior noise level, when measured at the property line of any affected noise-sensitive land use, to exceed any of the categorical noise level standards as set forth in the following table:

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Exterior Noise Level Standards (dBA)
Category
Cumulative Number of Minutes in
Any 1-Hour Time Period
Evening and Daytime
(6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.)
1 30 (L50) 50 45
2 15 (L25) 55 50
3 5 (L8) 60 55
4 1 (L2) 65 60
5 0 (Lmax) 70 65
Source: Visalia Municipal Code, Section 8.36.040(A)
B. In the event the measured ambient noise level without the alleged offensive source in operation exceeds an applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.

C. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by 5 dB for pure tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.

8.36.050 Exterior noise standards – mobile noise sources prohibition against use.

It is unlawful to operate any of the below-listed devices, appliances, equipment or vehicles on public or private property abutting noise-sensitive land uses between the weekday hours of 7:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., and between the weekend hours of 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.

C. Construction equipment including jackhammers, portable generators, pneumatic equipment, trenchers, or other such equipment, except for emergency repair purposes as provided in Section 8.36.070.

8.36.060 Residential interior noise standards.

A. It is unlawful for any person, at any location within the city, to operate or cause to be operated, any source of sound or to allow the creation of any noise which causes the noise level when measured inside a dwelling unit to exceed any of the categorized noise level standards as set forth in the following table:

Interior Noise Level Standards (dBA)
Category
Cumulative Number of Minutes in
Any 1-Hour Time Period
Evening and Daytime
(6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.)
1 5 (L8) 45 35
2 1 (L2) 50 40
3 0 (Lmax) 55 45
Source: Visalia Municipal Code, Section 8.36.040(A)
B. In the event the measured ambient noise level without the alleged offensive source in operation exceeds an applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standard shall be adjusted so as to equal the ambient noise level.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

C. Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by 5 dB for pure tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.

Environmental Setting – Existing Ambient Noise Environment Existing Land Uses in the Project Vicinity
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally defined as locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could adversely affect the primary intended use of the land. Places where people live, sleep, worship, and study are generally considered to be sensitive to noise because intrusive noise can be disruptive to these activities.

The existing noise-sensitive land uses which would potentially be affected by the project consist of residential uses. Specifically, single-family residential land uses are located to the south and east of the project area. Existing industrial uses are located to the north of the project, however these uses are not considered to be noise-sensitive, but rather noise-generating.

Existing Traffic Noise Levels along Project Area Roadway Network The FHWA Traffic Noise Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) was used to develop existing noise contours expressed in terms of DNL for major roadways within the project study area. The FHWA Model predicts hourly Leq values for free-flowing traffic conditions. Estimates of the hourly distribution of traffic for a typical 24-hour period were used to develop DNL values from Leq values.

Traffic data in the form of AM and PM peak hour movements for existing (2021) conditions were obtained from the project traffic impact study prepared by VRPA Technologies, Inc. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were conservatively estimated by applying a factor of 5 to the sum of AM and PM peak hour conditions. Using these data and the FHWA Model, traffic noise levels were calculated. The traffic noise level at 100 feet from the roadway centerline and distances from the centerlines of selected roadways to the 60 dB, 65 dB, and 70 dB DNL contours are summarized in Table 6. A complete listing of the FWHA Model inputs for existing conditions are provided as Appendix B.

In many cases, the actual distances to noise level contours may vary from the distances predicted by the FHWA Model. Factors such as roadway curvature, roadway grade, shielding from local topography or structures, elevated roadways, or elevated receivers may affect actual sound propagation. It is also recognized that existing sensitive land uses within the project vicinity are located at varying distances from the centerlines of the local roadway network. The 100-foot reference distance is utilized in this assessment to provide a reference position at which changes in existing and future traffic noise levels resulting from the project can be evaluated.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 6
Existing Traffic Noise Modeling Results
Seg. Intersection Direction
DNL 100
ft from
Roadway
Distance to Contour (ft)
70 dB
DNL
65 dB
DNL
60 dB
DNL
1 (1) SR-198 EB Ramps / Road 92 North 63 35 75 162
2 South 62 28 60 130
3 East 62 31 68 146
4 West 62 29 63 136
5 (2) SR-198 WB Ramps / Road 92 North 64 41 89 192
6 South 63 35 75 162
7 East 62 30 64 137
8 West 62 29 63 136
9 (3) Hillsdale Ave / Road 92 North 64 41 88 189
10 South 64 41 89 192
11 East 48 3 7 15
12 West -- -- -- --
13 (4) School Ave / Road 92 North 64 40 86 185
14 South 64 41 87 188
15 East 44 2 4 9
16 West -- -- -- --
17 (5) Hurley Ave / Road 92 North 63 33 70 151
18 South 64 40 86 185
19 East 57 13 28 61
20 West -- -- -- --
21 (6) Allen Ave / Road 92 North 62 31 67 144
22 South 62 31 67 144
23 East -- -- -- --
24 West -- -- -- --
25 (7) Goshen Ave / Road 92 North 61 25 53 114
26 South 62 29 63 136
27 East 63 34 74 160
28 West 64 38 82 176
29 (8) Project Drvwy / Road 88 North 48 3 7 16
30 South 48 3 7 16
31 East -- -- -- --
32 West -- -- -- --
33 (9) Goshen Ave / Road 88 North -- -- -- --
34 South 48 3 7 16
35 East 64 38 81 174
36 West 64 37 80 173
Blank cell = no traffic data was provided
Source: FHWA-RD-77-108 with inputs from VRPA. Appendix B contains FHWA model inputs.

