Agenda packet — Visalia City Council, July 17, 2023 (part 3 of 8)

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
A: VEHICLE 1 Transport Van Large
Freightliner Transport Van: Black & White
transport van, wheeled vehicle. gray, reflective
Agency Name markings and red/blue lights.

Equipped with a siren. Can hold a driver and 10
passengers.

Dually, five-speed automatic transmission, diesel
engine-powered personnel and equipment carrier.

Range 120 miles;
No ballistic capabilities.

To provide for the safe transport of
agency personnel and equipment in
high-risk incidents.

Operational use under the review of
the SWAT Commander or
appropriate team supervisor.

Agency-authored
orientation course;
annual refresher.
$180,000 initial
cost
$5,000 annual
maintenance
VPD Policy 405 10 yrs.

A: ROBOTICS 1
1 Bomb Robot
Remotec ANDROS F6A
ICOR Mini-Caliber
The Remotec ANDROS F6A is a heavy-duty robot.

Its stair climbing ability, an arm capable of lifting
65lbs. The F6A also offers multiple
communications options, a chassis and manipulator
that allow for accessories and tool combinations,
and quick-release pneumatic wheels for rapid width
reduction.

The ICOR Mini-Caliber is a small robot designed
for rapid tactical missions, the robot is simple to
operate and quick to deploy for searching rooms,
hallways, stairwells and confined spaces. With
rubber tracks and articulating front and rear
flippers, the Mini-CALIBER effortlessly climbs
stairs. It also includes an extendible rotating claw
arm that simplifies opening door handles.

Only assigned operators who have
completed the required training
shall be permitted to operate the
robots. Use is established by the
Bomb Squad Commander and or
Incident Commander.

Use is established by the Bomb
Squad Commander and or Incident
Commander.

All robot operators
must complete the
FBI's 6-week
hazardous device
school prior to
operating the robot.
$250,000 initial
cost
Annual
maintenance and
battery replacement
cost is
approximately
$5,000.
$90k
VPD Policy 410,
806
Tulare County
Consolidated Bomb
Squad Operating
Procedures
Expired

Page 2 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
A: ROBOTICS 12 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS)
Omnidirectional drones that capture complex
footage using the latest in camera technology.

DJI / Avata - 12 minute flight time, Micro
quadcopter to be used for interior building searches.

Single first person view camera, GPS guided.

DJI / Matrice 30T - 40 minute flight time, FPV,
zoom and FLIR camera. IP 55 rated for weather
conditions.

DJI / Mavic Pro - 25 min flight time and a single-
color camera with recording capabilities.

DJI / Mavic 2 Zoom - 30 min flight time and a
single-color camera with recording capabilities.

DJI / Mavic 3 Zoom - 30 min flight time and a
single-color camera with recording capabilities.

DJI / Mavic Enterprise - 30 min flight time and has
a color and inferred camera as well as audible
speaker and light with recording capabilities.

Deployed to assist officers and/or
incident commanders with
situations such as: major collision
investigations, missing persons,
natural disaster management, crime
scene photography, SWAT, tactical
or other public safety and life
preservation missions, and in
response to specific requests from
local, state or federal fire authorities
for fire response and or prevention.

UAS operators are
licensed by the
Federal Aviation
Administration
(FAA) for UAS
operation. In
addition, each
operator must attend
monthly trainings.

DJI / Avata - Initial
cost = $1,400,
annual = $500
DJI / Matrice 30T -
Initial cost=
$17,000, annual =
$1,000 each
DJI / Mavic Pro -
$1,400 initial cost;
$100 annual
maintenance.

DJI / Mavic 2
Zoom - $1,900
initial cost; $100
annual
maintenance.

VPD Policy 606
FAA Regulation 14
CFR Part 107
DJI /
Mavic Pro
-1 year
DJI /
Mavic 2
Zoom - 2
years
DJI /
Mavic
Enterprise
- 3 years

Page 3 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
A: ROBOTICS 1 Robot (Avatar)
2012 RoboteX Avatar II robot with rubber,
articulable tracked arms. 2 cameras and
communication capabilities. Remotely controlled.

The Avatar® II is a compact, lightweight robotic
platform that is part of the RoboteX Avatar®
Series. Designed from the ground up for portability,
expandability, and ease-of-use, the Avatar® II
serves as a useful tool for a variety of users.

Remotely controlled, battery life approx. 45
minutes
Allows SWAT operators to
remotely and safely clear location of
potentially violent suspects without
exposing human operators to
danger.

Operational use under the review of
the SWAT Commander or
appropriate team supervisor.

Agency-authored
orientation course;
annual refresher.
$12,500 initial cost
$100 annual
maintenance cost
VPD Policy 405 10 years
A: ROBOTICS 1 Robot (Scout)
Recon Scout is a rubber wheeled throwable
reconnaissance robot.

Recon Scout XT, a small throwable reconnaissance
robot designed and manufactured by
ReconRobotics for use in law enforcement and
military applications.
15-20 minutes run time
Allows SWAT operators to
remotely and safely clear location of
potentially violent suspects without
exposing human operators to
danger.

Operational use under the review of
the SWAT Commander or
appropriate team supervisor.

Agency-authored
orientation course;
annual refresher.
$7,500 initial cost VPD Policy 405 10 years
A: ROBOTICS 1 Robot (Transcend)
Transcend's Vantage Robot is a rubber tracked
remotely controlled robot equipped with cameras.

It's the world’s only double-patented automatic stair
and obstacle climbing robot for First Responders.
45-60 minutes runtime
Allows SWAT operators to
remotely and safely clear location of
potentially violent suspects without
exposing human operators to
danger.

Operational use under the review of
the SWAT Commander or
appropriate team supervisor.

Agency-authored
orientation course;
annual refresher.
$25,500 initial cost;
maintenance cost
variable
VPD Policy 405 10 years

Page 4 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
B: RIFLES
20 2
5 H&K 416
H&K MP5
Sig Sauer MCX
(Defined under 30510
& 30515)
The department issued rifle assigned to sworn
personnel/SWAT is a light weight, shoulder
mounted weapon platform capable of firing a .223 /

5.56 round. The rifle is a semi-automatic
(automatic for SWAT) weapon platform capable of
firing one round with each trigger press or pull.

The rifle is designed to be more accurate than a
handgun at both close and further distances.

Additionally, the department issues a shoulder
mounted weapon platform capable of firing a 9mm
round.

Thirty round magazines are issued with each rifle.

Range 0-200 yards
The purpose of the department
issued rifle is to provide officers
with superior firepower and
accuracy.

Patrol Rifle utilization compliance
is conducted by shift supervisor
assigned to incident in which the
patrol rifle is deployed.

SWAT Rifle utilization compliance
is conducted by SWAT Team
Leader and SWAT Commander
assigned to incident in which the
SWAT rifle is deployed. (As
applicable)
Training compliance is maintained
by the Visalia Police Department
Range Staff and the SWAT Team
Commander.

Instructors are
required to attend a
P.O.S.T. certified
rifle course.

Operators are
required to attend
our 16 hour
P.O.S.T. certified
Rifle Course. The
course covers
several topics
including but not
limited to policy,
maintenance of
weapon platform,
and weapon
manipulations.

Operators are also
required to attend an
80-hour P.O.S.T.
certified Basic
SWAT Course. (as
applicable)
H&K 416:
$3,900.00 Annual
Maintenance Cost:
$100
H&K MP5: $1,800
per rifle Annual
Maintenance Cost:
$100
Sig Sauer MCX:
$1,850.00 Annual
Maintenance Cost:
$100
VPD Policy 306,
405
10 yrs.

Page 5 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
B: RIFLES 1
4 SIG Sauer SSG3000
Accuracy International
SSG3000: The department issued precision rifle is a
shoulder fired bolt action rifle capable of firing a
.308 caliber round. One round is fired with each
trigger pull and the bolt must be cycled in order to
fire another round. The rifle is equipped with a
3x14 power scope and 5 round detachable
magazine.

AT308: Is a department issued shoulder fired semi-
automatic precision rifle capable of firing a .308
caliber round. One round is fired with each trigger
pull. This weapon is equipped with a 20 round
magazine.

Range 0-900 yards
The department issued precision
rifle is capable of providing long
range precision fire.

Precision Rifle utilization
compliance is conducted by SWAT
Team Leader and SWAT
Commander assigned to incident in
which the precision rifle is
deployed.

Operators are
required to attend a
P.O.S.T. approved
40-hour Basic
Sniper School
SSG3000:
$2,500 initial cost
$100 annual
maintenance cost
Accuracy
International
AT308:
$5,00 initial cost
$100 annual
maintenance cost
VPD Policy 306,
405
10 years
C: LESS-LETHAL 4 Launcher (40mm single shot)
LMT Defense 40mm launcher that fires standard
40mm less lethal ammunition.

Manufactured exclusively for Defense
Technology®, the 40LMTS is a tactical single shot
launcher that features an expandable ROGERS
Super Stoc and will fire standard 40mm less lethal
ammunition, up to 4.8 inches in cartridge length.

Launch 40mm less lethal round up to 131 feet.

The purpose of this system is to aid
law enforcement in resolving
violent confrontations with a less
lethal option. They also assist law
enforcement in situations in which
lethal force may be justified but
potentially resolved with a less
lethal option.

Instructors attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal Training
Course. Operators are trained by
certified instructors in topics
including the 40mm launcher,
shotgun less lethal launcher,
pepperball launcher, munition
characteristics, target and non-target
areas, and practical application.

Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified
Less Lethal Training
Course. Operators
are trained by
certified instructors
in topics including
the 40mm launcher,
shotgun less lethal
launcher, pepperball
launcher, munition
characteristics,
target and non-target
areas, and practical
application.
$1,000 initial cost VPD Policy 303,
405
10 yrs.

Page 6 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL 2 Launcher (40mm multi-launcher)
Penn Arms P540-1 – Pump Multi-Launcher
A 40mm pump-action advance magazine drum
launcher with a fixed stock and combo rail. It has a
six-shot capacity and rifled barrel. Features
include: Double-action trigger, trigger lock push
button and hammer lock safeties. See specification
sheet for more details.

Defense Technology® 1440 40mm Tactical 4-Shot
Launcher
A low-profile and lightweight design, providing
multi-shot capability in an easy to carry launcher. It
features the Rogers Super Stoc™ expandable gun
stock, an adjustable Picatinny mounted front grip,
and a unique direct-drive system.

Launch 40mm less lethal round up to 131 feet.

Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified
Less Lethal Training
Course. Operators
are trained by
certified instructors
in topics including
the 40mm launcher,
shotgun less lethal
launcher, pepperball
launcher, munition
characteristics,
target and non-target
areas, and practical
application.
$2000 initial cost VPD Policy 303,
405
N/A

Page 7 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL 72 Launcher (Bean Bag Shotgun)
(Remington 870)
The less lethal shotgun launcher is a standard
shotgun capable of firing standard lethal shotgun
rounds. Because of this, precautions have been
made to ensure lethal rounds are not fired from a
shotgun intended for less lethal munitions. No
operator will be assigned a lethal and non-lethal
shotgun. Only less lethal munitions will be given to
an operator assigned a less lethal shotgun. The less
lethal shotgun will be outfitted with color markings,
i.e. orange, designating it as a less lethal shotgun
launcher.
.

Effective Range 20-75 feet
The purpose of this system is to aid
law enforcement in resolving
violent confrontations with a less
lethal option. They also assist law
enforcement in situations in which
lethal force may be justified but
potentially resolved with a less
lethal option.

Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified
Less Lethal Training
Course. Operators
are trained by
certified instructors
in topics including
the 40mm launcher,
shotgun less lethal
launcher, pepperball
launcher, munition
characteristics,
target and non-target
areas, and practical
application.

Remington 870:
$600.00 Annual
Maintenance Cost:
$35
VPD Policy 303,
405
10 years
C: LESS-LETHAL 4 Breaching Shotgun
(Remington 870)
The Visalia Police Department utilizes a modified
Remington 870 12-gauge shotgun equipped with a
breaching barrel and breaching rounds to open
locked doors at target locations.

Open locked doors through a
directed breaching round at close
range. Use is authorized through the
SWAT Team Leader and SWAT
Commander.

Breaching utilization compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the Breaching
Shotgun is deployed.

Agency-authored
orientation course;
annual refresher.
$800 initial cost;
annual maintenance
cost: $50
VPD Policy 405 10 years

Page 8 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL 1 Chemical Agent Shotgun
The Visalia Police Department utilizes a modified
Remington 870 12-gauge shotgun equipped with a
CTS TACTICAL LC5 Launching Cup. The LC5
Launching Cups are designed for use with the 5200
series canister grenades.

Launch Diversionary Device / Chemical Munitions
up to 25 yards
Launch Diversionary Device /
Chemical Munitions up to 25 yards
when use of those devices is
authorized.

Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander.

Chemical agent utilization
compliance is conducted by SWAT
Team Leader and SWAT
Commander assigned to incident in
which the Chemical Agent Shotgun
is deployed.

Agency-authored
orientation course;
annual refresher.
$164 initial cost,
must be replaced
when worn
VPD Policy 303,
405
10 years

Page 9 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: AMMUNITION 1,900 rounds
200 rounds
Rifle Ammunition
Hornady .308 WIN 168 grain ELD M TAP
Hornady .308 WIN 165 grain GMX TAP BAR
ELD TAP: Hornady® 308 WIN TAP 168 gr.

ELD® MATCH TAP PRECISION® ammunition
was designed as an improvement on the 168 gr. A-
MAX TAP PRECISION® load by incorporating
the new ELD® Match bullet. The 168 gr. ELD®
Match bullet with Heat Shield® tip delivers the
excellent terminal performance TAP Precision® is
known for, but features a resilient, heat resistant
polymer tip that improves the ballistic coefficient,
resulting in higher impact velocities, less drop, less
wind drift, and more energy on target.

GMX TAP: TAP® Heavy Barrier turns cover into
concealment. The 165 gr. GMX® TAP® Heavy
Barrier is constructed of a monolithic material and
has a double-cannelured design. The GMX® bullet
penetrates heavy barriers such as 1” laminated glass
with exceptional weight retention while still
delivering superior terminal performance on the
other side.

Range 0-900 yards
The department issued precision
rifle is capable of providing long
range precision fire.

Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander.

Precision Rifle utilization
compliance is conducted by SWAT
Team Leader and SWAT
Commander assigned to incident in
which the precision rifle is
deployed.

Operators are
required to attend a
P.O.S.T. approved
40-hour Basic
Sniper School.

Hornady 168 grain
ELD Tap: $20 per
box of 20 rounds
Hornady 165 grain
GMX Barrier:
$29.50 per box of
20 rounds
VPD Policy 306,
405
N/A

Page 10 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL

AMMUNITION
50 rounds
10 rounds
5 rounds
Breaching Shotgun Munitions
Royal Arms Tesar #2 Black Cap
Royal Arms HP Cutter Purple Cap
Royal Arms Flash Bang Red Cap
12- gauge shotgun cartridges used for breaching.

Black Cap: Defeats: Heavy Locks, Dead-bolts and
Hinges (Solid Oak – Steel Doors.

Purple Cap: Use: Cuts re-bar, penetrates security
glass, car doors, punches into engine blocks.

Red Cap: Use: Diversionary / Disorientation /
Breaching / Crowd Control.

Open locked doors through a directed breaching
round at close range.

Open locked doors through a
directed breaching round at close
range. Use is authorized through the
Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander or SWAT Team
Leader.

Breaching utilization compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the Breaching
Shotgun is deployed.

Agency-authored
orientation course;
annual refresher.

Royal Arms Tesar
#2 Black Cap: $25
per box of 5
Royal Arms HP
Cutter Purple Cap:
$30 per box of 5
Royal Arms Flash
Bang Red Cap: $25
per box of 5
VPD Policy 306,
405
N/A

Page 11 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 21 Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed)
Defense-Tec Spede-Heat CS
The Spede-Heat™ CS Grenade is a high volume,
continuous burn it expels its payload in
approximately 20-40 seconds. The payload is
discharged through four gas ports on top of the
canister, three on the side and one on the bottom.

The use of chemical agents is meant
to induce the occupant of a structure
or vehicle to surrender to law
enforcement personnel without the
need for direct contact. Chemical
agent is introduced when all other
means of negotiation and voluntary
surrender have failed, and the
subject remains in a barricaded
position.

SWAT Deployment.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

MFF Deployment.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by MFF Commander and
MFF Team Leaders assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Chemical Agents
will be introduced
by the certified
chemical agent
instructor or under
their direct
supervision by
operators who have
been trained in the
use of chemical
agents and
launchers.
$26.92 each VPD Policy 303,
405
5 years

Page 12 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 4 Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed)
Defense-Tec CS Flameless Tri-Chamber
The design of the Tri-Chamber Flameless CS
Grenade allows the contents to burn within an
internal can and disperse the agent safely with
reduced risk of fire. The grenade is designed
primarily for indoor tactical situations to detect
and/or dislodge a barricaded subject. This grenade
will deliver approximately .70 oz. of agent during
its 20-25 seconds burn time. The Tri-Chamber
Flameless Grenade can be used in crowd control as
well as tactical deployment situations by Law
Enforcement and Corrections but was designed with
the barricade situation in mind. Its applications in
tactical situations are primarily to detect and/or
dislodge barricaded subjects. The purpose of the Tri-
Chamber Flameless Grenade is to minimize the
risks to all parties through pain compliance,
temporary discomfort, and/or incapacitation of
potentially violent or dangerous subjects. The Tri-
Chamber Flameless Grenade provides the option of
delivering a pyrotechnic chemical device indoors,
maximizing the chemicals’ effectiveness via heat
and vaporization, while minimizing or negating the
chance of fire to the structure.

Hand Deployed
The use of chemical agents is meant
to induce the occupant of a structure
or vehicle to surrender to law
enforcement personnel without the
need for direct contact. Chemical
agent is introduced when all other
means of negotiation and voluntary
surrender have failed, and the
subject remains in a barricaded
position.

SWAT Deployment.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 13 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL

AMMUNITION
30 30
Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed)
Defense-Tec Riot Control Continuous Discharge
Grenade, OC
Defense-Tec Riot Control Continuous Discharge
Grenade, CS
The Riot Control OC Grenade is designed
specifically for outdoor use in crowd control
situations with a high volume continuous burn that
expels its payload in approximately 20-40 seconds
through four gas ports located on the top of the
canister. This grenade can be used to conceal
tactical movement or to route a crowd. The volume
of smoke and agent is vast and obtrusive.

Purpose and authorized uses: The use of chemical
agents is meant to induce a voluntary surrender or
dispersal without the need for direct contact.

Chemical agent is introduced when all other means
of negotiation and voluntary compliance have
failed.

The Riot Control CS Grenade is designed
specifically for outdoor use in crowd control
situations with a high volume continuous burn that
expels its payload in approximately 20-40 seconds
through four gas ports located on the top of the
canister. This grenade can be used to conceal
tactical movement or to route a crowd. The volume
of smoke and agent is vast and obtrusive.

SWAT Deployment.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 14 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 9 Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed)
Defense-Tec Pocket Tactical CS Grenade
.

The Pocket Tactical CS Grenade is small, and
lightweight. The 0.9 oz. of active agent will burn
approximately 20-40 seconds. At 4.75 in. by 1.4
inches in size, it easily fits in most tactical pouches.

This is a launchable grenade; however, it is
normally used as a signaling or covering device.

Though this device is slightly over four inches in
length, it produces a smoke cloud so fast it appears
to be an enveloping screen produced by a full size
tactical grenade.

SWAT Deployment.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 15 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL

AMMUNITION
7 10
Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed)
Defense-Tec OC Vapor Aerosol
Defense-Tec OC Aerosol Grenade 1.3% Fogger, 6-
ounce
The Defense Technology® OC Vapor Aerosol
Grenade is for law enforcement and corrections use
to deliver a high concentration of Oleoresin
Capsicum (OC) in a powerful mist. The grenade is
designed for indoor use in confined areas and, once
deployed, inflames the mucous membranes and
exposed skin resulting in an intense burning
sensation. The incapacitating effect of the OC
Vapor on the subject is dramatic yet requires
minimal decontamination. Removing the subject
from the affected area to fresh air will resolve
respiratory effects within minutes. The OC Vapor
Aerosol Grenade is ideal for cell extractions or
barricade situations where the use of pyrotechnic,
powder or liquid devices is not practical or desired.

The 1 oz. OC Aerosol Grenade will deliver its
payload of 1.3% OC in 20-25 seconds. This is an
anotomized mist which enhances the pungent OC
formulation. It is ideal for hard to access areas like
attics, garages, etc. and may also be hand-held to
direct the spray pattern. This product is designed to
provide room clearing ability with minimum clean
up requirements.

SWAT Deployment.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 16 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 2
2 Chemical Agent (Pepperball)
Pepperball Tippman Launcher
Pepperball FTC Launcher
The Pepperball Launcher and munitions are
considered a non-lethal chemical agent delivery
system using high pressure air. The munitions
combine chemical agent exposure with kinetic
impact and pain. The chemical agent in the
munitions is Pepperball Pava. Pava is one of six
capsaicinoids found in pepper plants. Pava is non-
flammable and found in Tabasco sauce, spice packs
and cooking oils.

FTC is a high-capacity, semi-automatic launcher
that is perfect for crowd management and mobile
field force operations. Reliable and accurate, it
features a hopper that can hold up to 180 rounds
and a flexible air source configuration.

Effective Range 0-100 feet
The purpose of this system is to aid
law enforcement in resolving
violent confrontations with a less
lethal option. They also assist law
enforcement in situations in which
lethal force may be justified but
potentially resolved with a less
lethal option. This system allows
the possibility of non-lethal
resolution with or without impact to
the individual.

Instructors must attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal Training
Course and/or Pepperball instructor
Training Course. Operators must be
trained by a certified instructor in
topics including Pepperball
Launchers, munition or projectile
characteristics, target and non-target
areas, decontamination, and
practical application.

Instructors must
attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal
Training Course
and/or Pepperball
Instructor Training
Course. Operators
must be trained by a
certified instructor
in topics including
Pepperball
Launchers, munition
or projectile
characteristics,
target and non-target
areas,
decontamination,
and practical
application.

Pepperball FTC
Launcher-----$600
Annual
Maintenance Cost:
$35
Pepperball Tippman
Launcher-----$600
Annual
maintenance cost:
$35
VPD Policy 303,
405
N/A

Page 17 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 0 Chemical Agents (OC Spray)
FIRST DEFENSE® .7% MK-9S HV VAPOR OC

AEROSOL
The MK-9S features an easy to use trigger handle,
is intended for use in crowd management and will
deliver 8-10 short bursts of OC at an effective range
of 10-15 ft. This .7% MC OC aerosol product
utilizes a vapor delivery method providing a high
concentration of OC in a powerful mist inflaming
the mucous membranes and exposed skin. Onset is
immediate and very intense, resulting in an intense
burning sensation that evaporates quickly when
exposed to fresh air.

Non-flammable / Electronic Discharge Weapon
(EDW) safe
25-30 feet
High volume OC spray can be used
to control vicious animals at a
greater distance. It also has
applications for crowd control
during riot/violent disturbances.

Compliance with policy and
procedure is reviewed by the direct
supervisor at the time of the
incident and is further reviewed by
the Use of Force Review Board.

All officers utilizing
OC spray receive
training in
deployment and
effects of Oleoresin
Capsicum during
Basic Police
Academy.
$46.95 Per Unit VPD Policy 303,
405
5 years

Page 18 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 10
Chemical Agent Projectile
(Defense-Tec Muzzle Blast
40 MM Round (OC))
The 40 mm Muzzle Blast OC Round is widely used
as a crowd management tool for the immediate and
close deployment of chemical agent. It can also be
employed in tactical operations such as barricaded
subjects for area denial, area contamination, and a
means of contaminating crawl spaces and attics. As
a pain compliance round it is an excellent device for
deploying chemical-laden OC powder at close
ranges for indoor or outdoor operations.
30 Feet
The use of chemical agents is meant
to induce a voluntary surrender or
dispersal without the need for direct
contact. Chemical agent is
introduced when all other means of
negotiation and voluntary
compliance have failed.

Visalia Police Department MFF
Commander. Chemical agents
compliance is conducted by MFF
Commander and MFF Team
Leaders assigned to incident in
which the chemical agent is
deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 19 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 10
Chemical Agent Projectile
(Defense-Tec Muzzle Blast
40 MM Round (CS))
The 40 mm Muzzle Blast CS Round is widely used
as a crowd management tool for the immediate and
close deployment. It can also be employed in
tactical operations such as barricaded subjects,
room clearing, area denial, and for small space
contamination, and a means of contaminating crawl
spaces and attics. As a pain compliance round it is
an excellent device for deploying chemical-laden
CS powder at close ranges for indoor or outdoor
operations. The cloud of agent is very effective in
filling holes in dispersals lines or engaging crowds
at close distances.
30 Feet
The use of chemical agents is meant
to induce a voluntary surrender or
dispersal without the need for direct
contact. Chemical agent is
introduced when all other means of
negotiation and voluntary
compliance have failed
Visalia Police Department MFF
Commander. Chemical agent
compliance is conducted by MFF
Commander and MFF Team
Leaders assigned to incident in
which the chemical agent is
deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 20 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL

AMMUNITION
9 8
Chemical Agent Projectile
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret OC Powder Barricade
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret OC Liquid Barricade
Powder: The Ferret® 40mm Round is non-burning
and suitable for indoor use. Used primarily by
tactical teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers,
such as windows, hollow core doors, wallboard and
thin plywood. Upon impacting the barrier, the nose
cone ruptures and instantaneously delivers a small
chemPowder: The Ferret® 40 mm Barricade
Penetrating Round is filled with an OC powder
chemical agent. It is non-burning and designed to
penetrate barriers. Primarily used to dislodge
barricaded subjects, it can also be used for area
denial. Primarily used by tactical teams, it is
designed to penetrate barriers, such as windows,
hollow core doors, wallboard and thin plywood.

Upon impact the nose ruptures and instantaneously
delivers the agent payload inside a structure or
vehicle.

Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

40mm Ferret OC
Powder: $18.88
each
VPD Policy 303,
405
5 years
Liquid: The Ferret® 40mm Round is non-burning
and suitable for indoor use. Used primarily by
tactical teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers,
such as windows, hollow core doors, wallboard and
thin plywood. Upon impacting the barrier, the nose
cone ruptures and instantaneously delivers a small
chemical payload inside of a structure or vehicle.

In a tactical deployment situation, the 40mm Ferret
is primarily used to dislodge barricaded subjects
from confined areas. Its purpose is to minimize the
risks to all parties through pain compliance,
temporary discomfort and/or incapacitation of
potentially violent or dangerous subjects
5-54 yards

Page 21 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
20 25
Chemical Agent Projectile
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret CS Powder- Barricade
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret CS Liquid- Barricade
Powder: The Ferret® 40 mm Barricade Penetrating
Round is filled with a CS powder chemical agent. It
is non-burning and designed to penetrate barriers.

Primarily used to dislodge barricaded subjects, it
can also be used for area denial. Primarily used by
tactical teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers,
such as windows, hollow core doors, wallboard and
thin plywood. Upon impact the nose ruptures and
instantaneously delivers the agent payload inside a
structure or vehicle.

Liquid: The Ferret® 40mm Round is non-burning
and suitable for indoor use. Used primarily by
tactical teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers,
such as windows, hollow core doors, wallboard and
thin plywood. Upon impacting the barrier, the nose
cone ruptures and instantaneously delivers a small
chemical payload inside of a structure or vehicle.In
a tactical deployment situation, the 40mm Ferret is
primarily used to dislodge barricaded subjects from
confined areas. Its purpose is to minimize the risks
to all parties through pain compliance, temporary
discomfort and/or incapacitation of potentially
violent or dangerous subjects
5-54 yards
The use of chemical agents is meant
to induce the occupant of a structure
or vehicle to surrender to law
enforcement personnel without the
need for direct contact. Chemical
agent is introduced when all other
means of negotiation and voluntary
surrender have failed and the
subject remains in a barricaded
position.

Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 22 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 6 Chemical Agent Projectile
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret CS- Liquid
The Ferret® 40mm Round is non-burning and
suitable for indoor use. Used primarily by tactical
teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers, such as
windows, hollow core doors, wallboard and thin
plywood. Upon impacting the barrier, the nose cone
ruptures and instantaneously delivers a small
chemical payload inside of a structure or vehicle
50-200 yards
The use of chemical agents is meant
to induce the occupant of a structure
or vehicle to surrender to law
enforcement personnel without the
need for direct contact. Chemical
agent is introduced when all other
means of negotiation and voluntary
surrender have failed and the
subject remains in a barricaded
position
Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed
Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 23 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 9
21 6
Chemical Agent
(Shotgun Deployed)
CTS Baffled Canister
Def-Tec 12-gauge round
CTS 12-gauge launching cartridge
Pyrotechnic grenade designed for indoor use
delivering a maximum amount of irritant smoke
throughout multiple rooms with minimal risk of
fire.

Deployed with a launching-cup equipped shotgun
using a launching cartridge.

Def-Tec 12-gauge round used to launch
chemical/flash bang munitions.

CTS 12-gauge launching cartridge
Def-Tec: The 1210 12-Gauge Muzzle Bang /
Launching Cartridge incorporates an opaque shell
and utilizes black powder as the propellant. It has
the ability to be used alone as a Muzzle Bang for
crowd management or for propelling grenades when
using the 1370 Launching Cup.

CTS: Along with their line of canister grenades,
CTS also produces a full line of launching cups and
cartridges. The LC5 & LC6 launching cups are
designed for the 52 & 62 series grenades
respectively. The cups can be attached to virtually
any 12ga shotgun, and the munitions launched with
our Model 2600 and 3600 launching cartridge.

Launches up to 25 yards
Range: 25 yards
The use of chemical agents is meant
to induce the occupant of a structure
or vehicle to surrender to law
enforcement personnel without the
need for direct contact. Chemical
agent is introduced when all other
means of negotiation and voluntary
surrender have failed and the
subject remains in a barricaded
position.

Launch Flash Bang/ Chemical
Munitions up to 25 yards when use
of those devices is authorized.

Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander.

Chemical agent utilization
compliance is conducted by SWAT
Team Leader and SWAT
Commander assigned to incident in
which the Chemical Agent Shotgun
is deployed.

Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Page 24 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION Pepperball Ammunition
Live: 1475
Live X: 490
Inert: 850
Glass
Shattering: 100
“Live”
Red / White • PAVA Payload • 0.5% Chemical
Agent • Used for direct impact and area saturation •
0-60 feet (0-18 meters) direct impact/150+ feet
(45+ meters) area saturation • Operation
temperature range -30F to 150F (-34C to 65C)
“Live X”
Red / Black • Concentrated version of Live
projectile used in high-intensity/MFF/Crowd
Control • 5% Chemical Agent • Used for direct
impact and area saturation • 0-60 feet (0-18 meters)
direct impact/150+ feet (45+ meters area saturation
• Operation temperature range -30F to 150F (-34C
to 65C)
“Inert”
White / Purple • Used for direct impact and
training/qualification • 0-60 feet (0-18 meters)
direct impact/150+ feet (45+ meters) area saturation
• Operation temperature range -30F to 150F (-34C
to 65C) • Scented powder allows ventilation testing
“Glass Shattering”
Break side glass of vehicles and residential • 0-30
feet (0-9 meters) direct impact • Works in all
temperatures NOT FOR USE ON HUMANS
The purpose of this system is to aid
law enforcement in resolving
violent confrontations with a less
lethal option. They also assist law
enforcement in situations in which
lethal force may be justified but
potentially resolved with a less
lethal option. This system allows
the possibility of non-lethal
resolution with or without impact to
the individual.

Training compliance is maintained
by the Visalia Police Department
Range Staff.

Utilization compliance is conducted
by incident supervisor and the Use
of Force Review Board. .

Instructors must
attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal
Training Course
and/or Pepperball
instructor Training
Course. Operators
must be trained by a
certified instructor
in topics including
Pepperball
Launchers, munition
or projectile
characteristics,
target and non-target
areas,
decontamination,
and practical
application.

Live: $853 per 375
count
Live-X: $1123 per
375 count
Inert: $300 per 375
count
Glass Shattering:
$245 per 100 count
VPD Policy 303 Live: 3
years
Live X: 3
years
Inert: N/A
Glass
Shattering:

N/A

Page 25 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
Live--Pepperball Live Projectiles are perfect for
direct impact or crowd control situations.

Constructed with 100% waterproof, ultrasonically
welded shell seams.

Live X-- Our most potent and powerful
concentration of PAVA pepper powder. At 5%
PAVA, a LIVE-X™ round contains double the
amount of PAVA chemical agent of a regular
Pepperball® LIVE SD™ round. PAVA is based on
one of the hottest of the six capsaicinoids found in
pepper plants. Pepperball products contain only
safe, pure, non-oil based PAVA and are non-
flammable. Ingredient consistency ensures each
projectile operates with quality and effectiveness.

Inert-- Containing a harmless, scented powder, this
projectile is best suited for practice or direct impact when chemical exposure is not desired.

Glass Shattering-- Used to break side glass of
vehicles and residential glass windows.

Page 26 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL

AMMUNITION
0 0
Chemical Agents (OC Spray)
MK-21- High Volume Oleoresin Capsicum (OC)
MK-46- Stream Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) Aerosol
MK-21- Defense Technologies family of high
volume stream, fog and foam aerosol projectors,
available in OC, CN, CS and OC/CS, OC/CN
blends offer the first line of solutions for the
management of crowds. These large canisters are
extremely portable, but dispense the volume of
agent needed for effective crowd contamination.

MK-46- The MK-46 features a trigger handle, is
intended for use in crowd management and will
deliver 26 short bursts of OC at an effective range
of 25-30 ft. This 1.3% MC OC aerosol product
utilizes a stream delivery method providing a target-
specific, strong concentrated stream for greater
standoff. Non-flammable / Electronic Discharge
Weapon (EDW) safe
25-30 feet
High volume OC spray can be used
to control vicious animals at a
greater distance. It also has
applications for crowd control
during riot/violent disturbances.

Compliance with policy and
procedure is reviewed by the direct
supervisor at the time of the
incident and is further reviewed by
the Use of Force Review Board.

All officers utilizing
OC spray receive
training in
deployment and
effects of Oleoresin
Capsicum during
Basic Police
Academy.

MK-21: $100
MK-46: $135
VPD Policy 303,
405
5 years

Page 27 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 943 Less Lethal Bean Bag Ammunition
12-gauge Drag Stabilized Bean Bag Round
The munition carried by members of the Visalia
Police Department is a Defense Technology 12-
Gauge Drag Stabilized Bean Bag Round. The 12-
Gauge shell is loaded with a 40 gram, tear shaped
bag made from a cotton/ballistic blend and filled
with #9 shot.

The effective range of this munition is 20-75 feet.

The Drag Stabilized™ 12-Gauge Round is a
translucent 12-Gauge shell loaded with a 40-Gram
tear shaped bag made from a cotton and ballistic
material blend and filled with #9 shot. This design
utilizes four stabilizing tails and utilizes smokeless
powder as the propellant. The 12-Gauge Drag
Stabilized Round has secured its place as the Law
Enforcement Communities’ number one choice for
specialty impact munitions. This round has a
velocity of 270 fps.

The effective range of this munition is 20-75 feet.

Training compliance is maintained
by the Visalia Police Department
Range Staff.

Bean Bag Shotgun utilization
compliance is conducted by shift
supervisor assigned to incident in
which the Bean Bag shotgun is
deployed and the Use of Force
Review Board.

Instructors must
attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal
Training Course.