Existing Overall Ambient Noise Environment within the Project Area The existing ambient noise environment within the project area is defined primarily by traffic on Road 92 to the east, and by industrial operations from adjacent uses to the north. However, during evening hours, it was noted that noise generated by insects significantly contributed to the Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

project area noise environment. To quantify the existing ambient noise environment at the project site, BAC conducted long-term (72-hour) noise level measurements at four (4) locations on the project site from August 28th to 31st, 2021. The noise survey locations are shown on Figure 1.

Photographs of the noise level survey locations are provided in Appendix C.

Larson-Davis Laboratories (LDL) Model 820 and LxT precision integrating sound level meters were used to complete the noise level measurement survey. The meters were calibrated immediately before and after use with an LDL Model CAL200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy off the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4).

The results of the long-term ambient noise survey are shown numerically and graphically in Appendices D and E (respectively) and are summarized in Table 7.

Table 7
Summary of Long-Term Noise Survey Measurement Results – August 28-31, 20211 Description2 Date DNL
Average Measured Hourly Noise Levels,
dBA
Daytime3 Nighttime4
Leq L50 Lmax Leq L50 Lmax
Site 1: Northwest end of project
adjacent to industrial uses
8/28-8/29 55 49 47 60 48 48 57
8/29-8/30 56 48 46 60 50 50 57
8/30-8/31 57 49 46 62 51 50 58
Site 2: Centrally located along the
northern project boundary
8/28-8/29 63 60 59 64 56 53 62
8/29-8/30 66 60 59 66 60 58 64
8/30-8/31 66 61 60 67 59 58 64
Site 3: Northeast end of project
adjacent to industrial uses
8/28-8/29 64 56 48 62 58 48 67
8/29-8/30 65 56 48 66 59 52 68
8/30-8/31 67 56 51 67 61 55 73
Site 4: Approximately 100’ from
centerline of Road 92
8/28-8/29 62 59 52 76 54 47 73
8/29-8/30 66 60 53 77 59 52 74
8/30-8/31 66 62 59 77 59 53 75
1 Detailed summaries of the noise monitoring results are provided in Appendices D and E. 2 Long-term noise survey locations are identified on Figure 1. 3 Daytime hours: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
4 Nighttime hours: 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (2021)
Noise measurement sites 1 through 3 were specifically selected to capture operations noise levels from adjacent light industrial operations north of the project site. Noise measurement site 4 was specifically selected to be representative of the ambient traffic noise level environment at the project site from Road 92.

After close inspection of the collected ambient noise level data (Appendices D and E), it appears that the measured noise levels at the monitoring sites were significantly influenced by noise sources present during nighttime hours. Based on the proximity to Road 92, it is believed that Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

the elevated measured levels at site 4 are likely attributed to nighttime traffic on the nearby roadway. In addition, the elevated nighttime noise levels at site 3 are believed to be attributable to insect activity within close proximity to the monitoring location. However, based on BAC field observations during setup of monitoring site 2, and subsequently confirmed in analysis of the measurement data, it is believed that the measured elevated daytime and nighttime noise levels at site 2 are attributed to stationary equipment operations on an adjacent industrial parcel to the immediate north of the site. Photographs of the stationary equipment area adjacent to site 2 are provided in Appendix C.

Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Thresholds of Significance
For the purposes of this report, a noise and vibration impact is considered significant if the project would result in:
 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or other applicable standards of other agencies.  Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.  For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposing people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

The following criteria based on standards established by the Federal Interagency Commission on Noise (FICON), Caltrans, Visalia General Plan and Municipal Code were used to evaluate the significance of environmental noise and vibration resulting from the project:
 A significant noise impact would be identified if the project would expose persons to or generate noise levels that would exceed applicable noise standards presented in the Visalia General Plan or Municipal Code.
 A significant impact would be identified if off-site traffic or on-site construction activities would substantially increase noise levels at existing sensitive receptors in the vicinity. A substantial increase would be identified relative to the FICON noise level increase significance criteria provided in Table 1.
 A significant impact would be identified if project construction activities would expose sensitive receptors to excessive groundborne vibration levels. Specifically, an impact would be identified if groundborne vibration levels due to these sources would exceed the Caltrans vibration impact criteria.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Noise Impacts Associated with Project-Generated Increases in Off-Site Traffic With development of the project, traffic volumes on the local roadway network will increase.

Those increases in daily traffic volumes will result in a corresponding increase in traffic noise levels at existing uses located along those roadways. The FHWA Model was used with traffic input data from the project traffic impact analysis prepared by VRPA to predict project-generated traffic noise level increases relative to Opening Year, 5-Year Horizon, 10-Year Horizon, and 20- Year Horizon project and no project conditions.

Impact 1: Increases in Opening Year Traffic Noise Levels due to the Project Traffic data in the form of AM and PM peak hour movements for Opening Year and Opening Year Plus Project conditions in the project area roadway network were obtained from the project traffic impact study prepared by VRPA. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were conservatively estimated by applying a factor of 5 to the sum of weekday AM and PM peak hour conditions.

Predicted Opening Year versus Opening Year Plus Project traffic noise levels on the local roadway network are shown in Table 8. The following section includes an assessment of predicted traffic noise levels relative to the FICON increase significance noise criteria identified in Table 1. The data in Table 8 are provided in terms of DNL at a standard distance of 100 feet from the centerlines of the project-area roadways. Appendix B contains the FWHA Model inputs.

It should be noted that the FHWA Model predictions presented in Table 8 are based on inputs that include peak hour traffic volumes, day/night and truck type percentages (e.g., medium and heavy trucks), vehicle speed, and distance from roadway centerlines. The FHWA Model does not account for non-traffic ambient noise sources such as nearby wildlife (e.g., birds chipping) or other anthropogenic noise sources within an area (e.g., distant traffic from other roadways, recreational activities, commercial or industrial operations, etc.).