Page 28 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL

AMMUNITION
50 Direct Impact Less Lethal
Defense-Tec 40mm Direct Impact Sponge Round
Direct Impact 40mm OC Sponge Round
A less lethal 40mm lightweight plastic and foam
projectile fired from a single or multi-round
purpose built 40mm grenade launcher with a rifled
barrel at 325 FPS. The 30-gram foam projectile
delivers 120 ft/lbs. of energy on impact. The 40mm
Exact Impact Sponge Round provides accurate and
effective performance when fired from the approved
distance of not less than five (5) feet and as far as
131 feet from the target.
5-131 feet
A less lethal 40mm lightweight plastic and foam
projectile containing OC powder fired from a single
or multi-round purpose built 40mm grenade
launcher with a rifled barrel at 305 FPS. The 40
mm OC Sponge Round provides accurate and
effective performance when fored from the
approved distance of not less than five (5) feet and
as far as 120 feet from the target.
5-120ft
The purpose of this system is to aid
law enforcement in resolving
violent confrontations with a less
lethal option. They also assist law
enforcement in situations in which
lethal force may be justified but
potentially resolved with a less
lethal option.

Instructors must attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal Training
Course.

Operators must be trained by a
certified instructor in topics
including the shotgun less lethal
launcher, munition characteristics,
target and non-target areas, and
practical application.

Instructors must
attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal
Training Course.

Page 29 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL

AMMUNITION
23 Direct Impact Less Lethal
Defense-Tec 40mm Exact Impact Sponge Round
Ext Range
The eXact iMpact™ 40 mm Sponge Round is a
point-of-aim, point-of-impact direct-fire round. This
lightweight, high-speed projectile consisting of a
plastic body and sponge nose that is spin stabilized
via the incorporated rifling collar and the 40 mm
launcher’s rifled barrel. The round utilizes
smokeless powder as the propellant, and, therefore,
have velocities that are extremely consistent. Used
for Crowd Control, Patrol, and Tactical
Applications
33-230 feet
The purpose of this system is to aid
law enforcement in resolving
violent confrontations with a less
lethal option. They also assist law
enforcement in situations in which
lethal force may be justified but
potentially resolved with a less
lethal option.

Instructors must attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal Training
Course.

Operators must be trained by a
certified instructor in topics
including the shotgun less lethal
launcher, munition characteristics,
target and non-target areas, and
practical application.

Instructors must
attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal
Training Course.

Page 30 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION 5
Direct Impact Less Lethal
Defense -Tec 40mm Inert Direct Impact
The 40mm Direct Impact® munition is a point-of-
aim, point-of-impact direct-fire round. An excellent
solution whether you need to incapacitate a single
subject or control a crowd. The black nosed inert
munition is a great option for training.
5-131 feet
The purpose of this system is to aid
law enforcement in resolving
violent confrontations with a less
lethal option. They also assist law
enforcement in situations in which
lethal force may be justified but
potentially resolved with a less
lethal option.

Instructors must attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal Training
Course.

Operators must be trained by a
certified instructor in topics
including the shotgun less lethal
launcher, munition characteristics,
target and non-target areas, and
practical application.

Instructors must
attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal
Training Course.

Page 31 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: LESS-LETHAL

AMMUNITION
6 14
Direct Impact Chemical Agent
Defense-Tec 40mm Direct Impact CS
Defense-Tec 40mm Direct Impact CS Ext.

The 40mm Direct Impact® munition is a point-of-
aim, point-of-impact direct-fire round. An excellent
solution whether you need to incapacitate a single
subject or control a crowd. When loaded with CS
powder, the Direct Impact combines blunt trauma
with the effects of an irritant powder, maximizing
the potential for incapacitation.
5-131 feet
33-230 feet Ext.

Instructors must attend a P.O.S.T.
certified Less Lethal Training
Course.

Operators must be
trained by a certified
instructor in topics
including the
shotgun less lethal
launcher, munition
characteristics,
target and non-target
areas, and practical
application.
40mm Direct
Impact CS: $20.88
each
40mm Direct
Impact CS
Ext.:$21.35 each
VPD Policy 303,
405
7 years
C: LESS-LETHAL
AMMUNITION Chemical Agents (Smoke Only)
7 5
4 Defense-Tec: Saf-Smoke Grenade (white)- smoke is
used as concealment for officer/citizen down
rescues. It can also be utilized with Chemical Agent
(CS,OC) to multiply the effects.

Defense-Tec: Pocket Tactical Grenade Smoke-
smoke is used as concealment for officer/citizen
down rescues. It can also be utilized with Chemical
Agent (CS,OC) to multiply the effects.

CTS: Smoke (white)- smoke is used as concealment
for officer/citizen down rescues. It can also be
utilized with Chemical Agent (CS,OC) to multiply
the effects.

The purpose of white smoke is to
aid Law Enforcement in concealing
movements through an open area
when conducting officer/citizen
rescues.

Visalia Police Department SWAT
Team Commander.

Chemical agent compliance is
conducted by SWAT Team Leader
and SWAT Commander assigned to
incident in which the chemical
agent is deployed.

Chemical Agent
Instructors attend a
P.O.S.T. certified 40-
hour course.

Chemical Agents
will be introduced
by the certified
chemical agent
instructor or under
their direct
supervision by
operators who have
been trained in the
use of chemical
agents and
launchers.

Saf-Smoke: $26.63
each
Pocket Tactical
Smoke: $22.95 each
CTS White Smoke:
$32.25 each
VPD Policy 303,
405
5 years

Page 32 of 33 ends

CATEGORY QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION (GENERAL,

MANUFACTURER'S) & CAPABILITIES

PURPOSE AND

AUTHORIZED USES
&

COMPLIANCE MECHANISMS TRAINING FISCAL IMPACT

LEGAL &

PROCEDURAL
RULES
LIFE
SPAN
C: DIVERSION
DEVICE Light / Sound Diversionary Device
45 10
12 Defense Technology Diversionary Device
The diversoinary device can be hand deployed or by
using a pole designed to hold the device securely so
that the device can be deployed in elecated
locations or where hand deployment would not be
desirable.

The Low Roll® Distraction Device® is a reloadable
gun steel body with hex design. This newest version
of the first reusable non-bursting canisters limits
movement and rolling once deployed. The diameter
of the hex design body is 2.0 in., 5.0 cm. overall
length is 5.0 in., 12.7 cm. The Low Roll bodies’
ergonomic features complement its powerful output
of light, sound and twelve top port configuration
which results in an even distribution of gases from
the opposing ends of the canister. The distinctive
shape and capabilities are tools for dynamic entries
for police, corrections, and military tactical teams
worldwide.

The CTS Multi 9 Flash-Bang device provides 9
unique flash bang actions within a single hand safe
assembly. The device provides arrhythmic outputs
approximately 0.5 seconds apart. Unit is designed
to be hand safe and provides a physical feature to
locate the top and bottom of the grenade when
handling.

Hand Deployed / Deployed with Diversion Device
pole
The light/sound Diversionary
Device emits a bright light and
accompanying loud sound to
temporarily distract/disorient a
dangerous individual.

The use of light/sound diversionary
devices are utilized in a tactical
situation in which a temporary
distraction or disorientation of the
individual is advantageous to safely
taking the individual into custody or
completing a high-risk entry into a
structure or room.

The use of diversionary devices is
limited to SWAT Team Leaders
through approval from the SWAT
Commander for planned operations.

Emergency deployment is at the
discretion of the SWAT Team
Leader.

Each SWAT Team
member receives
training and
certification on the
use, deployment,
and considerations
of the use of
diversionary devices
at Basic SWAT
school. Instructors
must attend a POST
approved
Diversionary Device
Instructor School
consisting of 16
hours of specialized
training.
$33.23 each
$25.00 each
SWAT Manual 5 years

Page 33 of 33 ends

Attachment
Visalia PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/06/15, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Visalia Police Department
AB 481 Annual Report 2022.pdf - 7
AB 481 Annual Report 2022.pdf
AB 481 Annual Report 2022.pdf
484
Annual Report 2022

Usage Log 07/2022 - 12/2022
Date Item Used Quantity Used Summary of Use
7/22 - 12/2022 Bearcat and Van 4 Equipment used for search warrants. 7/22 - 12/2022 CS and Pepperball Chem Agent 1
Wanted (S) barricaded in bedroom of home refusing to exit, said had weapon, in custody w/out incident.
7/22 - 12/2022 UAS 89
Equipment used for a variety of missions including: search for missing persons, article search, death scene investigation, unlawful fire monitoring, fleeing suspect search, and public demonstrations.
7/22 - 12/2022 Bomb Truck 18
Response to variety of calls for service including: suspicious/unattended package, known or suspected improvised explosive device, collection of improperly stored commercial explosives, and ammunition disposal. 7/22 - 12/2022 Bomb Robot 7
Response to variety of calls for service including: suspicious/unattended package, known or suspected improvised explosive device, collection of improperly stored commercial explosives, and ammunition disposal.

Complaint Log 7/2022 - 12/2022
Date Complainant IA # Item Used Summary of Complaint Disposition NONE
Qty Unit Approved Date
None
REQUESTED NEW ITEM 2023
485
Attachment
Visalia PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/06/15, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Visalia Police Department
AB 481 Stock Planning 2023.pdf - 8
AB 481 Stock Planning 2023.pdf
AB 481 Stock Planning 2023.pdf
486
Inventory
Stock Planning Inventory Requested
Reserve
A: VEHICLE
Bomb Squad Truck 1 0
Mobile Command Vehicle 1 0
Armored Vehicle (Bearcat) 1 0
Transport Van Large 1 0
A: ROBOTICS
Bomb Robot 1 0
ICOR Mini Caliber 1 0
Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) 12 8
Robot (Avatar) 1 0
Robot (Scout) 1 0
Robot (Transcend) 1 0
B: RIFLES
H&K 416 20 0
H&K MP5 2 0
Sig Sauer MCX 5 0
SIG Sauer SSG3000 1 0
Accuracy International 4 0
H&K MR762A1 0 0
C: LESS-LETHAL
Launcher (40mm single shot) 4 13
Launcher (40mm multi-launcher) 2 0
Launcher (Bean Bag Shotgun)(Remington 870) 72 0
Breaching Shotgun (Remington 870) 4 2
Chemical Agent Shotgun 1 2
2023
487
Inventory
Stock Planning Inventory Requested
Reserve
2023
C: AMMUNITION (Rounds)
Hornady .308 WIN 168 grain ELD M TAP 1900 4100
Hornady .308 WIN 165 grain GMX TAP BAR 200 300
C: LESS-LETHAL AMMUNITION
Breaching Shotgun Munitions (Rounds)
Royal Arms Tesar #2 Black Cap 50 50
Royal Arms HP Cutter Purple Cap 10 20
Royal Arms Flash Bang Red Cap 5 20
Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed) Defense-Tec Spede-Heat CS 21 34 Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed) Defense-Tec CS Flameless Tri-Chamber 4 16 Defense-Tec Riot Control Continuous Discharge Grenade, OC 30 20 Defense-Tec Riot Control Continuous Discharge Grenade, CS 30 20 Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed) Defense-Tec Pocket Tactical CS Grenade 9 36 Chemical Agent (Hand Deployed) Defense-Tec OC Vapor Aerosol 7 28 Chemical Agent (Pepperball)
Pepperball Tippman Launcher 2 0
Pepperball FTC Launcher 2 2
Chemical Agents (OC Spray)
FIRST DEFENSE® .7% MK-9S HV VAPOR OC AEROSOL 4
Chemical Agent Projectile
(Defense-Tec Muzzle Blast 40 MM Round (OC)) 10 0
Chemical Agent Projectile
(Defense-Tec Muzzle Blast 40 MM Round (CS)) 10 0
488
Inventory
Stock Planning Inventory Requested
Reserve
2023
Chemical Agent Projectile
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret OC Powder Barricade 9 0
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret OC Liquid Barricade 8 22
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret CS Powder- Barricade 20 0
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret CS Liquid- Barricade 25 15
Defense-Tec 40mm Ferret CS- Liquid 6 0
Chemical Agent (Shotgun Deployed)
CTS Baffled Canister 9 21
Def-Tec 12-gauge round 21 24
CTS 12-gauge launching cartridge 6 0
Pepperball Ammunition
“Live” 1475 375
“Live X” 490 1780
“Inert” 850 750
“Glass Shattering” 100 0
Chemical Agents (OC Spray)
MK-21- High Volume Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) 1 0
MK-46- Stream Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) Aerosol 1 0
Less Lethal Bean Bag Ammunition
12-gauge Drag Stabilized Bean Bag Round 943 57
Direct Impact Less Lethal
Defense-Tec 40mm exact/direct Impact Sponge Round 50 230 Defense-Tec 40mm Exact Impact Sponge Round Ext Range 23 67 Defense -Tec 40mm Inert Direct Impact 5 25
489
Inventory
Stock Planning Inventory Requested
Reserve
2023
Direct Impact Chemical Agent
Defense-Tec 40mm Direct Impact CS 6 54
Defense-Tec 40mm Direct Impact CS Ext. 14 46
Less Lethal Indirect Impact Rounds
Chemical Agents (Smoke Only)
Defense-Tec: Saf-Smoke Grenade (white) 7 28
Defense-Tec: Pocket Tactical Grenade Smoke 5 15
CTS: Smoke (white) 4 11
Light / Sound Diversionary Device
Defense Technology Diversionary Device 45 25
The Low Roll® Distraction Device® 10 10
CTS Multi 9 Diversionary Device 12 12
490
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA RENEWING VISALIA POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY 708, MILITARY EQUIPMENT

WHEREAS, On September 30, 2021, California Assembly Bill 481, relating to the use of military equipment by law enforcement agencies in the State of California, was signed into law ; and

WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481, codified in Government Code sections 7070 -7015, requires law enforcement agencies to obtain approval by ordinance from the applicable governing body of a “military equipment” (as that term is defined in Government Code section 7070) policy, during a regular meeting prior to taking specified actions relating to the funding, acquisition, or use of the defined types of military equipment; and

WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 481, the California Government Code (Gov. Code § 7070 et seq.), and Policy 708, requires that the Visalia Police Department submit an annual military equipment report to the legislative body, and for the Department to hold a public community engagement meeting, at which the general public may discuss and ask questions regarding the annual military equipment report, including the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment; and

WHEREAS, Government Code section 7071(e)(1) and (2) requires that the legislative body review the ordinance that adopted Visalia Department Policy 708 and vote on whether to renew it annually along with reviewing the equipment identified in the annual report has be en used appropriately and deciding whether to allow the continued use of the specified equipment ; and

WHEREAS, In 2022, in compliance with Assembly Bill 481, t he Visalia City Council passed Ordinance 2022-09, adopting a military equipment use policy identified as Visalia Police Department Policy Number 708 – Military Equipment; and

WHEREAS, The Visalia Police Department has reviewed the deployment and use of the inventoried equipment during the annual report period, included descriptions of such deployment and use in the report, and considers such usage to have followed applicable policies; and

WHEREAS, The policy and the required annual report were submitted for review by the Visalia Police Department and the documents were made available on the City of Visalia Website on June 15, 2023; and

WHEREAS, a public h earing was held on July 17, 2023 that included a presentation of related to the use of military equipment in the previous year.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Visalia Police Department Policy 708, Military Equipment, complies with Ordinance 2022- 09, and is renewed pursuant to Assembly Bill 481 and Government Code Section 7070 et. seq.

2. The annual military equipment report submitted by the Visalia Police Department has been reviewed and each type of military equipment identified in that report complies with the standards set forth in Government Code section 7071(d) : the identified equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective 491
of officer and civilian safety; the military equipment use policy safeguards the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties; the equipment that is being purchased is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety; military equipment usage complied with the relevant policy; and the equipment use policy was made publicly available.

3. Continued usage of the equipment identified in the annual report by the Visalia Police Department as military equipment in accordance with California law and applicable Visalia Police Department Policy 708, is hereby authorized.

PASSED AND ADOPTED:

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF TULARE ) ss.

CITY OF VISALIA

492
Visalia City Council
Staff Report
Visalia City Council
707 W. Acequia
Visalia, CA 93291
File #: 23-0267 Agenda Date: 7/17/2023 Agenda #: 5.

Agenda Item Wording:

Public hearing and consideration of the following actions related to the project site located between South Lovers Lane and Road 148, just south of East Cherry Avenue (APN: 127-030-038):

1. Certification of Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30 for Annexation No. 2022-05 and Pearl Woods Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5591 (Resolution No. 2023-30 required); and

2. Initiation of Proceedings for Annexation No. 2022-05 a request by D.R. Horton to annex a 67.7 -acre parcel into the City Limits of Visalia; and

3. Authorize the detachment from County Service Area No. 1 in accordance with State and County requirements; and

4. Authorize the City Manager to sign and enter into a Pre-Annexation Agreement (Resolution No. 2023-31 required).

Deadline for Action: 7/17/2023
Submitting Department: Community Development
Contact Name and Phone Number: Josh Dan, Senior
Planner, (559) 713-4003, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Paul Bernal, Community Development Director, (559) 713-4025 [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Department Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council initiate annexation proceedings for the subject parcel by taking the following actions:

1. Certify Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30 for Annexation No. 2022-05 and Pearl Woods Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5591; and

2. Initiate proceedings on Annexation No. 2022-05 with the Tulare County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO); and

3. Authorize the detachment of the property from County Service Area No. 1 in accordance with State and County requirements; and

4. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Pre-Annexation Agreement between the City of Visalia and property owners.

If approved by the City Council, staff will file the Annexation application with LAFCO.

Summary:

The recommendation to initiate Annexation No. 2022-05 is based on the conclusion that the project is Visalia City Council Printed on 7/14/2023Page 1 of 7
powered by Legistar™
493
File #: 23-0267 Agenda Date: 7/17/2023 Agenda #: 5.

The recommendation to initiate Annexation No. 2022-05 is based on the conclusion that the project is consistent with General Plan land use policies directing development to occur in the City’sTier 2 Urban Development Boundary (UDB) through projects that promote concentric growth utilizing sites in close proximity to City services (i.e., sewer, water, police, and fire, etc.). Additionally, the subdivision is subject to City’sAgricultural Preservation Ordinance. This is discussed in greater detail in the Agricultural Preservation Ordinance section of the staff report below.

The annexation application is requesting to annex a property within the City’sGrowth Tier 2 boundary to facilitate development of the Pearl Woods Tentative Subdivision Map, which was approved with conditions by the Planning Commission on June 12, 2023. Upon annexation, the zoning designation for the 67.7-acre parcel will be R-1-5 (Single-family Residential 5,000 square foot minimum site area), Q-P (Quasi-Public), and O-S (Open Space) for the project site. The Pearl Woods Tentative Subdivision Map will subdivide the 67.7-acre parcel into a 273-lot single-family residential subdivision at a density of 4.03 dwelling units per acre (see Exhibit “A”).

The proposed single-family subdivision will be serviced by 60-foot wide public local streets containing full improvements (curb, gutter, parkway landscaping, sidewalks, and streetlights), sewer lines, storm drainage, and other public infrastructure, utilities, and services (i.e., electricity, gas, and water).

Primary access to the subdivision will be from Cherry Avenue, a local roadway, and McAuliff Street, a collector roadway. Both streets will be improved to their ultimate right-of-way width within the boundaries of the Pearl Woods subdivision. Improvements along the right-of-way include construction of curb, gutter, parkway landscaping, sidewalks, block wall, installation of park strip landscaping, streetlights, and undergrounding of utility lines. The street improvements associated with this subdivision are discussed in greater detail in the Cherry Avenue and McAuliff Street Improvements and Local Street Connectivity section of the staff report below.

The subdivision map will also create 16 lettered lots for Landscaping and Lighting District (LLD) purposes. The LLD lots will contain landscaping and block walls along McAuliff Street and portions of lots adjacent to interior street sides on the corner lots (i.e.: Lots 141 & 129) (see Exhibit “A”).

The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 12, 2023, to consider the annexation and tentative subdivision map request for the project site. The Planning Commission concluded that the annexation of the site is consistent with the Visalia General Plan, and specifically noted that the proposed annexation is consistent with General Plan Land Use Policies LU-P-21 and LU-P-55.

The Planning Commission’s recommendation and findings to support the annexation request are included in the resolution for the City Council’sconsideration. If the City Council adopts the resolution initiating the annexation, staff will prepare an annexation application and file it with the Tulare County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).

Background Discussion:

General Plan Consistency
The proposed 273-lot single-family residential subdivision on 67.7 acres is compatible with existing residential development adjacent to the area. The project is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-P-21 of the 2014 General Plan, which states that the city should “Allow annexation and development of residential, commercial, regional retail, and industrial land to occur within the Urban Development Boundary (Tier II) consistent with the City’sLand Use Diagram”. The proposed site is within the County of Tulare and is adjacent to developed sites to the north and west. Existing utility infrastructure (i.e., sewer, storm and water) can be provided to accommodate the project at buildout.

Visalia City Council Printed on 7/14/2023Page 2 of 7
powered by Legistar™
494
File #: 23-0267 Agenda Date: 7/17/2023 Agenda #: 5.
infrastructure (i.e., sewer, storm and water) can be provided to accommodate the project at buildout.

Further, the site is in the Urban Development Boundary (UDB) Tier 2, which allows for immediate development upon successful annexation. Visalia met the residential land use thresholds for expanding into the Tier 2 growth boundary in July 2021.

Furthermore, the project is consistent with Policy LU-P-55. The policy allows for residential development consistent with the Low Density Residential designation at a density range between two to ten dwelling units per gross acre. The proposed development will be developed at a residential density of 4.03 units per acre consistent with the Low Density Residential General Plan land use designation as well as the R-1-5 zoning district. The policy states: “this designation is intended to provide for single-family subdivisions.” Compatibility with the surrounding area is required by the General Plan in the decision to approve the proposed subdivision. The proposed subdivision meets all codified standards contained in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, as well as all General Plan policies pertaining to residential development. Staff finds that the proposed tentative subdivision map is compatible with the surrounding area and the Low Density Residential land use designation.

Housing Accountability Act (Government Code section 66589.5) The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) requires local agencies to approve housing developments that are consistent with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the housing development project’s application is determined to be complete. A local agency cannot disapprove a project or lower its density unless it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety, and there is no feasible way to mitigate or avoid the impact.

The project is consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and single-family residential development standards. The lots proposed within the Pearl Woods subdivision meet and/or exceed the minimum 5,000 square foot lot area. As depicted per the subdivision map, the average lot size is 5,250 square feet. The subdivision will also comply with the required setbacks and height restrictions per the R-1 standards. The developer is not seeking any concessions and/or deviations to the required setbacks.

Furthermore, the subdivision will be required to develop the local street network to provide connectivity to future growth areas and to the existing street network developed in the area. The subdivision will build the major street, McAliff Avenue, and the local streets to City standards.

Annexation Processing
The project proponents have filed the annexation application, which is required in order to annex the site into the City’s land use jurisdiction. The Annexation can be supported on the basis that the proposed use is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-P-21, which allows for the annexation and development of residential land to occur within the Urban Development Boundary (Tier 2) consistent with the City’sLand Use Diagram. The proposed site is within the County of Tulare and is adjacent to developed sites to the north and west. Existing utility infrastructure (i.e., sewer, storm and water) can be provided to accommodate the project at buildout. Cities can approve tentative maps prior to initiation by the City Council and prior to final approval of the annexation by the local agency formation commission, but cannot approve the final subdivision map until after the land is annexed and the annexation is recorded through the Tulare County Recorder.

Visalia City Council Printed on 7/14/2023Page 3 of 7
powered by Legistar™
495
File #: 23-0267 Agenda Date: 7/17/2023 Agenda #: 5.

City Services
City Services, including Police and Fire protection, will be provided to the project site upon annexation. Sanitary sewer service will be extended to the project site upon development, as will water service through the California Water Service Company. Upon annexation, the full complement of city services and programs will be available to future occupants of the project site.

Detachment for Service Area No. 1
The subject site is part of Tulare County Service Area No. 1. Services provided in Service Area No. 1 include domestic water and sewer. Detachment of the project area from Service Area No. 1 is required upon annexation as future development will receive domestic water and sanitary sewer services from the California Water Service Company and the City of Visalia, respectively.

Annexations submitted to LAFCO require that the City include a request to detach the annexed area from the County’s service area. Though detachments were previously an automatic process conducted as part of annexations, a 2009 law change now requires Cities to explicitly request detachment.

Pre-Annexation Agreement
The annexation will be subject to the terms of a Pre-Annexation Agreement which must be signed by the property owners requesting the annexation. The agreement is included as Exhibit “C”in the staff report.

City Council Districts
If the annexation area is approved, the parcel will be annexed into Voting District 2 per the Council Election Voting District Map.

Cherry Avenue and McAuliff Avenue Improvements and Local Street Connectivity The developer of the subdivision will be required to construct major street improvements along both South McAuliff Street and East Cherry Avenue. Improvements along the subdivision frontage for these major streets include improving these streets to their ultimate right-of-way design.

McAuliff Street is a designated 84-foot-wide collector roadway. Improvements along the right of way within the boundaries of the subdivision map include improving the street to its full width which will include curb, gutter, sidewalks, streetlights, block wall and landscaping. McAuliff Street pavement ends at Cherry Avenue however curb, gutter, sidewalks, streetlights, block wall and landscaping has already been installed along the Woodside Sousa Property Subdivision to the east. Additional landscaping frontage along McAuliff Street will be required to be dedicated as part of a Landscape and Lighting District which will be formed with the subdivision map. The Landscape and Lighting District lots are identified as outlots “G”,“I”,“J”,“K”and “M”of the Pearl Woods tentative subdivision map (see Exhibit “A”).The establishment of the district provides maintenance of the landscape lots, block walls, street pavement and street lighting. Also, as noted in the Engineering Division’sSite Plan Review comments, all new utilities that will service the residential subdivision will be placed underground.

Cherry Avenue is a 56-foot-wide local street. Full street improvements along Cherry Avenue include a street widening, new curb, gutter, parkway landscaping and new sidewalk along the south side of the roadway fronting the new development. The north side of the roadway has been improved as part of the improvements that were required with the residential subdivision to the north. In addition, as noted in the Engineering Division’sSite Plan Review comments, all new utilities required to service Visalia City Council Printed on 7/14/2023Page 4 of 7
powered by Legistar™
496
File #: 23-0267 Agenda Date: 7/17/2023 Agenda #: 5.
noted in the Engineering Division’sSite Plan Review comments, all new utilities required to service the residential subdivision will be required to be undergrounded.

Local Street Connectivity: The 273-lot subdivision is designed to comply with the City’sEngineering Improvement Standards “P-15 - Super Block Connectivity”. This improvement standard provides for access via the local street connectivity pattern within a superblock thereby reducing trips onto arterial and collector streets. The superblock connectivity design allows for interconnectivity between and within neighborhoods. The local street connection proposed within the 273-lot subdivision provides for the local street stub-out connection to a future Higgins Ranch subdivision located to the west of the project site which will be accessible via “E”Street as shown on Exhibit “A”.Additionally, the subdivision will connect to existing Rio Vista Street which stubs in the existing Woodside Sousa Property Subdivision to the north.

Agricultural Preservation Ordinance (Title 18 “Agricultural Land Preservation”) The 67.7-acre project site is located in the City’sTier II growth boundary and is designated as Prime Farmland as defined per the Tulare County Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Based on the projects location in Tier II and having a Prime Farmland designation, the development of this site is subject to the City’s recently adopted Agricultural Preservation Ordinance.

On May 1, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing to introduce Ordinance No. 2023-02, a request to adopt a new title and chapter to the Visalia Municipal Code referred to as Title 18 “Agricultural Land Preservation”, Chapter 18.04 “Agricultural Land Preservation Program”, to create an Agricultural Preservation Ordinance (APO) to implement Visalia General Plan Land Use Policy LU -P-34. The second reading of Ordinance No. 2023-02 was done on May 15, 2023, and the APO will take effect 30 days after the ordinance adoption.

The adoption of the Agricultural Preservation Ordinance (APO) is a necessary step for projects in the Tier II growth boundary to move forward. The purpose and intent of the ordinance is to implement the goals of the City of Visalia General Plan and address the conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance through the adoption of an agricultural land preservation program. In addition, the ordinance established a process for the required preservation of agricultural land through the acquisition of agricultural conservation easements or the payment of an in-lieu fee for projects subject to the provisions of this ordinance.

The developer of the project is subject to complying with the requirements of the adopted APO. The preserved land obligation shall be calculated at a ratio of one acre of preserved land for each acre of converted land. Converted land acreage shall be calculated by determining the applicable project acreage less the acreage of exclusions. In addition, the preserved land obligation, as established in Section 18.04.070(A) of the APO, shall be preserved through acquisition of an agricultural easement in accordance with Section 18.04.080, unless eligible for payment of an in-lieu fee in accordance with Section 18.04.090 of the APO.

Please note prior to issuance of any permit directly authorizing or resulting in disturbance to the project site, the preserved land obligation shall be satisfied when either the approved agricultural conservation easement has been recorded; or when the applicant has remitted the approved in-lieu fee to the qualified entity.

Planning Commission Public Hearing
At its meeting on June 12, 2023, the Planning Commission considered Annexation No. 2022-05 and Visalia City Council Printed on 7/14/2023Page 5 of 7
powered by Legistar™
497
File #: 23-0267 Agenda Date: 7/17/2023 Agenda #: 5.

At its meeting on June 12, 2023, the Planning Commission considered Annexation No. 2022-05 and Pearl Woods Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM) No. 5591.

There were no comments or concerns from members of the public at the meeting. So, based on the proposal and public testimony received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission approved the tentative subdivision map request, and found the annexation to be consistent with the policies and goals of the Visalia General Plan. The resolution recommending approval of the annexation to the City Council and the Tentative Subdivision Map were unanimously approved via a 4-0 vote by the Planning Commission with one commissioner absent.

Fiscal Impact:

Future development of the property will require the developer to pay development impact fees which include Transportation, Trunk Line Capacity, Strom Drainage Acquisition, Park Acquisition and Development, Waterways Acquisition, Public Safety, and Groundwater Overdraft Mitigation.

Prior Council Action: None.

Committee/Commission Review and Action:

The Planning Commission held a public hearing for the proposed project on June 12, 2023 and approved the tentative subdivision map and found the annexation consistent with the Visalia General Plan by a 4-0 vote with one commissioner absent.

Other: N/A
Alternatives:

The City Council may, in lieu of the recommended motion specified above, consider any of the following alternatives:

1. Deny the Annexation; or

2. Refer the matter back to the Planning Commission; or,

3. Continue the matter to a future City Council hearing for additional information.

Recommended Motion (and Alternative Motions if expected):

I move to approve Resolution No. 2023-30, adopting Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30; and
I move to approve Resolution No. 2023-31, to initiate proceedings for Annexation No. 2022-05, authorize the detachment of property from County Service Area No. 1, and authorize the City Manager to enter into a Pre-Annexation Agreement between the City of Visalia and the property owners...end
Environmental Assessment Status:

An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for the proposed project.

CEQA Review:

An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for the proposed project. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30 disclosed that environmental impacts are Visalia City Council Printed on 7/14/2023Page 6 of 7
powered by Legistar™
498
File #: 23-0267 Agenda Date: 7/17/2023 Agenda #: 5.

Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30 disclosed that environmental impacts are determined to be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation to address significant impacts to the following resources:

1. One (1) mitigation measure pertaining to Agricultural and Forestry Resources to mitigate impacts for loss of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance on a 1:1 ratio.

2. Nine (9) mitigation measures pertaining to Biological Resources to reduce impacts of the Project to special-status wildlife species (i.e., Swainson's Hawk, nesting Raptors, and Migratory Birds, Bats, and Northern California legless lizard).

3. Two (2) mitigation measures pertaining to Cultural Resources to reduce the impacts of the Project on the potential of exposing historical or archaeological materials during construction.

4. One (1) mitigation measure pertaining to Geology and Soils to address whether paleontological resources be encountered.

5. Two (2) mitigation measures pertaining to Tribal and Cultural Resources to address the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe’sconcerns regarding Tribal history and knowledge of the area.

Attachments:

1. Resolution No. 2023-30 certifying Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30

2. Resolution No. 2023-31 initiating the Proceedings for Annexation No. 2022-05 and Detachment from County Service Area No. 1.

3. Exhibit “A” - Pearl Woods Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5591

4. Exhibit “B” - Annexation Plan and Legal Description

5. Exhibit “C” - Pre-Annexation Agreement

6. Exhibit “D” - Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30

7. Exhibit “E” - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-30 recommending initiation of Annexation No. 2022-05

8. Exhibit “F” - Planning Commission Staff Report

9. General Plan Land Use Map

10. Zoning Map

11. Aerial Map

12. Location Map
Visalia City Council Printed on 7/14/2023Page 7 of 7
powered by Legistar™
499
Resolution No. 2023-30
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-30

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

VISALIA, ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
NO. 2023-30, WHICH EVALUATES ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
FOR ANNEXATION NO. 202 2-05 AND PEARL WOODS
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 5591

WHEREAS, the project consisting of Annexation No. 2022-05 and Pearl Woods Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5591 (hereinafter “Project”) is a request to annex a 67.7-acre parcel into the City Limits of Visalia in order to facilitate the subdivision of said 67.7-acre parcel into a 273-lot single-family residential subdivision. The Project is located in between South Lovers Lane and Road 148, just south of East Cherry Avenue (APN: 127-030-038); and,

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia, after t en (10) days published notice, held a public hearing before said Council on July 17, 2023; and,

WHEREAS, on the basis of this Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended; and

WHEREAS, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project were prepared and noticed for review and comment for 20 days beginning on May 11, 2023; and,

WHEREAS, the City of Visalia did not receive any comments on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration; and,

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia considered the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and found that the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration contain and reflect the independent judgment of the City of Visalia.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Visalia Environmental Guidelines.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Visalia hereby finds, on the basis of the whole record before it, that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and he reby adopts Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30. The documents and other material which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the decisions based are located at the office of the City Planner, 315 East Acequia Avenue, Visalia, California, 93291.

500
Resolution No. 2023-31

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-31

A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY OF

VISALIA REQUESTING THE CITY OF VISALIA TO INITIATE

PROCEEDINGS FOR FILING WITH THE TULARE COUNTY

LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION
ANNEXATION NO. 2022-05 AND DETACHMENT OF
PROPERTY FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 1,
PERTAINING TO ONE PARCEL TOTALING 67.7 ACRES.

THE SITE WOULD BE ZO NED R-1-5 (SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL 5,000 SQ UARE FOOT MINIMUM ), QP
(QUASI-PUBLIC), AND O -S (OPEN SPAC E) WHICH IS

CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN LAND US E
DESIGNATION. THE SIT E IS LOCATED IN BETWEEN
SOUTH LOVERS LANE AND ROAD 148, JUST SOUTH OF
CHERRY AVENUE (APN: 127-030-038)

WHEREAS, Annexation No. 2022-05 is a proposed annexation of a total of 67.7 acres into the city limits (“Project”). The property is located in between South Lovers Lane and Road 148, just south of East Cherry Avenue (APN: 127-030-038); and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia desires to initiate proceedings for annexation to said city of territory described on the attached legal description and map herein as Exhibit “B”; and

WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Visalia desires to annex said property to the City of Visalia for the following reasons: The annexation wil l contribute to and facilitate orderly growth and development of both the City and the territory proposed to be annexed; will facilitate and contribute to the proper and orderly layout, design and construction of streets, gutters, sanitary and storm sewers and drainage facilities, both within the City and within the territory proposed to be annexed; and will provide and facilitate proper overall planning and zoning of lands and subdivision of lands in said City and said territory in a manner most conducive of the welfare of said City and said territory; and

WHEREAS, this proposal is made pursuant to the Cortese -Knox-Hertzburg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, commencing with Section 56000 of the Government Code of the State of California; and

WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed is uninhabited per Government Code Section 56046; and

WHEREAS, the property proposed to be annexed is adjacent to City Limits; and

501
Resolution No. 2023-31

WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed is located in Voting District 2 as identified in the Election District Map adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2022, per Resolution No. 2022-11; and

WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Visalia, after a ten day public notification period, held a public hearing on July 17, 2023, and found the project consistent with the General Plan; and

WHEREAS, the City Council hereby makes the following findings with regard to the project:

1. That the Annexation is consistent w ith the intent of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

2. The subject property is within Tier 2 Urban Development Boundary as defined by the City of Visalia General Plan and is designated Low Density Residential , Parks/Recreation and Conservation by the General Plan Land Use Map.