Table 8
Traffic Noise Modeling Results and Project-Related Traffic Noise Increases Opening Year vs. Opening Year Plus Project Conditions
Segment Intersection Direction
Traffic Noise Level at 100
feet, DNL (dB) Substantial
OY OY+P Increase Increase?
1 (1) SR-198 EB Ramps / Road 92 North 63.8 64.1 0.3 No
2 South 62.1 62.1 0.0 No
3 East 63.2 63.7 0.5 No
4 West 62.7 62.9 0.2 No
5 (2) SR-198 WB Ramps / Road 92 North 65.1 65.5 0.4 No
6 South 63.8 64.1 0.3 No
7 East 62.9 63.4 0.5 No
8 West 62.6 62.9 0.3 No
9 (3) Hillsdale Ave / Road 92 North 64.9 65.3 0.4 No
10 South 65.1 65.5 0.4 No
11 East 49.7 49.7 0.0 No
12 West -- -- -- --
13 (4) School Ave / Road 92 North 64.8 65.2 0.4 No
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 8
Traffic Noise Modeling Results and Project-Related Traffic Noise Increases Opening Year vs. Opening Year Plus Project Conditions
Segment Intersection Direction
Traffic Noise Level at 100
feet, DNL (dB) Substantial
OY OY+P Increase Increase?
14 South 64.9 65.3 0.4 No
15 East 44.1 44.1 0.0 No
16 West -- -- -- --
17 (5) Hurley Ave / Road 92 North 63.5 63.9 0.4 No
18 South 64.8 65.2 0.4 No
19 East 57.7 57.9 0.2 No
20 West -- -- -- --
21 (6) Allen Ave / Road 92 North 63.2 63.3 0.1 No
22 South 63.2 63.7 0.5 No
23 East -- -- -- --
24 West -- 50.2 50.2 Yes
25 (7) Goshen Ave / Road 92 North 61.8 61.8 0.0 No
26 South 62.9 63.0 0.1 No
27 East 63.4 63.5 0.1 No
28 West 64.5 64.5 0.0 No
29 (8) Project Drvwy / Road 88 North 47.9 49.7 1.8 No
30 South 47.9 47.9 0.0 No
31 East -- 40.5 40.5 Yes
32 West -- -- -- --
33 (9) Goshen Ave / Road 88 North -- -- -- --
34 South 53.8 54.3 0.5 No
35 East 64.1 64.2 0.1 No
36 West 64.2 64.2 0.0 No
Blank cell = no data was provided in traffic study
Source: FHWA-RD-77-108 with inputs from VRPA. Appendix B contains the FHWA Model inputs.

As stated previously, the FHWA Model does not account for non-traffic ambient noise sources such as nearby wildlife or other anthropogenic noise sources within an area. Consideration of such sources typically results in higher ambient noise levels (i.e., existing no project) than those predicted by the FHWA Model alone.

As indicated in Table 8, the proposed project’s contribution to traffic noise level increases is predicted to exceed applicable FICON increase significance criteria along two (2) of the roadway segments evaluated in the Opening Year conditions analysis – segments 24 and 31, which are access points to the development located on the project site. Specifically, the traffic noise level increases along roadway segments 24 and 31 are calculated to be approximately 50 dB DNL and to 41 dB DNL, respectively.

As discussed above, baseline (no project) ambient conditions are considerably higher than baseline traffic noise levels alone. When project traffic noise generation is conservatively compared to the lowest measured ambient day-night average (DNL) levels within the vicinity of roadway segment 24 on the project site (62 dB DNL at site 4), the project-generated traffic noise level increase along the roadway segment is calculated be less than 1 dB DNL (0.3 dB DNL).

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Similarly, when project traffic noise generation is conservatively compared to the lowest measured ambient day-night average (DNL) levels within the vicinity of roadway segment 31 on the project site (55 dB DNL at site 1), the project-generated traffic noise level increase along the roadway segment is also calculated be less than 1 dB DNL (0.2 dB DNL). This is a more accurate representation of actual project-related noise level increases than the “traffic-only” noise increases shown in Table 8. Thus, project-related increases in traffic noise levels would not substantially exceed measured ambient noise conditions in the project area relative to the applicable FICON increase significance criteria.

Finally, although existing residential uses were not identified within 100 feet from the centerline of roadway segments 24 and 31, it should be noted that the predicted Opening Year Plus Project traffic noise levels of approximately 50 dB DNL and 41 dB DNL at 100 feet along the segments is well below the Visalia General Plan exterior noise level standard of 65 dB DNL applicable to transportation noise sources affecting residential uses.

Based on the analysis presented above, including consideration of measured existing ambient noise conditions within the project area, off-site traffic noise impacts related to increases in traffic resulting from the implementation of the project (Opening Year vs. Opening Year Plus Project conditions) are identified as being less than significant.

Impact 2: Increases in 5-Year Horizon Traffic Noise Levels due to the Project Traffic data in the form of AM and PM peak hour movements for 5-Year Horizon and 5-Year Horizon Plus Project conditions in the project area roadway network were obtained from the project traffic impact study prepared by VRPA. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were conservatively estimated by applying a factor of 5 to the sum of weekday AM and PM peak hour conditions.

Predicted 5-Year Horizon and 5-Year Horizon Plus Project traffic noise levels on the local roadway network are shown in Table 9. The following section includes an assessment of predicted traffic noise levels relative to the FICON increase significance noise criteria identified in Table 1. The data in Table 9 are provided in terms of DNL at a standard distance of 100 feet from the centerlines of the project-area roadways. Appendix B contains the FWHA Model inputs.

Table 9
Traffic Noise Modeling Results and Project-Related Traffic Noise Increases 5-Year Horizon vs. 5-Year Horizon Plus Project Conditions Segment Intersection Direction
Traffic Noise Level at 100
feet, DNL (dB) Substantial
5YH 5YH+P Increase Increase?
1 (1) SR-198 EB Ramps / Road 92 North 64.2 64.4 0.2 No
2 South 62.5 62.5 0.0 No
3 East 63.5 64.0 0.5 No
4 West 63.1 63.3 0.2 No
5 (2) SR-198 WB Ramps / Road 92 North 65.5 65.8 0.3 No
6 South 64.2 64.5 0.3 No
7 East 63.3 63.7 0.4 No
8 West 63.0 63.3 0.3 No
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 9
Traffic Noise Modeling Results and Project-Related Traffic Noise Increases 5-Year Horizon vs. 5-Year Horizon Plus Project Conditions Segment Intersection Direction
Traffic Noise Level at 100
feet, DNL (dB) Substantial
5YH 5YH+P Increase Increase?
9 (3) Hillsdale Ave / Road 92 North 65.3 65.6 0.3 No
10 South 65.5 65.8 0.3 No
11 East 50.0 50.0 0.0 No
12 West -- -- -- --
13 (4) School Ave / Road 92 North 65.2 65.5 0.3 No
14 South 65.3 65.6 0.3 No
15 East 44.6 44.6 0.0 No
16 West -- -- -- --
17 (5) Hurley Ave / Road 92 North 63.9 64.3 0.4 No
18 South 65.2 65.5 0.3 No
19 East 58.0 58.2 0.2 No
20 West -- -- -- --
21 (6) Allen Ave / Road 92 North 63.7 63.7 0.0 No
22 South 63.7 64.1 0.4 No
23 East -- -- -- --
24 West -- 50.2 50.2 Yes
25 (7) Goshen Ave / Road 92 North 62.2 62.2 0.0 No
26 South 63.3 63.3 0.0 No
27 East 63.8 63.9 0.1 No
28 West 64.8 64.9 0.1 No
29 (8) Project Drvwy / Road 88 North 48.4 50.0 1.6 No
30 South 48.4 48.4 0.0 No
31 East -- 40.5 40.5 Yes
32 West -- -- -- --
33 (9) Goshen Ave / Road 88 North -- -- -- --
34 South 53.9 54.4 0.5 No
35 East 64.5 64.6 0.1 No
36 West 64.6 64.7 0.1 No
Blank cell = no data was provided in traffic study
Source: FHWA-RD-77-108 with inputs from VRPA. Appendix B contains the FHWA Model inputs.

As indicated in Table 9, the proposed project’s contribution to traffic noise level increases is predicted to exceed applicable FICON increase significance criteria along two (2) of the roadway segments evaluated in the 5-Year Horizon conditions analysis – segments 24 and 31, which are access points to the development located on the project site. Specifically, the traffic noise level increases along roadway segments 24 and 31 are calculated to be approximately 50 dB DNL and to 41 dB DNL, respectively.

As discussed previously, baseline (no project) ambient conditions are considerably higher than baseline traffic noise levels alone. When project traffic noise generation is conservatively compared to the lowest measured ambient day-night average (DNL) levels within the vicinity of roadway segment 24 on the project site (62 dB DNL at site 4), the project-generated traffic noise level increase along the roadway segment is calculated be less than 1 dB DNL (0.3 dB DNL).

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Similarly, when project traffic noise generation is conservatively compared to the lowest measured ambient day-night average (DNL) levels within the vicinity of roadway segment 31 on the project site (55 dB DNL at site 1), the project-generated traffic noise level increase along the roadway segment is also calculated be less than 1 dB DNL (0.2 dB DNL). This is a more accurate representation of actual project-related noise level increases than the “traffic-only” noise increases shown in Table 9. Thus, project-related increases in traffic noise levels would not substantially exceed measured ambient noise conditions in the project area relative to the applicable FICON increase significance criteria.

Finally, although existing residential uses were not identified within 100 feet from the centerline of roadway segments 24 and 31, it should be noted that the predicted 5-Year Horizon Plus Project traffic noise levels of approximately 50 dB DNL and 41 dB DNL at 100 feet along the segments is well below the Visalia General Plan exterior noise level standard of 65 dB DNL applicable to transportation noise sources affecting residential uses.

Based on the analysis presented above, including consideration of measured existing ambient noise conditions within the project area, off-site traffic noise impacts related to increases in traffic resulting from the implementation of the project (5-Year Horizon vs. 5-Year Horizon Plus Project conditions) are identified as being less than significant.

Impact 3: Increases in 10-Year Horizon Traffic Noise Levels due to the Project Traffic data in the form of AM and PM peak hour movements for 10-Year Horizon and 10-Year Horizon Plus Project conditions in the project area roadway network were obtained from the project traffic impact study prepared by VRPA. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were conservatively estimated by applying a factor of 5 to the sum of weekday AM and PM peak hour conditions.

Predicted 10-Year Horizon and 10-Year Horizon Plus Project traffic noise levels are shown in Table 10. It should be noted that 10-Year Horizon conditions were only evaluated for Road 92 and SR-198 intersections in the project traffic impact study. The following section includes an assessment of predicted traffic noise levels relative to the FICON increase significance noise criteria identified in Table 1. The data in Table 10 are provided in terms of DNL at a standard distance of 100 feet from the centerlines of the project-area roadways. Appendix B contains the FWHA Model inputs.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 10
Traffic Noise Modeling Results and Project-Related Traffic Noise Increases 10-Year Horizon vs. 10-Year Horizon Plus Project Conditions Segment Intersection Direction
Traffic Noise Level at 100 feet,
DNL (dB) Substantial
10YH 10YH+P Increase Increase?
1 (1) SR-198 EB Ramps / Road 92 North 64.7 64.9 0.2 No
2 South 63.0 63.1 0.1 No
3 East 64.0 64.4 0.4 No
4 West 63.6 63.7 0.1 No
5 (2) SR-198 WB Ramps / Road 92 North 66.0 66.3 0.3 No
6 South 64.7 64.9 0.2 No
7 East 63.8 64.1 0.3 No
8 West 63.6 63.8 0.2 No
Blank cell = no data was provided in traffic study
Source: FHWA-RD-77-108 with inputs from VRPA. Appendix B contains the FHWA Model inputs.