3. That the proposed Annexation , which changes 67.7 acres of County/ AE-20 (Exclusive Agriculture, 20 Acre Minimum) zone to R-1-5 (Single-family Residential 5,000 square foot minimum site area), Q-P (Quasi-Public), and O-S (Open Space), will not impose new land uses or development that will adversely affect the subject site or adjacent properties.

4. That the property is located within Voting District 2 per the Council Election Voting District Map.

5. That an Initial Study was prepared for this project, consistent with CEQA, which disclosed that environmental impacts are determined to be not significant and that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30, is hereby adopted.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Visalia requests the following actions:

1. Application is hereby made to the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), County of Tulare, State of California, for an annexation of territory illustrated in the map attached as Exhibit “B”.

2. Proceedings shall be taken for this a nnexation proposal pursuant to Title 5, Division 3, Part 3 of the California Government Code and other relevant provisions of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000.

502
Resolution No. 2023-31

3. In conjunction with the proceedings being taken for this annexation proposal, application is also hereby being made to the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission, County of Tulare, State of California, for detachment from County Service Area No. 1.

4. The Council hereby request s waiver of the c onducting authority proceedings in accordance with Government Code Section 56663(c).

5. Upon annexation, the territory shall be zoned R-1-5 (Single-family Residential 5,000 square foot minimum site area), Q-P (Quasi-Public), and O-S (Open Space) consistent with the pre-zoning designated by the General Plan Land Use Map.

6. Upon annexation, the territory shall be assigned to Voting District 2 and the Election District Map adopted on February 22, 2022, per Resolution No. 2022-11 shall be amended to reflect the new territory assigned to Voting District 2.

7. The City Clerk of the City of Visalia is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Executive Officer of Tulare County LAFCO.

8. The applicant(s) shall enter into a Pre -Annexation Agreement with the City which memorializes the required fees, policies, and other conditions applicable to the annexation. The Pre-Annexation Agreement is attached herein as Exhibit “C”. The agreement is subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney a nd subject to clerical and form modifications as approved by the City Manager. 503
TT
T
o □ □ □ x
o
oo
ox
x x x
o x
OE
OE
OE

OEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
133132131130 248247246245244
141
135136137
134 221220219226225224223222130757473727170696867
26494827472846293045443143324233344140353936 6665
1219 11 318 1017 916 815 722 14 621 13 520 424
3837 6364
50 55
62 54
61 53
60 52
59585756
517625
23 2
94 115
127126125124123122121120119118117
101781007999808198978296839584859386928791889089 116
103
11411311211111010910810710610510477102128
184165164 158157156155154153152151150149148147146145144143168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183166160161162163 142159167 197200185 202187188 205190191192194195196199201186 203204189193 270 254269 261 253268 260 252267 259
212213214215216239243217236235234233232231 242241 206207208209210211218 198
140
249238240
266 258265 257264 256263 255262
138
237
271
B
129273272 251250
A
139
1 227
L
H
J
E
C D
P
G
MF
O
I
N K 230228229
4/4/2022 3:42 PM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\340 Sheet Sets\08_TTM\01 COVER SHEET.dwg -Tonia Holmes

PREPARED BY
455 W FIR AVENUECLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93611559/449-2700 FAX 559/449-2715https://provostandpritchard.com/ PROJECT INFO. ·APN: 127-030-038·SITE AREA: 67.70 AC·GENERAL PLAN: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL·CURRENT ZONING: AE-20·PROPOSED ZONING: R-1-5·EXISTING USE: AGRICULTURE/VACANT·PROPOSED USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION,PARKS/RECREATION AND RESERVOIRS/CANALS.·SITE DRAINAGE: DRAIN TO PROPOSED ON-SITE REGIONAL BASIN.·TRASH COLLECTION: CITY OF VISALIA·PROPOSED SEWERAGE: CITY OF VISALIA PUBLIC WORKS.CONNECT TO EXISTING MAIN IN MCAULIFF STREET AND CHERRYAVENUE.·WATER: CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE. CONNECT TO EXISTINGMAIN IN RIO VISTA STREET AND CHERRY AVENUE.·FIRE PROTECTION: CITY OF VISALIA FIRE DEPARTMENT·FLOOD ZONE: ZONE AE & X·TOTAL LOTS: 273·LOT AREA: 5,000 MIN/ 8,190 MAX·DENSITY: 4.04 UNITS/GROSS AC·GROSS AREA: 67.70 AC. NET AREA: 34.08 AC·PARK BASIN AREA: 8.96 AC. PERCENTAGE OF AREA DEDICATEDTO COMMUNITY PARK COMP. TO NET AREA: 26.3%·REMAINDER PARCEL AREA: 5.07 AC·ZONING SETBACKS FOR R-1-5:FRONT:15 FEET FOR LIVING SPACE AND SIDE LOADING GARAGEFRONT/CORNER:22 FEET FOR FRONT-LOADING GARAGECORNER:10 FEETREAR:25 FEETSIDE:5 FEET PROPERTY OWNER PEARL WOODSDR HORTON419 W. MURRAY AVE.VISALIA, CA 93291

SITE MAP
RD 148

S MCAULIFF AVE

VICINITY MAP

E WALNUT AVE

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAPPEARL WOODSVISALIA, CALIFORNIA 1ST STREET

N TEAKWOODSTREET
2ND STREET
3RD STREET

MCAULIFF STREET
5TH STREET
6TH STREET

A STREET

B STREET

C STREETD STREET
0100200400SCALE IN FEET
PROPOSED PARK BASIN8.96 AC

CHERRY AVENUE
4TH STREET
7TH STREET
DATE:01/20/2022JOB NO.:0159421003
SIMONSTREET R.R. TRACKS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PARCEL BASED UPON THE PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT FROM FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY, ORDER NO. 0131-624802ala, DATED JUNE 10, 2021, FOR APN: 127-030-038:REAL PROPERTY IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY OF TULARE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:PARCEL 1:THAT PORTION OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF TULARE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF THE SURVEY OFSAID LAND ON FILE IN THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AT THE DATE OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE PATENT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3, THENCE EAST 80 RODS, THENCE NORTH 45-1/2 RODS, THENCE WEST 80 RODS, THENCE SOUTH 45-1/2 RODS TOTHE POINT OF BEGINNING.EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE CITY OF VISALIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION RECORDED OCTOBER 9, 2006, FILE NO. 2006-0103968, OFFICIAL RECORDS.PARCEL 2: (APN: PORTION 127-030-038-000)THAT PORTION OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF TULARE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF THE SURVEYOF SAID LAND ON FILE IN THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AT THE DATE OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE PATENT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3, THENCE NORTH 45.40 RODS, THENCE WEST 80 RODS, THENCE SOUTH 45.40 RODS, THENCE EAST 80 RODS TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING.EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION WHICH WAS CONVEYED TO PACIFIC LIGHT AND POWER CORPORATION BY A DEED DATED JUNE 22, 1916, RECORDED JULY 8, 1916 IN BOOK 238, PAGE 174 OF DEEDS,RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY OF TULARE.ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE CITY OF VISALIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION RECORDED OCTOBER 9, 2006, FILE NO. 2006-0103968, OFFICIAL RECORDS.PARCEL 3: (APN: PORTION 127-030-038-000)THAT PORTION OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF TULARE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF THE SURVEYOF SAID LAND ON FILE IN THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AT THE DATE OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE PATENT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3,EXCEPTING THEREFROM FROM ALL OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY, THOSE PORTIONS THEREOF LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY'S RIGHT OF WAY, AS SAME IS NOWESTABLISHED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY.ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE CITY OF VISALIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION RECORDED OCTOBER 9, 2006, FILE NO. 2006-0103968, OFFICIAL RECORDS.

CAMERON CREEKRIO VISTA STREET
ROAD 148

E STREET
504

SSFDSSS
S
TT
T
N89°29'27"W 2643.33'
N1°26'00"E 2630.02'
S89°20'39"E 2642.98'S89°20'38"E 2642.36'
S1°31'04"W 2617.37'
N89°28'22"W 2638.32'
N1°28'22"E 2620.31'S89°25'35"E 2640.34'S89°26'08"E 2643.17'S1°25'40"W 2623.25'N1°25'50"E 2626.63' 1320.17'1320.17'1321.58'1321.58' 1307.19'
1319.44'
1321.49' 1321.49' 2642.36' 2642.36'
1303.79'
1313.57'
1319.16' 1319.16'1321.67' 1321.67'
1305.91'
1317.34'
1304.85'
1315.45'
1308.47'
1321.55'
N89°07'56"W 430.00'
S1°31'04"W 331.21'R=43089.56'L=286.31'Δ=0°22'51"
605.75'
527.06'

1.65'
420.00'N1°31'04"E 1303.79'

16.42'
312.79'
N89°28'22"W 1319.75'N1°28'22"E 1304.85'N1°25'40"E 1148.74' N88°28'01"W 252.15'S1°31'59"W 50.00'N88°28'01"W 1400.00'N1°31'59"E 50.00'N88°28'01"W 269.70'

15.92' 15.34'
577.85'
156.01'
N89°28'22"W 1319.75'
N1°25'40"E 28.00'S89°25'35"E 185.14'S89°26'08"E 1185.37' N1°25'50"E 1138.40'
S89°26'08"E 16.64'R=272.00'L=54.49'Δ=11°28'42"R=328.00'L=65.71'Δ=11°28'42" N88°42'17"W 232.05'N1°25'40"E 129.17'S89°28'22"E 1319.16'N1°25'50"E 152.79'S89°29'27"E 1321.67' 1148.74'

28.00'
N1°25'40"E 1305.91'
129.17'
N89°25'35"W 1319.72'N89°25'35"W 1319.72'

1.65'
420.00'N1°31'04"E 1303.79'

16.42'
312.79'
N89°28'22"W 1319.75'N1°28'22"E 1304.85'N1°25'40"E 1148.74' N88°28'01"W 252.15'S1°31'59"W 50.00'N88°28'01"W 1400.00'N1°31'59"E 50.00'N88°28'01"W 269.70'

28.00'
N1°25'40"E 1305.91'
129.17'
N89°25'35"W 1319.72'N89°25'35"W 1319.72'
3/18/2022 4:44 PM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\340 Sheet Sets\08_TTM\07 EXISTING PARCELS.dwg -Tonia Holmes DATE:01/20/2022JOB NO.:0159421003
455 W FIR AVENUECLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93611559/449-2700 FAX 559/449-2715https://provostandpritchard.com/ LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PARCEL BASED UPON THE PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT FROM FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY, ORDER NO. 0131-624802ala, DATED JUNE 10, 2021, FOR APN: 127-030-038:REAL PROPERTY IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY OF TULARE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:PARCEL 1:THAT PORTION OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF TULARE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF THE SURVEY OFSAID LAND ON FILE IN THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AT THE DATE OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE PATENT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3, THENCE EAST 80 RODS, THENCE NORTH 45-1/2 RODS, THENCE WEST 80 RODS, THENCE SOUTH 45-1/2 RODS TOTHE POINT OF BEGINNING.EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE CITY OF VISALIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION RECORDED OCTOBER 9, 2006, FILE NO. 2006-0103968, OFFICIAL RECORDS.PARCEL 2: (APN: PORTION 127-030-038-000)THAT PORTION OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF TULARE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF THE SURVEYOF SAID LAND ON FILE IN THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AT THE DATE OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE PATENT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3, THENCE NORTH 45.40 RODS, THENCE WEST 80 RODS, THENCE SOUTH 45.40 RODS, THENCE EAST 80 RODS TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING.EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION WHICH WAS CONVEYED TO PACIFIC LIGHT AND POWER CORPORATION BY A DEED DATED JUNE 22, 1916, RECORDED JULY 8, 1916 IN BOOK 238, PAGE 174 OF DEEDS,RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY OF TULARE.ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE CITY OF VISALIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION RECORDED OCTOBER 9, 2006, FILE NO. 2006-0103968, OFFICIAL RECORDS.PARCEL 3: (APN: PORTION 127-030-038-000)THAT PORTION OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF TULARE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF THE SURVEYOF SAID LAND ON FILE IN THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AT THE DATE OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE PATENT THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3,EXCEPTING THEREFROM FROM ALL OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY, THOSE PORTIONS THEREOF LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY'S RIGHT OF WAY, AS SAME IS NOWESTABLISHED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY.ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE CITY OF VISALIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION RECORDED OCTOBER 9, 2006, FILE NO. 2006-0103968, OFFICIAL RECORDS.

LOVERS LANE

WALNUT AVENUE

CHERRY AVENUEMCAULIFF STREET
U.P.R.R. U.P.R.R.

SIMON STREET

CAMERON CREEK

CITY OF VISALIA

COUNTY OF TULARE

CITY OF VISALIA

COUNTY OF TULARE

CITY OF VISALIA

COUNTY OF TULARE

CITY OF VISALIACOUNTY OF TULARE
505
1417,095 SF
136
1376,246 SF
1417,095 SF
136
1376,246 SF
1845,726 SF
1406,246 SF
1156,312 SF
121
1205,250 SF
1195,250 SF
1185,250 SF
1175,250 SF
9584
855,250 SF
935,250 SF865,250 SF
925,250 SF
1585,100 SF1575,100 SF1565,100 SF1555,100 SF1545,100 SF1535,100 SF1525,100 SF1515,100 SF1505,100 SF1495,100 SF1485,100 SF1475,100 SF1465,100 SF1455,100 SF1445,100 SF1435,100 SF 1685,100 SF1695,100 SF1705,100 SF1715,100 SF1725,100 SF1735,100 SF1745,100 SF1755,100 SF1765,100 SF1775,100 SF1785,100 SF1795,100 SF1805,100 SF1815,100 SF1825,100 SF1835,100 SF1666,548 SF 1605,725 SF1615,502 SF1625,503 SF
875,250 SF
915,250 SF885,250 SF
69 685,250 SF
675,250 SF
435,250 SF325,250 SF
425,250 SF335,250 SF
345,250 SF415,250 SF
405,250 SF355,250 SF
395,250 SF365,250 SF
945,250 SF
665,250 SF
655,250 SF
1656,301 SF1648,190 SF
1638,114 SF
E
E

DSSFDEDSEDSEEDSED
E
D
S
o

W W W W W W W W W W W W
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SS
SS
SD
SS SS
SS
SS
SD
SD
110+00111+00112+00113+00114+00115+00116+00117+00118+00119+00120+00121+00122+00122+87 29+90
25+00
26+00
27+00
28+00
29+00
57+32
55+00
56+00
57+00
37+32
35+00
36+00
37+0017+32
14+00
15+00
16+00
17+00
76+00
77+00
78+00
79+00
80+00
81+00
81+50
47+32
45+00
46+00
47+00
124.93'
124.93'

50.48'

18.00'53.54'

50.00'

43.88'

50.00'

49.52'
60'30'
60'30'
R60'

50.00'

55.00'L=93.33' 55.00'38.47'
100.01'
L=55.41'7.12'63.00'48.22'28.07'

80.03'

28.50'

40.49'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'

62.01' 57.01'

45.50'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'43.52'28.07'

80.01'

28.50'

42.00'28.50'85.01'84.99'28.10'

42.00'62.01'105.01'105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'50.00'

50.00'

50.00'50.00'

50.00'

85.01'85.01'28.50' 28.07'

42.00'62.00'42.00'105.01'105.01'50.00' 50.00'

50.00' 50.00'

50.00'

50.00'50.00' 50.00'50.00'

50.00'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'

28.50'42.00'

50.00'

50.00' 50.00'

50.00'

42.00'

28.07'85.01'85.01'62.00'105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'

50.00'50.00' 50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'

50.00' 50.00'

50.00'50.00'

50.00' 50.00'

41.95'62.00'42.00'

28.07'28.57'85.01'85.01' 97.23'
124.92'

57.84'40.29'14.71'48.29'60.00'

42.47'
60'30' 60'30' 60'30'
1675,925 SF
625,250 SF
615,250 SF
605,250 SF
595,250 SF
1596,076 SF
1386,277 SF
386,311 SF376,310 SF 636,310 SF646,310 SF 906,310 SF896,310 SF 1166,310 SF 1145,252 SF
1135,252 SF
1125,252 SF
1115,252 SF
1425,576 SF100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'90.01'160.02'90.01' 252.42'

6.71'110.64'
136.19'

48.52'14.04'

14.25'14.25'

80.03'100.03'100.05'100.06'
100.02'
105.06'105.01'
105.05'
105.05'
105.05'
105.04'105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01' 124.92'
124.92'
16'
1396,216 SF
O
G
H
I
3/18/2022 3:46 PM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\340 Sheet Sets\08_TTM\2 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP.dwg -Michael McConnell

PREPARED BY
DATE:01/20/2022JOB NO.:0159421003
455 W FIR AVENUECLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93611559/449-2700 FAX 559/449-2715https://provostandpritchard.com/

SIMON STREET

A STREET
3RD STREET
2ND STREET
1ST STREET 4TH STREET
03060 120SCALE IN FEET
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 03
5TH STREET

TEAKWOOD CT
RISH
RI
SHSH
SH
506
1335,386 SF
1325,123 SF
1315,006 SF
1304,996 SF
1355,991 SF
1366,218 SF
1345,690 SF1345,690 SF
1355,991 SF
1366,218 SF
1335,386 SF
1325,123 SF
1315,006 SF
1304,996 SF1275,250 SF
1265,250 SF
1255,250 SF
1245,250 SF
1235,250 SF
1225,250 SF
1215,250 SF
1015,250 SF785,250 SF
1005,250 SF795,250 SF
995,250 SF805,250 SF
815,250 SF985,250 SF
975,250 SF825,250 SF
965,250 SF835,250 SF
955,250 SF845,250 SF
755,250 SF
745,250 SF
735,250 SF
725,250 SF
715,250 SF
705,250 SF
695,250 SF
265,250 SF495,250 SF
485,250 SF275,250 SF
475,250 SF285,250 SF
465,250 SF295,250 SF
305,250 SF455,250 SF
445,250 SF315,250 SF
5,250 SF5,250 SF
125,993 SF195,640 SF 116,027 SF 35,868 SF185,718 SF 106,060 SF175,779 SF 96,093 SF165,825 SF 86,126 SF155,871 SF 76,158 SF225,425 SF 145,918 SF 66,191 SF215,484 SF 135,960 SF 56,224 SF205,562 SF 46,128 SF 245,623 SF

OEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
E
OE
OE OE
OE
OE OE

OE OE OE OE OE OE
20+00
21+00
22+00
23+00
24+00
212+62
200+00201+00202+00203+00204+00205+00206+00207+00208+00209+00210+00211+00212+0050+00 51+00
52+00
53+00
54+00
30+00
31+00
32+00
33+00
34+00
10+00
11+00
12+00
13+00
14+00
70+00
71+00
72+00
73+00
74+00
75+00
76+00
40+00
41+00
42+00
43+00
44+00
300+00
122.79'
116.81'
110.78'
104.69'
100.75'

99.91'

99.92'

84.63'78.08'

43.28'

50.00'

40.34'21.26'

77.78 50.00'
L=41.34'

41.57'

45.86'
L=8.80'
L=50.17'

50.00'
L=39.40'

50.38'2.06'

50.00'
6030
6030
4284
L=7.08'
6030 6030 6030 6030

40.39'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00' 107.55'112.49'117.62'122.35'121.71'121.07'120.43'119.79'119.14'118.49'117.84'117.19'116.48'115.58'114.68'113.77'112.87'111.36'109.83'108.30'106.77'106.05'105.39'

51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'51.00'

40.00'60.00'40.00'

50.00'50.00'50.00'

40.00'

50.00'

50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'

50.00'

50.00'50.00'

40.00'60.00'85.01'85.01'28.07' 28.50'28.50'85.01'85.01'28.07'105.01'105.01' 105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01' 105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'105.01' 40.00'50.00'

50.00'

50.00'50.00'50.00'

50.00'50.00'

50.00'50.00'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'

50.00'

60.00'28.07'85.01'85.01'28.50'40.00'

50.00'

50.00' 50.00'50.00'

50.00'

60.00'40.00'

50.00'

50.00'50.00'

50.00'

40.00'28.07'85.01'85.01'28.50'
105.04'105.01'
105.01'105.03'
105.03'
105.03'
105.02'
105.02'
105.02'105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
105.01'
506,100 SF 776,100 SF1026,100 SF 1286,100 SF
555,250 SF
545,250 SF
535,250 SF
525,250 SF
5,250 SF
575,250 SF
565,250 SF
516,100 SF766,100 SF256,100 SF
235,392 SF 25,520 SF
1036,100 SF
1105,251 SF
1095,251 SF
1085,251 SF
1075,251 SF
1065,251 SF
1055,250 SF
1045,250 SF
R60'
1295,341 SF
R750'
L=45.45' 6.79' 14.04'

92.48'
I
15,241 SF
500+89.42500+50.00
L=49.71'

29.6329.99
J
N
F
I
L
M
K
4/5/2022 10:13 AM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\340 Sheet Sets\08_TTM\03 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP.dwg -Tonia Holmes

PREPARED BY
455 W FIR AVENUECLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93611559/449-2700 FAX 559/449-2715https://provostandpritchard.com/ 3RD STREET2ND STREET

B STREET
1ST STREET

MCAULIFF STREET
4TH STREET
03060 120SCALE IN FEET
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 04
5TH STREET
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 02
DATE:01/20/2022JOB NO.:0159421003
SH
SH SH
BT
BT

E STREET

C STREET
TT

TT TT TT TT TT
507
D
o
o o o o x x

OEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOE
OE
OE
OESS
2485,200 SF2475,200 SF2465,200 SF2455,200 SF2445,200 SF 82+60
80+00
81+00
82+00
92+61
90+00
91+00
92+00
412+16400+00401+00402+00403+00404+00405+00406+00407+00408+00409+00410+00411+00412+00 104+01
100+00
101+00
102+00
103+00
104+00
313+72301+00302+00303+00304+00305+00306+00307+00308+00309+00310+00311+00312+00313+00 100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'80.10'

28.28'42.96'53.00'53.00'53.00'53.00'

60.00'50.00'50.00'50.00' 100.00'100.00'

28.29'

80.09'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'

53.00'53.00'53.00'53.00'53.00'53.00'45.53'

28.28'

80.00'
100.00'100.00'
100.00'

50.59'24.64'
165.62'58.71'50.76'50.76'50.76'50.77'50.76'50.77'50.77'50.77'60.00'

28.28'

80.00' 100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'

31.46'58.71'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'41.23' 100.00'108.13' 100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.01'100.01'100.01'100.01'100.01'100.01'

53.00' 31.46'
100.00'
2215,000 SF2205,000 SF2195,000 SF

40.00'50.00'50.00'50.00' 28.28'

80.00'

28.28'50.00'14.93' 50.00'50.00'56.00'38.65'
L=75.95'
100.00'100.00'41.51'53.00'62.20'
6030
6030
6030
R52'
2215,000 SF2205,000 SF2195,000 SF2265,600 SF2255,000 SF2245,000 SF2235,000 SF2225,000 SF 2485,200 SF2475,200 SF2465,200 SF2455,200 SF2445,200 SF 2685,000 SF 2605,000 SF 2525,000 SF2675,000 SF 2595,000 SF2665,000 SF 2585,000 SF2655,000 SF 2575,000 SF2645,000 SF 2565,000 SF2635,000 SF 2555,000 SF2625,000 SF 1976,508 SF2005,300 SF1856,119 SF 2025,300 SF1875,300 SF1885,300 SF 2055,300 SF1905,300 SF1915,300 SF1925,300 SF1945,300 SF 2125,200 SF2135,200 SF2145,200 SF2155,200 SF2165,200 SF 2395,200 SF
1955,300 SF1966,254 SF 1995,300 SF2015,300 SF1865,300 SF 2035,300 SF2045,300 SF1895,300 SF 1935,300 SF 2435,200 SF
2175,800 SF
2365,000 SF2355,000 SF2345,000 SF2335,000 SF2325,000 SF2315,000 SF 2425,200 SF2415,200 SF 2065,994 SF2075,200 SF2085,200 SF2095,200 SF2105,200 SF2115,200 SF2185,800 SF 1985,300 SF
2705,000 SF 2545,000 SF2695,000 SF 2615,000 SF 2535,000 SF 2495,871 SF2385,923 SF
B
2405,200 SF

52.00' 52.00'

59.94'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'52.00'40.00'

50.77' 50.76'100.00'100.00'100.00'

50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'40.00'

80.00'
100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'101.26'84.93'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'L=77.55' 134.14'

33.22'L=26.74'
L=13.88'
L=89.99' L=31.27'
L=40.78' 50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00' 50.00'50.00'50.46'50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'40.52' 50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00' 50.00'50.00'

99.80'86.81'

64.89'
338.50'
L=86.43'15.22'
100.01'100.01'100.01'100.01'

50.00'50.00'50.00'16.81'

50.00'50.00'50.00'50.00'56.00'58.01' 100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00'100.00' 100.00'

53.00'53.00'
100.00'100.00'

53.00'53.00'
100.00'

58.10'13.27'L=52.88'
2375,800 SF
2715,686 SF2735,983 SF2725,508 SF

39.9789.6 50' MIN

52.21 60

66.89' 101.65'69.40'56.94'

55.00'58.52'58.33'55.14' 65.75
2505,500 SF2515,000 SF
A
2275,387 SF
L=40.63' L=54.99'
L=22.55'
L=18.00'L=116.14'50.00'
2305,021 SF2285,812 SF2295,267 SF
R=300.00'L=1216.07'
R=200.00'
L=400.53'
298.97'
4/4/2022 1:33 PM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\340 Sheet Sets\08_TTM\04 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP.dwg -Tonia Holmes

PREPARED BY
455 W FIR AVENUECLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93611559/449-2700 FAX 559/449-2715https://provostandpritchard.com/ 7TH STREET

B STREET

D STREET
03060 120SCALE IN FEET
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 05
6TH STREET
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 03
DATE:01/20/2022JOB NO.:0159421003

RIO VISTA STREET
SH
SH SH
SHSH

TO BE DEEDICATED TOCALWATER FORWATER SUPPLYPURPOSES
TR
TR
508
T
T
T
E
x x x
o o o o
o
oo
ooooooo o
o
o
o
o
x
x
x
x
x x x x x x x x x
o
ooo
o o
x x x x
x
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE

OEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOE
OE
OE
OE
OE
o o o o o o o o o o o o
oooooo o
o o o o o
50' MIN
80'
C
D
3/18/2022 3:49 PM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\340 Sheet Sets\08_TTM\05 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP.dwg -Michael McConnell

PREPARED BY
455 W FIR AVENUECLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93611559/449-2700 FAX 559/449-2715https://provostandpritchard.com/ PROPOSED PARK BASIN8.96 AC
03060 120SCALE IN FEET
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 04
DATE:01/20/2022JOB NO.:0159421003

EXISTING HOME SITE ASDESIGNATED REMAINDER

SCE MAINTENANCE YARD

GENERALPLANCLASS IBIKE TRAIL
ROAD 148
509
E

EDSSFDEDSEDSEEDSEDE
D
S
TT
T
E
E
o
W W W
x
o
oo
ox
x x x
o x
o o o o
OE
OE
OE

OEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOEOE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE

SSSD SD
SD
EE

OE OE OE OE OEOE OE OE OE OEOE OE OE
o o o
oo o o133132131130 248247246245244
141
135136137
134 221220219226225224223222134
141
135136137
133132131130
197185187188190191192194
217236235234233232231 242241218
198
184
215216239
140115
127126125124123122121120119118117
10178100799980819897829683958485938692
158157156155154153152151150149148147146145144143168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183166160161162 213214
195196186189193
879188
757473727170696867
26494827472846293045443143324233344140353936
946665
165
12 27019 11 3 269 26118 10 268 26017 9 267 259
164
16 8 266 25815 7 265 25722 14 6 26421 13 5 26320 4 26224 163
238240
167
62616059
159
138
3837 6364 9089 116114113112111
142
139
50 55545352
585756
517625 77102128129103
110109108107106105104
2123
212243 206207208209210211249
254253252256255
237
271273272 250251
227
200202205199201203204A
B C P
D
E
L
M
I J
H
G
N
O
F
K 230228229
3/29/2022 3:24 PM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\340 Sheet Sets\08_TTM\06 PHASING BOUNDARIES.dwg -Tonia Holmes

PREPARED BY
DATE:01/20/2022JOB NO.:0159421003
455 W FIR AVENUECLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93611559/449-2700 FAX 559/449-2715https://provostandpritchard.com/

A STREET
3RD STREET2ND STREET1ST STREET4TH STREET
0100200400SCALE IN FEET
5TH STREET

C STREET

MCAULIFF STREET
6TH STREET

RIO VISTA STREET
7TH STREET

B STREET

D STREET

E STREET
LEGENDFENCED BASIN DESIGNED FOR 10-YEAR CAPACITY100-YEAR BASIN CAPACITYPARK AREA OUTSIDE OF BASINCLASS I BIKE TRAILAE ZONE LIMITPHASE 1 - 101 LOTS (106 - 5 FOR TEMP TURNAROUNDS)PHASE 2 - 89 LOTSPHASE 3 - 83 LOTS (78 + 5 FROM P1 TEMP TURNAROUNDS) PROJECT INFO. SITE AREA: 67.70 ACTOTAL LOTS: 273

N TEAKWOOD STREETMCAULIFF STREETSIMON STREET
NOTE PHASE 1 WOULD REQUIRE A TEMPORARY BASIN OR TEMPORARYSTORM DRAIN EASEMENT TO REGIONAL BASIN LOCATION. 510
2%2%2%2%
56' 7'7'
AA

SECTION A-A

CONCRETE
56'7' 7'6"

RAISED INTERSECTIONSPEED HUMP
0FEET3 6

LIBRARY FOLDER NAME
7' 10' 7'

CONCRETE
6"
6"RECTANGULAR TUBINGSEE CITY-STANDARD D-20(WHERE NECESSARY) 7' 10' 7'
2%2%ASPHALT ASPHALT
CURB AND GUTTERRECTANGULAR TUBINGSEE CITY-STANDARD D-20(WHERE NECESSARY)

CONCRETECONCRETECONCRETE

PLAN VIEW

LONGITUDINAL SECTION
NOTE: TO BE STRIPED FOR HIGH VISIBILITY
6''
5''
6''11'' 11''8''PARKING5''BIKE12''LANE8''PARKING12''LANE5''BIKE 5''2%1.5%1.5% 1.5%1.5%2% 1.5%-10% MINIMUM 5" ASPHALTCONCRETE, TYPE AMINIMUM 8" AGGREGATEBASE, CLASS 2 95%RELATIVE COMPACTION.MINIMUM 6" COMPACTEDSUBGRADE 95%RELATIVE COMPCTION.SEE CURB AND GUTTERSTANDARD DRAWINGSLANDSCAPINGSETBACK LOT

SEE SIDEWALKSTANDARDDRAWINGSPARKWAY

1.5%-10%1.5%-10%
2'' 2''

MCAULIFF STREET
R/W R/W ℄
12''TURN LANE
84'
5''5'' 5''10'' 8''PARKING12''LANE8''PARKING12''LANE 5''2%1.5%1.5% 1.5%1.5%2% 1.5%-10% MINIMUM 2.5" ASPHALTCONCRETE, TYPE AMINIMUM 7" AGGREGATEBASE, CLASS 2 95%RELATIVE COMPACTION.MINIMUM 6" COMPACTEDSUBGRADE 95%RELATIVE COMPCTION.

SEE CURB AND GUTTERSTANDARD DRAWINGSLANDSCAPINGSETBACK LOTPER PLAN

SEE SIDEWALKSTANDARDDRAWINGSPARKWAY
2'' 2''
 ℄ R/WR/W 60' 10'

TYPICAL INTERIOR STREET
3/18/2022 3:50 PM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\340 Sheet Sets\04_Civil_Details\07 DETAILS.dwg -Michael McConnell

PREPARED BY
455 W FIR AVENUECLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93611559/449-2700 FAX 559/449-2715https://provostandpritchard.com/DATE:01/20/2022JOB NO.:0159421003

CLASS I MULTI-USE RECREATION TRAIL

CLASS I TRAIL CROSSING
511
512
Page1 of2
ANNEXATION NO. ____

TO THE CITY OF VISALIA

GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
All that certain real property, situate in the North half of Section 3 of Township 19 South, Range 25 East, Mount Diablo Base & Meridian, in the County of Tulare, State of California, described as follows:

BEGINNING at the Southeast corner of Woodside Sousa Property, Unit No. 1 subdivision, according to the map thereof recorded in Volume 42 of Maps at Page 75, Tulare County Records, being a point on the South line of the North 34 3/5 acres of the South half of the Northeast quarter of said Section 3, and being an angle point in the existing City Limit line of the City of Visalia; thence departing said City Limit Line
1) South 89°25’35” East, along said South line, 1361.43 feet, more or less, to a point on the West right-of-way line of Road 148, a county road, said point lying 25 feet West of the East line of said Northeast quarter of Section 3; thence 2) South 1°31’04” West, along said West right-of-way line, 312.67 feet, more or less, to a point on the North line of that parcel granted to Pacific Light & Power by the deed recorded in Book 238 of Deeds at Page 174, Tulare County Records; thence 3) North 89°07’56” West, along said North line, 405.00 feet to the Northwest corner of said parcel; thence
4) South 1°31’04” West, along the West line of said parcel, 331.21 feet, more or less, to the northerly right-of-way line of the Union Pacific Railroad, and a point on a non-tangent curve, concave northerly and having a radius of 43,089.56 feet, a radial to said point bears South 1°09’08” West; thence
5) Westerly, along said northerly right-of-way line, 286.31 feet along the arc of said non- tangent curve, through a central angle of 0°22’51”; thence 6) North 88°28’01” West, along said northerly right-of-way line, 269.70 feet to an angle point in said right-of-way line at U.P.R.R. Station 584+74.0; thence 7) North 1°31’59” East, along said northerly right-of-way line, 50.00 feet to an angle point in said right-of-way line; thence
8) North 88°28’01” West, along said northerly right-of-way line, 1400.00 feet to an angle point in said right-of-way line at U.P.R.R. Station 570+74.0; thence 9) South 1°31’59” West, along said northerly right-of-way line, 50.00 feet to an angle point in said right-of-way line; thence
513
NE14SEC. 3-19/25
NW14SEC. 3-19/25ANNEXATION AREAAPN 127-030-03868.30 ACRESCHERRYAVENUE LICENSE NO:LAND SURVEYOR:SHEETDATE:JOB NO:DRAFTED BY: CHECKED BY:OFORIGINAL SCALE SHOWN IS ONEINCH. ADJUST SCALE FORREDUCED OR ENLARGED PLANS.01"PHASE:PROJECT NO:ANNEXATION NO. ____TO THE CITY OF VISALIATULARE COUNTY, CALIFORNIAGRAPHICAL EXHIBITTIMOTHY M. ODOMPLS 8468TMO JSO4/7/221594210031 14/7/2022 12:36 PM G:\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\300 CAD\330 Existing Conditions\Surveys_Ex\159421003-SUR-GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION.dwg -Tim Odom CHERRYAVENUEU.P.R.R.

ROAD148

MCAULIFFSTREET

LOVERSLANEROAD
RD 148S MCAULIFF AVEVICINITY MAPE WALNUT AVER.R.TRACKSLOVERS LANEPINKHAM STAVENUE280POINT OF BEGINNINGRIOVISTASIMONSTREETTEAKWOODSTREET 514
4/7/22
515
516
Page2 of2
10) North 88°28’01” West, along said northerly right-of-way line, 1573.64 feet to a point on the West line of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 3; thence 11) North 1°25’50” East, along said West line, 1154.40 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 3, being a point on the existing City Limit line; thence along said existing City Limit line the following three (3) courses:
12) South 89°26’08” East, 1321.58 feet, more or less to the Northeast corner of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 3; thence 13) South 1°25’40” West, along the West line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 3, a distance of 570.99 feet, more or less, to a point on the South line of the North 34 3/5 acres of the South half of the Northeast quarter of said Section 3; thence 14) South 89°25’35” East, along said South line, 1253.01 feet, more or less, to the POINT OF BEGINNING.