As indicated in Table 10, the proposed project’s contribution to traffic noise level increases is predicted to satisfy the applicable FICON increase significance criteria along all the roadway segments evaluated in the 10-Year Horizon conditions analysis. As a result, off-site traffic noise impacts related to increases in traffic resulting from the implementation of the project (10-Year Horizon vs. 10-Year Horizon Plus Project conditions) are identified as being less than significant.

Impact 4: Increases in 20-Year Horizon Traffic Noise Levels due to the Project Traffic data in the form of AM and PM peak hour movements for 20-Year Horizon and 20-Year Horizon Plus Project conditions in the project area roadway network were obtained from the project traffic impact study prepared by VRPA. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were conservatively estimated by applying a factor of 5 to the sum of weekday AM and PM peak hour conditions.

Predicted 20-Year Horizon and 20-Year Horizon Plus Project traffic noise levels are shown in Table 11. It should be noted that 20-Year Horizon conditions were only evaluated for Road 92 and SR-198 intersections in the project traffic impact study. The following section includes an assessment of predicted traffic noise levels relative to the FICON increase significance noise criteria identified in Table 1. The data in Table 11 are provided in terms of DNL at a standard distance of 100 feet from the centerlines of the project-area roadways. Appendix B contains the FWHA Model inputs.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 11
Traffic Noise Modeling Results and Project-Related Traffic Noise Increases 20-Year Horizon vs. 20-Year Horizon Plus Project Conditions Segment Intersection Direction
Traffic Noise Level at 100 feet,
DNL (dB) Substantial
20YH 20YH+P Increase Increase?
1 (1) SR-198 EB Ramps / Road 92 North 65.6 65.8 0.2 No
2 South 64.0 64.0 0.0 No
3 East 64.9 65.3 0.4 No
4 West 64.5 64.6 0.1 No
5 (2) SR-198 WB Ramps / Road 92 North 66.8 67.1 0.3 No
6 South 65.6 65.8 0.2 No
7 East 64.6 64.9 0.3 No
8 West 64.4 64.6 0.2 No
Blank cell = no data was provided in traffic study
Source: FHWA-RD-77-108 with inputs from VRPA. Appendix B contains the FHWA Model inputs.

As indicated in Table 11, the proposed project’s contribution to traffic noise level increases is predicted to satisfy the applicable FICON increase significance criteria along all the roadway segments evaluated in the 20-Year Horizon conditions analysis. As a result, off-site traffic noise impacts related to increases in traffic resulting from the implementation of the project (20-Year Horizon vs. 20-Year Horizon Plus Project conditions) are identified as being less than significant.

Noise Impacts Associated with Project On-Site Construction Activities Impact 5: Project Construction Noise Levels at Existing Residential Uses During project construction, heavy equipment would be used for grading excavation, paving, and building construction, which would increase ambient noise levels when in use. Noise levels would vary depending on the type of equipment used, how it is operated, and how well it is maintained.

Noise exposure at any single point outside the project work area would also vary depending upon the proximity of equipment activities to that point. The nearest existing sensitive uses (residential) are located approximately 30 feet away from where construction activities could occur within the project area.

Table 12 includes the range of maximum noise levels for equipment commonly used in general construction projects at full-power operation at a distance of 50 feet. Not all of these construction activities would be required of this project. The Table 12 data also include predicted maximum equipment noise levels at the nearest existing residential uses located 30 feet away, which assumes a standard spherical spreading loss of 6 dB per doubling of distance.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 12
Construction Equipment Reference and Projected Noise Levels Noise Levels Equipment Description
Maximum Noise Level at
50 Feet (dB)
Predicted Maximum Noise
Level at 30 Feet (dB)
Air compressor 80 84
Backhoe 80 84
Ballast equalizer 82 86
Ballast tamper 83 87
Compactor 82 86
Concrete mixer 85 89
Concrete pump 82 86
Concrete vibrator 76 80
Crane, mobile 83 87
Dozer 85 89
Excavator 85 89
Generator 82 86
Grader 85 89
Impact wrench 85 89
Loader 80 84
Paver 85 89
Pneumatic tool 85 89
Pump 77 81
Saw 76 80
Scarifier 83 87
Scraper 85 89
Shovel 82 86
Spike driver 77 81
Tie cutter 84 88
Tie inserter 85 89
Truck 84 88
Source: Federal Transit Administration Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Table 7-1 (2020) Based on the equipment noise levels in Table 12, worst-case on-site project construction equipment noise levels at the nearest residential uses located 30 feet away are expected to range from approximately 80 to 89 dB. Thus, it is possible that a portion of the project construction equipment could result in substantial short-term increases over ambient maximum noise levels at nearby existing residential uses. Further, it is possible that those noise levels could exceed the applicable Visalia General Plan and Municipal Code noise level limits.