Containing approximately 68.30 acres.

For assessment purposes only. This description of land is not a legal property description as defined in the Subdivision Map Act and may not be used as the basis for an offer for sale of the land described. 4/7/22
517
1 of 8

EXHIBIT

Pre-Annexation Agreement

This Pre -Annexation Agreement (”Agreement”) is made and entered into this _____ day of ______________, by and among the City of Visalia, a charter law city (“City’) and Nash Limited Partnership, (hereinafter “Owner”):

RECITALS

WHEREAS, Owners are the record owners of the property , currently located in the unincorporated area of the C ounty of Tulare, legally described in Exhibit A and depicted in Exhibit B, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter referred to as the “Property”); and

WHEREAS, the Property is adjacent to and contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City, but is not situated within the limits of any municipality; and

WHEREAS, Owner desires to have the Property annexed to the City and to have the Property zoned as R-1-5, Q-P (Quasi-Public) and O -S (Open Space) which would permit the Property to be used for Low Density Residential; and

WHEREAS, the Property consists of approximately 67.7 acres, and no electors reside thereon; and

WHEREAS, proper applications have been filed with the City for approval of the annexation and for the legal subdivision of the lot, as may be required for the Property; and

WHEREAS, the City has, by a resolution requesting initiation of proceedings to annex territory (“Resolution”) adopted on Month ___, 2023, initiated proceedings to annex the Property; and

WHEREAS, in certain annexation proceedings Williamson Act issues arise which require indemnification of LAFCO, in said event, C ity requires indemnification from Developer; and

WHEREAS, finding __ of Resolution No. 2023-___ initiating annexation requires entry into this Annexation Agreement prior to the City submitting an application to the Local Area Formation Commission to commence the proposed annexation; and

WHEREAS, Owner acknowledges that during the term of this Agreement the Property will be subject to all ordinances, resolutions, and other regulations of the City, as they may be amended from time to time, as well as state and federal statutes and regulations, as they may be amended.
518
2 of 8

WHEREAS, the City is authorized by its police powers to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community, and is entering into this Agreement and executing such authority for said purpose; and

WHEREAS, nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of the City’s legislative, governmental, or police powers to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of the City and its inhabitants, nor shall this Agreement prohib it the enactment or increase by town of any tax, fee, or charge.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above Recitals and the following Covenants, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:

I. AGREEMENT

A. Parties. The parties to this Agreement are the City and Owner.

B. Incorporation of Recitals. The parties confirm and incorporate the foregoing Recitals into this Agreement.

C. Purpose/Limits of Agreement. A specific purpose of this Agreement is to set forth specific terms and condition s of annexation of the Property to City.

II. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION; PURPOSE OF

AGREEMENT

Generally, each party to this Agreement is benefited and burdened by detachment from the County and annexation to the City. Owner will obtain a variety of services from City and City will obta in additional tax revenues. City has adopted ordinances , regulations, and policies concerning design, improvement, construction, development and use of property within the City .

Nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of City’s legislative, governmental, or police powers to promote and protect the health, safety, and welfare of City and its inhabitants, nor shall this Agreement prohibit the enactment or increase by City of any tax or fee. The purpose of this Agreement is to spell out additional conditions to which Owner will be subject following annexation and prior to development within the City due to the burden placed on City by Owner’s desired annexation:

A. Water Acquisition Policy: Although City’s current water service provi der, California Water Service, continues to issue will -serve letters, City’s Council is aware of the steadily decreasing level of water in the City’s underground water aquifers and has determined that increasing development is contributing to this serious problem. Therefore, City’s Council has studied the issue and investigated possible solutions in order that it may continue to assure citizens that there will be water available to serve the community’s needs. City’ s Council is actively engaged in water replenishment activities with the Kaweah Delta Water 519
3 of 8
Conservation District and it has adopted a policy, as set forth in Chapter

16.54 of the Visalia Municipal Code, which requires annexation applicants to convey title to water rights to City upon annexatio n and/or to pay a fee to City (pursuant to an adopted fee schedule) so that City may acquire water for groundwater replenishment and storage in order to serve new development that comes with annexation, including development of the Property (the “Water Acq uisition Policy”). Therefore, Owner agrees that, at the time that LAFCO issues a Certificate of Completion finalizing the annexation (and upon the running of all applicable statutes of limitation related thereto), Ow ner will comply with the Water Acquisit ion Policy by entering into an agreement with City to either (i) convey to City those water rights vested in the Property, if any, (ii) agree to pay City a fee in lieu thereof, (iii) agree to some combination of an in lieu fee payment and water right conveyance, or (iv) to comply by any other method allowed by the Water Acquisition Policy, provided that such agreement includes a condition precedent requiring City’s water supplier to agree to serve the Property with po table water in amount sufficient to meet Owner’s reasonably anticipated total water demand for the Property, as determined by a valid water supply assessment prepared pursuant to California Water Code § 10910 et seq. No post -annexation permit or entitlement approvals concerning the Property will be issued by City unless and until Owner complies with the Water Acquisition Policy in a manner consistent with this subsection II(A). Owner agrees that it shall identify all water rights which, to the best of Owner’s knowledge, have been used by Owner or its ag ents in connection with the Property, regardless of whether they are considered “vested” in the Property, and shall comply with the Water Acquisition Policy by entering into an agreement with City to convey such rights, if any, to City. City sha ll cooperate with Owner in valuing such water rights for the purposes of determining the amount of offset to be applied against the in lieu fee as required pursuant of the Water Acquisition Policy. Owner further agre es that City shall have first right of r efusal in acquiring upon mutually acceptable terms any water rights that Owner owns that may be in addition to those required to meet Owner’s obligations under the Water Acquisition Policy. City agrees that water ri ghts need not be conveyed and in lieu fees shall not be made payable until City’s issuance of one or more parcel maps or final subdivision maps covering the Property and, in the event Owner applies to City for its approval of multiple final maps covering t he Property, City agrees such water rig hts convey ance or fee payment obligation shall be allocated on a pro rata basis to each phase of development covered by each final subdivision map, with conveyance of water rights or payment to be made on a per map ba sis upon City’s issuance of each final subdivision map covering the Property.

B. General Plan Maintenance Fee: On June 21, 2004, the City adopted (by Resolution 2004 -63, as corrected ) a General Plan Maintenance Fee.

Owner agrees that, at the time LAFCO issues a Certificate of Completion finalizing the annexation (and upon the running of all applicable statutes of limitation related thereto), Owner will enter into an agreement with City to pay the General Plan Maintenance Fee in an amount equal to 520
4 of 8
$427 per acre and no post-annexation permit or entitlement approvals concerning the Property will be issued unless and until said agreement is executed. City agrees that such fee shall not be made payable until City’s issuance of one or more final subdivision ma ps covering the Property and, in the ev ent Owner applies to City for its approval of multiple final maps covering the Property, City agrees such fee payment obligation shall be allocated on a pro rata basis to each phase of development covered by each fina l subdivision map, with payment to be made on a p er map basis upon City’s issuance of each final subdivision map covering the Property. Owner’s satisfaction of its obligations under this Section II(B) will satisfy any and all of Owner’s obligations related to and arising under the General Plan Maintenance Fee.

C. Plan For Providing Services . The parties agree to cooperate in, and to take such actions as may be necessary to ensure, the diligent preparation of a Plan For Providing Services to the Property, to be submitted to LAFCO along with Ci ty’s annex ation application, in accordance with Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act requirements.

Developer understands and agrees that building permits and other entitlements for development on the Property will not be issue d unless and until each and every condition herein is met.

III. TERM

The term of this Agreement shall become effective when fully executed by the parties hereto ( the “Effective Date”) and continue for a period of twenty (20) years. This Agreement shall termi nate if (a) the annexation proceedings a re terminated for any reason; or (b) the completion of the annexation (recordation of a Certificate of Completion) does not occur on or before one (1) year from the Effective Date. Any indemnification provision incl uded herewith shall survive termination and continue until expiration of the statute of limitations applicable to the subject matter thereof.

IV. DEFAULT, REMEDIES AND ENFORCEMENT

In the event of breach or default of any term, condition, covenant or obligati on of this Agreement by either party, t he other p arty may exercise any rights available at law or in equity, including an action for specific performance or other injunctive relief, and all such remedies shall be cumulative. This Agreement shall be enforceable, unless lawfully terminated or cancelled, by any party to the Agreement or any party’s successor in interest, notwithstanding any subsequent changes in any applicable law adopted by the City which alters or amends the laws, ordinances, resolutions, r ules or policies frozen by this Agreement.

V. INDEMNIFICATION

Owner agrees to indemnify and hold harmless City and the City’s officers, employees, agents, and contractors, from and against all liability, claims, 521
5 of 8
causes of actions, and demands, including att orney’s fees and court costs, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this Agreement or its operation, or with any other action annexation or other action determined necessary or desirable by the City in order to effectuate the annexation of Owner’s property, or which are in any manner con nected with the City’s enforcement of this Agreement. Owner further agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against or at the City’s option to pay the attorney’s fee s and court costs, which arise out of o r are in a ny manner connected with this Agreement or its operation.

VI. MISCELLANEOUS

a. Binding Effect/Covenants to Run With Land. The Parties hereto agree to be bound by this Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, transferees, successors and assigns of the part ies hereto. The terms and conditions stated herein shall constitute covenants running with the land.

b. Assignment. Neither party shall assign, delegate or tra nsfer their rights and duties in this Ag reement w ithout the written consent of the other party.

c. Authorized Signatory. The individuals executing this Agreement, by their signature hereto, declare that they are authorized to, and have the legal power, righ t and actual authority to bind the part y to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

d. Notices. All notices under this Agreement shall be effective upon personal delivery to City, or Owner, as the case may be, three (3) business days after deposit in th e United States Mail, postage fully prepaid, addressed to the respective parties as follows:

To the City: City Manager
City of Visalia
220 N. Santa Fe Street
Visalia, CA 93292

With Copy to: Kenneth J. Richardson
City Attorney
Peltzer & Richardson
3746 West Mineral King Avenue
Visalia, CA 93291

To Owner: Kevin Clements
939 S. McAuliff Street
Visalia, CA 93292

Or such other address as the parties may from time to time designate by giving notice as required hereunder.
522
6 of 8

e. Entire Ag reement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the City and Owner as to its subject matter and no prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or affect.

f. Amendment. No part of this Agreement may be modified without the written consent of both parties.

g. Headings. Section headings are provided for organizational purposes only and do not in any manner affect the scope, meaning, or intent of the provisions under the heading.

h. No Third Party Beneficiaries Intended . Ex cept as p rovided herein, the parties of this Agreement do not intend to provide any other party with any benefit or enforceable legal or equitable right or remedy.

i. Exhibits and Recitals . The recitals and any exhibits to this Agreement are fully incorpora ted by re ference and are integral parts of this Agreement.

j. Conflict With Laws or Regulations /Severability. This Agreement is subject to all applicable laws and regulations. If any provision(s) of this Agreement is found by any court or other legal aut hority, or is agreed by the parties, to be in conflict with any code or regulation governing this subject, the conflicting provision(s) shall be considered null and void. If the effect of nullifying any conflicting provision is such that a material benefit of the A greement to either party is lost, the Agreement may be terminated at the option of the effected party. In all other cases, the remainder of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.

k. Waiver. A waiver of any breech of this Agreement by any party shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breech of the same or any other provision of this Agreement.

l. Choice of Law - Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California and any ques tions ari sing her eunder shall be construed or determined according to such law. Venue for any legal action arising from or in connection with this Agreement or the Property shall be in Tulare County, California.

m. Attorneys Fees . In the event either par ty commen ces any action, arbitration or legal proceedings for the enforcement of this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the court or arbitrator, shall be entitled to recovery of its reasonable fees and costs, including attorneys fees, court costs an d arbitration costs incurred in the action brought thereon.

n. No Agency, Joint Venture or Partnership . It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by City and Owner and that Owner is not an agent of City. City and 523
7 of 8
Owner hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection therewith shall be construed as making City and Owner joint v enturers or partners.

o. Excusable Delays; Extension of Time of Performance. In the event of delays due to strikes, inability to obtain materials, civil commotion, fire, war, terrorism, lockouts, third -party litigation or other legal challenges regarding the annex ation, riots, floods, earthquakes, epidemic, quarantine, freight embargoes, failure of contractors to perform, or other circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the parties and which cause substantially interferes with the ability of either party to perform its obligations under this Agreement, then the time for performance of any such obligation shall be extended for such period of time as the cause of such delay shall exist but in any event not longer than for such period of time.

p. Further Assurances. The parties will execute and deliver, upon demand by the other party, such further documents, instruments and conveyances, and shall take such further actions as such other party may request from time to time to document the transa ctions set forth herein.

q. Recordation of Agreement; Counterparts. This Agreement, or an abstract of its material terms and conditions shall be recorded by either party in the Official Records of the Tulare County Recorder. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and, when all counterparts are combined, shall constitute a single agreement.

/////

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date set forth next to their signature.

CITY
524
8 of 8

Date: ____________ By: _________________________________ Leslie Caviglia, City Manager

Attest:

Date: ____________ By: _________________________________ Michelle Nicholson, City Clerk

Approved as to Form:

Date: ____________ By: _________________________________ Kenneth J. Richardson,
City Attorney

OWNER

Date: ____________ By: ________________________________ Kevin Clements

525

PEARL WOODS SUBDIVISION

DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE

DECLARATION

APRIL 2023
SCH NO.

PREPARED FOR:

City of Visalia
Community Development Department
315 East Acequia Avenue
Visalia, CA 93291

PREPARED BY:

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

526
Table of Contents
April 2023 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 1-1

1.1 Regulatory Information ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 1-1

1.2 Document Format ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 1-1 Chapter 2 Project Description ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 2-1

2.1 Project Background ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 2-1 Project Title ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 2-1 Lead Agency Name and Address ................................ ................................ .............. 2-1 Contact Person and Phone Number ................................ ................................ ......... 2-1 Project Location ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 2-1 General Plan Designation and Zoning ................................ ................................ ...... 2-1 Description of Project ................................ ................................ .............................. 2-1 Site and Surrounding Land Uses and Setting ................................ ............................ 2-2 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May Be Required................................ ....... 2-2 Consultation with California Native American Tribes ................................ ............... 2-3 Chapter 3 Determination ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 3-1

3.1 Potential Environmental Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 3-1

3.2 Determination ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3-2 Chapter 4 Environmental Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4-3

4.1 Aesthetics ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 4-3 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4-3 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ............................. 4-4 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 4-5

4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................ ................................ ................................ . 4-7 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4-7 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ............................. 4-8 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-10 Mitigation ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4-12

4.3 Air Quality ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 4-14 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-14 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-14 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-22

4.4 Biological Resources ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 4-24 527

Table of Contents
April 2023 ii
Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-24 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-34 Visalia City Oak Tree Ordinance ................................ ................................ ............. 4-38 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-40 Mitigation ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4-42

4.5 Cultural Resources ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 4-45 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-45 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-47 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-49 Mitigation ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4-50

4.6 Energy................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 4-51 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-51 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-51 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-53

4.7 Geology and Soils ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-55 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-55 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-56 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-58 Mitigation ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4-60

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 4-62 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-62 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-62 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-68

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4-70 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-70 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-71 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-73

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 4-75 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-75 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-76 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-81

4.11 Land Use and Planning ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 4-86 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-86 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-89 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-91 528

Table of Contents
April 2023 iii

4.12 Mineral Resources ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 4-93 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-93 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-93 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-94

4.13 Noise ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 4-96 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-96 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-96 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-98

4.14 Population and Housing ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 4-99 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 4-99 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-99 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-99

4.15 Public Services ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 4-101 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ .............................. 4-101 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ......................... 4-101 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4-108

4.16 Recreation ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4-110 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ .............................. 4-110 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ......................... 4-111 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4-115

4.17 Transportation ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 4-116 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ .............................. 4-116 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ......................... 4-116 Thresholds ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 4-116 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4-117

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 4-119 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ .............................. 4-119 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ......................... 4-120 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ .............................. 4-123 Mitigation ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 4-124

4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4-125 Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ .............................. 4-125 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ......................... 4-126 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4-130

4.20 Wildfire ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 4-132 529

Table of Contents
April 2023 iv
Baseline Conditions ................................ ................................ .............................. 4-132 Applicable Regulations ................................ ................................ ......................... 4-132 Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4-134

4.21 CEQA Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................ ................................ .................. 4-136 Statement of Findings ................................ ................................ .......................... 4-136 Chapter 5 Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program ................................ ................................ ....... 5-1 Chapter 6 References ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 6-1

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........A-1 Appendix B: Biological Evaluation ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. B-1 Appendix C: Cultural Resources Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ C-1 Appendix D: Traffic Impact Study ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. D-1

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Regional Location Map ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 2-4 Figure 2-2: Topographic Quadrangle Map ................................ ................................ ................................ . 2-5 Figure 2-3: Aerial Image ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 2-6 Figure 2-4: General Plan Land Use Designation Map ................................ ................................ ................. 2-7 Figure 2-5: Zone District Map ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 2-8 Figure 4-1: Farmland Map ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 4-13 Figure 4-2: Oak Trees within the Project Site ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-44 Figure 4-3: FEMA Flood Map ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 4-85

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Existing Uses, General Plan Designation, & Zone Districts of Surrounding Properties .............. 2-2 Table 4-1: Aesthetics Impacts................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 4-3 Table 4-2: Agriculture and Forest Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ . 4-7 Table 4-3: Air Quality Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 4-14 Table 4-4: SJVAPCD Thresholds of Significance ................................ ................................ ....................... 4-20 Table 4-5: Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Designation .............................. 4-21 Table 4-6: Unmitigated Short-Term Construction-Generated Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants .......... 4-22 Table 4-7: Unmitigated Long-Term Operational Emissions ................................ ................................ ...... 4-23 Table 4-8: Biological Resources Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 4-24 Table 4-9: List of Soils Located Onsite and Their Basic Properties ................................ ............................ 4-25 Table 4-10: Results from the Valley Oak Tree Survey ................................ ................................ ............... 4-26 Table 4-11: List of Special Status Animals with Potential to Occur Onsite and/or in the Vicinity ............. 4-27 Table 4-12: List of Special Status Plants with Potential to Occur Onsite and/or in the Vicinity ................ 4-30 530