As mentioned previously, not all of the construction equipment/activities presented in Table 12 would be required of this project. Nonetheless, because project construction activities would result in short-term periods of elevated ambient noise levels in the immediate project vicinity, and because engineering techniques may not be practical in addressing noise attenuation for some equipment types, the following noise abatement measures should be incorporated into project construction operations to reduce the potential for adverse reaction at nearby existing residences:
 Pursuant to Visalia Municipal Code Section 8.36.050(C), the operation of construction equipment including jackhammers, portable generators, pneumatic equipment, trenchers, or other such equipment shall not be operated on the project site between the weekday Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

hours of 7:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., and between the weekend hours of 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.
 All noise-producing project equipment and vehicles using internal-combustion engines shall be equipped with manufacturers-recommended mufflers and be maintained in good working condition.
 All mobile or fixed noise-producing equipment used on the project site that are regulated for noise output by a federal, state, or local agency shall comply with such regulations while in the course of project activity.
 Electrically powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internal-combustionpowered equipment, where feasible.  Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas shall be located as far as practicable from noise-sensitive receptors.  Project area and site access road speed limits shall be established and enforced during the construction period.
 Nearby residences shall be notified of construction schedules so that arrangements can be made, if desired, to limit their exposure to short-term increases in ambient noise levels.

Provided that the project implements the above recommended construction noise measures, adverse construction noise impacts are not expected for this project, and this impact is identified as being less than significant.

Vibration Impacts Associated with Project Activities
Impact 6: Project Construction and Operations Vibration at Existing Sensitive Uses During project construction, heavy equipment would be used for grading, excavation, paving, and building construction, which would generate localized vibration in the immediate vicinity of the construction. The nearest existing sensitive receptors have been identified as residential structures located approximately 30 feet from construction activities which would occur within the project area. Table 13 includes the range of vibration levels for equipment commonly used in general construction projects at a distance of 25 feet. The Table 13 data also include projected equipment vibration levels at the nearest existing residences to the project area located approximately 30 feet away.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Table 13
Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment and Projected Levels at 30 Feet Equipment
Maximum Vibration Level at 25
Feet (PPV)1
Predicted Maximum Vibration
Level at 30 Feet (PPV)
Vibratory roller 0.210 0.160
Hoe ram 0.089 0.068
Large bulldozer 0.089 0.068
Caisson drilling 0.089 0.068
Loaded trucks 0.076 0.058
Jackhammer 0.035 0.027
Small bulldozer 0.003 0.002
1 PPV = Peak Particle Velocity
Source: 2020 FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual and BAC calculations As shown in Table 13, vibration levels generated from on-site construction activities at the nearest existing sensitive structures located approximately 30 feet away (residences) are predicted to be below the strictest Caltrans thresholds for damage to residential structures of 0.30 in/sec PPV shown in Table 2. Further, construction activities are not expected to result in adverse human response relative to the vibration annoyance criteria as defined by Caltrans in Table 3. Therefore, on-site construction within the project area is not expected to result in excessive groundborne vibration levels at nearby existing sensitive uses.

During a site visit on August 27th, 2021, vibration levels were below the threshold of perception at the project site. Based on those observations, it is believed that existing vibration levels at the project site are well below the strictest Caltrans thresholds for damage to structures and thresholds for annoyance. Therefore, it is expected that the project would not result in the exposure of persons to excessive groundborne vibration levels at proposed uses of the project.

Finally, the project proposes the development of residential uses. It is the experience of BAC that residential uses do not typically have equipment that generates appreciable vibration. Further, it is our understanding that the project does not propose equipment that will produce appreciable vibration.

Because vibration levels due to and upon the proposed project are expected to satisfy the applicable Caltrans groundborne impact vibration criteria, this impact is identified as being less than significant.

Noise Impacts Upon the Development
The California Supreme Court issued an opinion in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) holding that CEQA is primarily concerned with the impacts of a project on the environment and generally does not require agencies to analyze the impact of existing conditions on a project’s future users or residents. Nevertheless, the City of Visalia has policies that address existing/future conditions affecting the proposed project, which are discussed in the following section. The following section includes assessments of future traffic, industrial, and construction-related noise exposure at proposed noise-sensitive receptors Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

(residential) within the project area and recommended improvement measures to ensure consistency with City noise requirements.

Impact 7: Future Exterior Traffic Noise at Proposed Residential Uses The FHWA Model was used with future traffic data to predict future Road 88 and Road 92 traffic noise levels at the proposed residential uses of the development. Future traffic volume data for the roadways were obtained from the project traffic impact study prepared by VRPA Technologies, Inc. (Iron Ridge Residential Development Traffic Impact Study, December 13, 2021). The day/night distribution, truck percentages, and traffic speeds for the roadways were derived from BAC file data for similar roadways and field observations. The FHWA Model inputs and predicted future traffic noise levels at the project site are provided in Appendix F and are summarized in Table 14.

It should be noted that the project traffic impact study contains future traffic conditions for Opening Year (2022), 5-Year Horizon, 10-Year Horizon, and 20-Year Horizon project and no project scenarios. However, future traffic data for segments of Road 88 and Road 92 adjacent to the project site are not included in the 10-Year Horizon or 20-Year Horizon forecasts. As a result, traffic data for the 5-Year Horizon Plus Project scenario was utilized in the prediction of future Road 88 and Road 92 traffic noise levels at the project site.

Table 14
Predicted Future Exterior Traffic Noise Levels at the Project Site Roadway Receiver Description
Predicted Noise
Level, DNL (dB)1,2
Road 88
Nearest backyards 59
Nearest first-floor building facades 58
Nearest upper-floor building facades 60
Road 92
Nearest backyards 68
Nearest first-floor building facades 67
Nearest upper-floor building facades 69
1 A complete listing of FHWA Model inputs for future traffic noise levels are provided as Appendix F. 2 An offset of +2 dB was applied at upper-floor locations due to reduced ground absorption of sound at elevated positions.

As indicated in Table 14, future Road 88 traffic noise level exposure is predicted to satisfy the applicable Visalia General Plan 65 dB DNL exterior noise level standard at the nearest singlefamily residential outdoor activity areas (backyards) proposed within the development. However, future Road 92 traffic noise level exposure is predicted to exceed the General Plan 65 dB DNL exterior noise level standard at the nearest backyards.

However, the project site plans indicate that a 6-foot-tall block (masonry) wall is proposed to be constructed along residential lots adjacent to Road 92. The location of the proposed wall is illustrated on Figure 2. The results presented in Table 15 contain predicted future Road 92 traffic noise levels at proposed ground level locations with consideration of the noise attenuation that would be provided by the proposed 6-foot-tall wall. Barrier insertion loss calculation worksheets Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

are provided as Appendix G. Because elevated upper-floor building facades of the residences constructed adjacent to Road 92 would not receive shielding from the proposed 6-foot-tall wall, attenuated noise levels for those locations were not included in Table 15.

Table 15
Predicted Future Exterior Road 92 Traffic Noise Levels with Proposed 6’ Wall Roadway Receiver Description
Predicted Noise
Level, DNL (dB)1
Road 92 Nearest backyards 62
Nearest first-floor building facades 61
1 Barrier insertion loss calculation worksheets are provided as Appendix G.

The Table 15 data indicate that future Road 92 traffic noise level exposure at the backyards proposed nearest to the roadway is predicted to comply with the Visalia General Plan 65 dB DNL exterior noise level standard, including consideration of the shielding that would be provided by the proposed 6-foot-tall wall at the location illustrated on Figure 2. Provided that proposed 6-foottall wall is constructed at the location shown in Figure 2, no further consideration of Road 92 traffic noise reduction measures would be warranted for the project relative to the General Plan 65 dB DNL exterior noise level limit.

It should be noted that the barrier analysis for the proposed 6-foot-tall wall provided in this report assumes that the difference in elevation between the roadway and proposed adjacent residential lots are within ± 2 feet. Should a difference greater than ± 2 feet be present, an additional analysis would be warranted. Nonetheless, the barrier height is relative to lot or roadway elevation, whichever is greater.

Impact 8: Future Interior Traffic Noise within Proposed Residential Uses As indicated in Table 14 of Impact 7, future Road 88 traffic noise level exposure is predicted to be 58 dB DNL at the nearest first-floor building facades proposed within the development. Due to reduced ground absorption of sound at elevated positions, noise levels at the upper-floor facades of those residences are predicted to approach 60 dB DNL. Additionally, after consideration of shielding that would be provided by the proposed 6-foot-tall traffic noise barrier as indicated in Figure 2, future Road 92 traffic noise level exposure is calculated to be reduced to 61 dB DNL at the nearest first-floor building facades to the roadway (Table 15 of Impact 7). Due to reduced ground absorption of sound at elevated positions, and lack of shielding provided by the proposed traffic noise barrier, noise levels at the upper-floor facades of those residences are predicted to approach 69 dB DNL.

To satisfy the Visalia General Plan 45 dB DNL interior noise level standard, minimum noise reductions of 13 and 15 dB would be required of the first- and upper-floor building facades (respectively) of residences constructed nearest to Road 88. Further, minimum noise reductions of 17 and 24 dB would be needed for compliance within the first- and upper-floor interior areas (respectively) of residences constructed nearest to Road 92.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Standard residential construction (i.e., stucco siding, STC-27 windows, door weather-stripping, exterior wall insulation, composition plywood roof), typically results in an exterior to interior noise reduction of approximately 25 dB with windows closed and approximately 15 dB with windows open. This level of noise reduction would be adequate to reduce future Road 88 traffic noise exposure to 45 dB DNL or less within the first- and upper-floors of all residences constructed within the development. Standard residential construction is also expected to be adequate to reduce future Road 92 traffic noise levels to 45 dB DNL or less within the first-floors of all residences within the development but would fail to provide for a factor of safety within the upperfloors of the closest residences to the roadway.

To satisfy the General Plan 45 dB DNL interior noise level standard including a factor of safety, it is recommended that the upper-floor window assemblies of residences from which a view of Road 92 would be present (i.e., north-, east- and south-facing windows) be upgraded to a minimum STC rating of 32. The locations of the window construction upgrades are illustrated on Figure 4.

In addition, it is recommended that mechanical ventilation (air conditioning) be provided for all residences within the development to allow the occupants to close doors and windows as desired for additional acoustical isolation.

Legend
0 200 Figure 4
Scale (Feet)
100
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Recommended Window Assembly Upgrades
Proposed 6’ Traffic Noise Barrier
Recommended Window Construction Upgrades: STC-32 (Upper-Floors Only) Light-Industrial Uses
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Impact 9: Industrial Operations Noise at Proposed Residential Uses Existing light industrial uses are located to the north of the proposed development. According to BAC field observations, the industrial uses consist primarily of storage yards, warehouse and loading docks, stationary equipment, and parking areas. The locations of the industrial uses are shown on Figure 1. BAC field observations also noted that existing CMU walls ranging from 6 to 8-feet in height are constructed along portions of the northern project property boundary. Chainlink fencing is constructed along the remaining portions of the northern project property line. The approximate locations of the existing CMU walls and chain-link fencing are illustrated on Figures 5 and 6. Photographs of existing walls and fencing are provided in Appendix C.

Noise measurement sites 1 through 3 were selected to quantify the existing ambient noise level environment along the northern project property line, including noise levels associated with adjacent existing industrial operations. As discussed previously, average measured hourly noise levels at the monitoring locations exceeded the General Plan/Municipal Code daytime and nighttime exterior noise level standards for non-transportation (stationary) noise sources. After close inspection of the collected ambient noise level data (Appendices D and E), it appears that the measured noise levels at the monitoring sites were significantly influenced by noise sources present during nighttime hours. For example, the elevated nighttime noise levels at site 3 are believed to be attributable to insect activity within close proximity to the monitoring location.

However, based on BAC field observations during setup of noise monitoring site 2, and subsequently confirmed in analysis of the measurement data, it is believed that the measured elevated daytime and nighttime noise levels at site 2 are attributed to stationary equipment operations on an adjacent industrial parcel to the immediate north of the site. The location of the noise-generating stationary equipment area is shown on Figure 5. Photographs of the equipment area adjacent to site 2 are provided in Appendix C.

BAC staff conducted noise level measurements of the identified stationary equipment while in operation during a site visit on August 28th, 2021. According to the data, noise from the equipment area was measured to be approximately 63 dB at 180 feet with an unshielded view of the equipment area. However, equipment noise was measured to be approximately 54 dB at 180 feet (or 9 dB lower) when measured from behind a nearby existing 8-foot-tall CMU wall.

Photographs of the noise meter and associated readings during the equipment noise measurements are provided in Appendix C.

Based on the measured equipment area reference noise level of 63 dB at 180 feet, and assuming standard spherical spreading loss (-6 dB per doubling of distance from a stationary noise source), noise level exposure associated with the identified equipment area was projected to be approximately 58 dB at the property line of the nearest single-family residence proposed within the development. Because sound from the stationary equipment is identified as being steady state in nature, noise from the equipment area would be most appropriately assessed relative to Visalia General Plan hourly average (Leq) and Municipal Code median (L50) noise level standards.

The projected equipment area noise level of 58 dB Leq/L50 at the property line of the nearest proposed residence within the development would exceed the General Plan and Municipal Code daytime and nighttime noise level standards of 50 dB Leq/L50 and 45 dB Leq/L50, respectively.

Legend
0 300 Figure 5
Scale (Feet)
150
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Aerial with Existing CMU Walls & Fencing
Project Boundary (Approximate)
Existing 6’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
Existing 8’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
Existing Chain-Link Fence (Approximate)
Road 92
Road 88
Pershing Ave
Noise-Generating
Equipment Area
Legend
0 200 Figure
6 Scale (Feet)
100
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Site Plan with Existing CMU Walls & Fencing
Existing 6’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
Existing 8’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
Existing Chain-Link Fence (Approximate)
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California

Satisfaction of the City’s 45 dB Leq/L50 nighttime noise level standard at the project site would ensure satisfaction of the City’s less restrictive daytime noise level limit of 50 dB Leq/L50 at the development.

To reduce noise level exposure from the identified stationary equipment at the project site, the effectiveness of the screening provided by a solid noise barrier (CMU wall) along the northern project property boundary was evaluated. The evaluation concluded that a wall having a minimum height of 20 feet would be required along a 400+ foot section of the property line to satisfy the City’s 45 dB Leq/L50 nighttime noise level standard at the property line of the nearest proposed residential uses. However, the construction of such wall is believed to be an infeasible measure for the project. To comply with the City’s 45 dB Leq/L50 nighttime noise level standard at the nearest proposed residential uses, one of the following two options (improvement measures) is recommended:

Option 1
a. The project developer should construct a continuous CMU wall ranging from 8 to 12-feet in height at the locations illustrated on Figure 7. This improvement measure would include removal and replacement of existing chain-link fencing with CMU wall and increasing existing CMU wall heights to the indicated heights shown in Figures 7 and 8. b. In addition to Option 1a above, the project developer should ensure that the residential lots proposed within the development have a minimum setback of 700 feet from the recommended 12-foot wall shown on Figures 7 and 8. The contoured lot setback distance of 700 feet is illustrated on Figure 7.

Option 2
a. The project developer should construct a continuous CMU wall having a minimum height of 8-feet along the northern project property boundary, as indicated on Figure 9. This improvement measure would include removal and replacement of existing chain-link fencing with CMU wall and increasing existing CMU wall heights to 8-feet (where applicable).
b. In addition to Option 2a above, a localized noise barrier should be constructed around the identified equipment area adjacent to BAC monitoring site 2. The location of the stationary equipment area is illustrated on Figure 10. Specifically, the project developer should coordinate with the owner of the adjacent industrial use in the installation a localized noise barrier around the identified stationary equipment on the property. It is estimated that a localized noise barrier would need to be a minimum of 10-feet in height, however a specific noise assessment would need to be completed by a qualified acoustical consultant to determine the ultimate height required for compliance. The benefits of a barrier located immediately adjacent to noise source in question would be that a barrier at that location would be more effective in reducing noise, less of a visual impact, and considerably more cost effective to implement. In addition, it would negate the requirement of a taller barrier along a portion of the property line (i.e., 12 feet), thereby affording a uniform 8-foot tall barrier along the northern property line.

Legend
0 300 Figure 7
Scale (Feet)
150
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Industrial Noise Reduction – Option 1a & 1b
Project Boundary (Approximate)
Recommended 8’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
Recommended 12’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
Road 92
Road 88
Pershing Ave
Noise-Generating
Equipment Area
Recommended 700-Foot Lot Setback
700-Foot Setback
Legend
Figure 8
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Industrial Noise Reduction – Option 1a
Recommended 8’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
Recommended 12’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
0 200
Scale (Feet)
100
Legend
Figure 9
Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Industrial Noise Reduction – Option 2a
Recommended 8’ CMU Wall (Approximate)
0 200
Scale (Feet)
100
Legend
0 50 Figure 10
Scale (Feet)
25 Iron Ridge Development I & II
Visalia, California
Industrial Noise Reduction – Option 2b
Project Boundary (Approximate)
Noise-Generating
Equipment Area
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise & Vibration Assessment
Iron Ridge Development I & II – Visalia, California