Table of Contents
April 2023 v
Table 4-13: Cultural Resources Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 4-45 Table 4-14: Energy Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 4-51 Table 4-15: Geology and Soils Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 4-55 Table 4-16: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts ................................ ................................ ...................... 4-62 Table 4-17: Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts ................................ ................................ ............ 4-70 Table 4-18: Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts ................................ ................................ ................... 4-75 Table 4-19: Use for Potable and Non-Potable Water – Projected ................................ ............................ 4-82 Table 4-20: Land Use and Planning Impacts ................................ ................................ ............................. 4-86 Table 4-21: Mineral Resources Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 4-93 Table 4-22: Noise Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 4-96 Table 4-23: City of Visalia - Noise Level Standards ................................ ................................ ................... 4-97 Table 4-24: Population and Housing Impacts ................................ ................................ ........................... 4-99 Table 4-25: Public Services ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 4-101 Table 4-26: Recreation Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 4-110 Table 4-27: Transportation Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 4-116 Table 4-28: Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts ................................ ................................ ....................... 4-119 Table 4-29: Utilities and Service Systems Impacts ................................ ................................ .................. 4-125 Table 4-30: Wildfire Impacts ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 4-132 Table 4-31: CEQA Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................ ................................ ........... 4-136 Table 5-1: Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program ................................ ................................ ....... 5-2

531

Table of Contents
April 2023 vi

ACRONYMS
AB ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... Assembly Bill APE ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... Area of Potential Effect AQP ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... Air Quality Plan Cal/OSHA ................................ .............................. California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CalEEMod ................................ ................................ ...... California Emissions Estimator Modeling (software) CARB ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ California Air Resources Board CDFW................................ ................................ ................................ .................... California Fish and Wildlife CH4 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. Methane CNDDB ................................ ................................ ................................ .. California Natural Diversity Database CO2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ Carbon dioxide County ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... Tulare County dBA ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ A-weighted decibels EIR ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. Environmental Impact Report EPA ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... Environmental Protection Agency FEMA ................................ ................................ ............................. Federal Emergency Management Agency FMMP ................................ ................................ ....................... Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program GAMAQI ................................ ............................ Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts GHG ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... Greenhouse Gas GIS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. Geographic Information System IS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. Initial Study IS/MND ................................ ................................ ...................... Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration km ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... kilometers MMRP ................................ ................................ .................... Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MND ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. Mitigated Negative Declaration MTCO2e ................................ ................................ .......................... Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NAHC ................................ ................................ ................................ . Native American Heritage Commission ND ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... Negative Declaration NOX ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... Nitrogen oxides NRCS ................................ ................................ ................................ Natural Resources Conservation Service O3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... Ozone PM10 ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... particulate matter 10 microns in size 532

Table of Contents
April 2023 vii
PM2.5 ................................ ................................ ................................ ... particulate matter 2.5 microns in size ppb ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... parts per billion ppm ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... parts per million Project ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... Pearl Woods Subdivision RWQCB ................................ ................................ ................................ Regional Water Quality Control Board SJVAPCD ................................ ................................ ............... San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SO2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... Sulfur Dioxide SR ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. State Route SWPPP ................................ ................................ ............................... Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB ................................ ................................ ................................ . State Water Resources Control Board TID ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... Tulare Irrigation District USACE ................................ ................................ ................................ United States Army Corps of Engineers USDA ................................ ................................ .............................. United States Department of Agriculture USFWS ................................ ................................ ................................ United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. United States Geological Survey μg/m3................................ ................................ ................................ .................. micrograms per cubic meter

533
Chapter 1: Introduction
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 1-1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group (Provost & Pritchard) has prepared this Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) on behalf of DR Horton to address the environmental effects of the Pearl Woods Subdivision (Project). This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. The City of Visalia is the CEQA lead agency for this Project.

The site and the Project are described in detail in Chapter 2 Project Description.

1.1 REGULATORY INFORMATION
An Initial Study (IS) is a document prepared by a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 14 (Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq. )-- also known as th e CEQA Guidelines --Section 15064 (a)(1) states that an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared if there is substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the Project under review may have a significant effect on the environment and shoul d be further analyzed to determine mitigation measures or project alternatives that might avoid or reduce project impacts to less than significant levels. A negative declaration (ND) may be prepared instead if the lead agency finds that there is no substan tial evidence in light of the whole record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. An ND is a written statement describing the reasons why a proposed Project, not otherwise exempt from CEQA, would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why it would not require the preparation of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15371). According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a ND or mitigated ND shall be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when either:
a. The IS shows there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed Project may have a significant effect on the environment, or b. The IS identified potentially significant effects, but:

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

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

1.2 DOCUMENT FORMAT
This IS/MND contains six chapters. Chapter 1 Introduction, provides an overview of the Project and the CEQA process. Chapter 2 Project Description , provides a detailed descr iption of proposed Project components and objectives. Chapter 3 Determination, the Lead Agency’s determination based upon this initial evaluation. Chapter 4 Environmental Impact Analysis presents the CEQA checklist and environmental analysis for all impact areas, mandatory findings of significance, and feasible mitigation measures. If the Project does not have the potential to significantly impact a given issue area, the relevant section provides a brief discussion of the reasons why no impacts are expected. If the Project could have a potentially significant impact on a resource, the issue area discussion provides a description of potential impacts, and appropriate mitigation measures and/or permit requirements that would reduce those impacts to a less than significant level. Chapter 5 Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP), provides the 534
Chapter 1: Introduction
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 1-2
proposed mitigation measures, implementation timelines, and the entity/agency responsible for ensuring implementation. Chapter 6 References details the documents and reports this document relies upon to provide its analysis.

The CalEEMod Output Files, Biological Evaluation, Cultural Resources Information, and Traffic Impact Study are provided as technical Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files, Appendix B: Biological Evaluation, Appendix C: Cultural Resources Study, Appendix D: Traffic Impact Study, respectively, at the end of this document. 535
Chapter 2: Project Description
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 2-1
CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
Project Title
Pearl Woods Subdivision
Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Visalia
Community Development Department, Planning Division
315 East Acequia Avenue
Visalia, California 93291
Contact Person and Phone Number
Lead Agency Contact
Brandon Smith, Principal Planner
(559) 713-4636
CEQA Consultant
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Jarred Olsen, AICP, Associate Planner
(559) 636-1166 x535
Project Location
The Project is located in Visalia, California, approximately 200 miles southeast of Sacramento and 62 miles north of Bakersfield (see
Figure 2-1 and Figure 2-3). The Project site is located on Assessor’s Parcel Number 127-030-038. The centroid of the Project site is 36° 18’ 24.19” N, 119° 15’ 01.48” W.

General Plan Designation and Zoning
Project Area General Plan Designation Zoning District
ONSITE Low Density Residential AE-20 (Existing)
R-1-5 (Proposed)
ADJACENT LANDS Low Density Residential AE-20, R-1-5
Description of Project
536
Chapter 2: Project Description
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 2-2
The proposed Pearl Woods Subdivision pertains to approximately 67.70 gross acres of property located at the southwest corner of South McAuliff Street and East Cherry Avenue in the Southeast Quadrant of the City of Visalia.

This project proposes to subdivide and develop the property into 273 single family residential lots. The subdivision would be developed into three separate phases through a Tentative Parcel Map. The project site will be zoned to R -1-5 (Single-family residential zone - 5,000 square foot minimum site area) and annexed into the City of Visalia. Site improvements and construction of the homes will take place over approximately 21 months. The Project would construct its portions of the General Plan-designated collector McAuliff Street right-of-way.

The Project site currently contains an orchard and oak trees and the so utheastern portion of the parcel is bounded by Cameron Creek. Ten oak trees will be removed as part of the project. As part of the Project and pursuant to the General Plan and the Waterways and Trails Master Plan, the proposal will dedicate the subject property’s portion of the Segment 4 Preferred Trail Alignment, which would run adjacent to Cameron Creek. This trail wo uld be a Class I Bike Trail and would maintain views of Cameron Creek. No development is proposed on the portion of property east of Cameron Creek. The Tulare Irrigation District (TID) Canal which runs along the western portion of the Area of Potential Effect (APE) would have a culvert constructed across the Canal to provide vehicular connectivity and to connect the APE to the adjacent property. The culvert would be approximately 7 feet across by up to 60 feet wide and would be located near Lot 31. The APE is identified as 67.7 acres for the purposes of the biological and cultural field surveys.

Farmland, consisting primarily of pecan and walnut orchards, is the prominent land use currently within the Project Site. These orchards will be chipped and removed as part of the project.

The project proposes a regional-serving stormwater drainage basin with its watershed being the quarter - section that this Project is located in. This location reduces the necessity of further-increasing storm main sizing at further-increasing depths, in addition to avoiding crossing under a railroad. Adjacent to the above- mentioned basin and trail, the Project proposes a General Plan-designated Neighborhood Park. The park and basin would be approximately 8.96 acres in size. These two features would be located in the 100-year floodplain portion of the site, adjacent to Cameron Creek.

Site and Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Table 2-1: Existing Uses, General Plan Designation, & Zone Districts of Surrounding Properties Direction from Project
Site Existing Use General Plan Designation Zone District NORTH Single-Family Residential Low Density Residential R-1-5 (City of Visalia) EAST Agriculture, Single-Family
Residential
Agriculture AE-20 (Tulare County)
SOUTH Agriculture Medium Density Residential,
Low Density Residential,
Public Institutional
AE-20 (Tulare County)
WEST Single-Family Residential Low Density Residential R-1-5 (City of Visalia) Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May Be Required
• Tulare County LAFCo
537
Chapter 2: Project Description
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 2-3
Consultation with California Native American Tribes
Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, et seq. (codification of AB 52, 2013 -14)) requires that a lead agency, within 14 days of determining that it will undertake a project, must notify in writing any California Native American Tribe traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project if that Tribe has previously requested notification about projects in that geographic area. The notice must briefly describe the project and inquire whether the Tribe wishes to initiate request formal consultation. Tribes have 30 days from receipt of notification to request formal consultation. The lead agency then has 30 days to initiate the consultation, which then continues until the parties come to an agreement regarding necessary mitigation or agree that no mitigation is needed, or one or both parties determine that negotiation occurred in good faith, but no agreement will be made.

The City of Visalia, as the public lead agency, received a letter from the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe pursuant to PRC § 21080.3.1 (AB 52) officially requesting notification of Projects within the Santa Rosa Rancheria’s geographic area of traditional and cultural affiliation. On May 16, 2022, the City sent the Tribe a formal letter including a Project description. In accordance with the law, the letter provided 30 days from receipt of the letter to request consultation in writing. No response was received. Further discussion of the AB 52 process can be found in the Tribal Cultural Resources Section (4.18). 538
Chapter 2: Project Description
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 2-4

Figure 2-1: Regional Location Map
539
Chapter 2: Project Description
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 2-5

Figure 2-2: Topographic Quadrangle Map
540
Chapter 2: Project Description
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 2-6

Figure 2-3: Aerial Image
541
Chapter 2: Project Description
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 2-7

Figure 2-4: General Plan Land Use Designation Map
542
Chapter 2: Project Description
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 2-8

Figure 2-5: Zone District Map
543
Chapter 3: Determination
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 3-1
CHAPTER 3 DETERMINATION

3.1 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
As indicated by the discussions of existing and baseline conditions, and impact analyses that follow in this Chapter, environmental factors not checked below would have no impacts or less than significant impacts resulting from the project. Environmental factors that are. checked below would have potentially significant impacts resulting from the project. Mitigation measures are recommended for each of the potentially significant impacts that would reduce the impact to less than significant.

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

The analyses of environmental impacts in Chapter 4 Impact Analysis result in an impact statement, which shall have the following meanings.

Potentially Significant Impact. This category is applicable if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant, and no feasible mitigation measures can be identified to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. This category applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures would reduce an effect from a “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measure(s), and briefly explain how they would reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses may be cross-referenced).

Less than Significant Impact. This category is identified when the proposed Project would result in impacts below the threshold of significance, and no mitigation measures are required.

No Impact. This category applies when a project would not create an impact in the specific environmental issue area. “No Impact” answers do not require a detailed explanation if they are adequately supported by the information sources cited by the lead agency, which show that the impact does not apply to the specific project (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 544
Chapter 3: Determination
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 3-2

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

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

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

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, an d an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated" impact o n the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.

An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

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

_______________________________________ _____________________________ Signature Date

_______________________________________
Printed Name/Position
545
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-3
CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

ANALYSIS

4.1 AESTHETICS
Table 4-1: Aesthetics Impacts
Except as provided in Public Resources
Code Section 21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?

c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that
are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?

d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?

Baseline Conditions
The Project is located along the floor of the San Joaquin Valley in Tulare County adjacent to the southeast quadrant of the City of Visalia. The San Joaquin Valley, including Tulare County, is known for its prominent agricultural land; and has been termed the “breadbasket of the world.” To the east lies the Sierra Nevada Mountain range and Sequoia National Park, which is known for its large mountains, rugged foothills, deep canyons, vast caverns, and the world’s largest trees , the giant sequoias. 1 California State Route (SR) 198, which runs east-west through Visalia, connects to SR 99, located near the western boundary of Visalia’s city limits. SR 99 runs north-south. The 44-mile stretch of SR 198 between SR 99 and Sequoia National Park is classified as eligible for State Scenic Highway status but is not officially designated. 2 Regional views from the valley floor are generally limited due to the flatness of the region, however, on clear days the Sierra

1 (National Park Service 2022)
2 (CIty of Visalia, Dyett & Bhatia, Urban and Regional Planners, ICF International, Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group, Omni-Means, Transportation Planners and Engineers 2014) 546
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-4
Nevada’s are visible to the east. The City of Visalia is characterized as a freestanding city with a small town feel but also with big city amenities.

The Project site itself currently contains an orchard and oak trees and the southeastern portion of the parcel is bounded by Cameron Creek. To the north lies a residential subdivision and rural residences. To the east are more orchards, to the west orchard and a cana l, owned and operated by TID and to the south there lies agricultural land and a Southern California Edison (SCE) rector substation. There are no historic buildings located on or near the Project site.

Applicable Regulations
State
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA establishes that it is the policy of the State to take all action necessary to provide the people of the state “with…enjoyment of aesthetic, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities.” [California Public Resources Code Section 21001(b)].

California Scenic Highways Program
Recognizing the value of scenic areas and the value of views from roads in such areas, the State Legislature established the California Scenic Highway Program in 1963. Under this program, State highway segment s are designated as eligible for inclusion as scenic routes. Once the local jurisdictions through which a roadway passes have established a corridor protection program, the State may officially designate a roadway as a scenic route. Projects must then be e valuated for their impact on the scenic qualities of the corridor. Each designated corridor is monitored by the State and its designation may be revoked if a local government fails to enforce the provisions of the corridor protection program.

As stated in the Environmental Setting above, SR 198 through the Project vicinity is classified as eligible for State Scenic Highway status but is not officially designated.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan
• Policy LU-P-37: Adopt specific development standards for scenic entryways (gateways) and roadway corridors into the City, including special setback and landscape standards, open space and park development, and/or land use designations.
• Policy LU-P-41: Use Mill, Packwood and Cameron Creeks and other waterways as natural amenities and links between neighborhoods.
• Policy LU-P-43: Develop land use and site design measures for areas adjacent to high-voltage power facilities. Measures will include landscape buffers and mandatory setbacks from substations and transmission towers and lines.
• Policy LU -P-59: Ensure that natural and open space features, such as Valley Oak trees and community waterways, are treated as special site amenities as part of any residential development. • OSC-P-13: Require that new development along waterways maintain a visual orientation and active interface with waterways. Develop design guidelines to be used for review and approval of subdivision and development proposals to illustrate how this can be accomplished for different land uses in various geographic settings.
547
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-5
• OSC-P-34: Enhance views and public access to Planning Area waterways and other significant features such as Valley Oak groves consistent with flood protection, irrigation water conveya nce, habitat preservation and recreation planning policies.
• OSC-P-35: Use native trees in street and public landscaping designs, where appropriate, to preserve Visalia’s character.

City of Visalia Municipal Code
Section 17.30.015.H – Lighting: No on-site lighting shall directly or indirectly illuminate adjacent properties or the public street which provides access. The lights and standards to be used for the Project shall be subject to the requirements set forth by the City’s Site Plan Review Committee.

City of Visalia Valley Oak Ordinance
The City’s Valley Oak Ordinance provides basic standards, measures, and compliance requirements for the preservation and protection of native Valley oak trees and landmark trees. The Ordinance prohibits destruction of Valley oak trees except with an oak tree removal permit. A permit may be granted only if it is found that the oak tree is in danger of falling on a structure or is host for a plant, pest, or disease endangering other species; if removal is necessary to allow the reasonable enjoyment of private property; or if urban forestry or land management practices warrant removal. If a tree removal permit is granted, the tree must either be replaced by planting new oak trees at the specified mitigation ratio on the same property, or by paying mitigation fees to be used by the City to plant new oak trees at other locations, consistent with the City Oak Tree Mitigation Policy.3
Impact Analysis
a) Have substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less than Significant Impact. Views of the Sierra Nevada Mountain range to the east and the surrounding agricultural lands help showcase the scenery from the Project. The development of residential homes would align with the development to the north of the Project site and would not significantly impact views of the Sierra Nevada. As mentioned earlier, Cameron Creek runs adjacent to a portion of the Project. As part of the Project and pursuant to the General Plan and the Waterways and Trails Master Plan, the proposal would dedicate th e subject property’s portion of the Segment 4 Preferred Trail Alignment, which would run adjacent to Cameroon Creek. This trail would be a Class I Bike Trail and would maintain views of Cameron Creek. Impacts to a scenic vista would be less than significant. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Less than Significant Impact. There are no scenic resources onsite; however, there are oak trees on the property that have a scenic quality. The City of Visalia’s ordinance prohibits destruction of Valley oak trees except with an oak tree removal permit. The Project propose s to remove ten oak trees, however the Project would have to comply with tree removal permit conditions . The Project would not impact a state scenic highway as one does not exist in the vicinity of the Project site. Impacts would be less than significant.

3 (City of Visalia 2007)
548
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-6
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, w ould the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less than Significant Impact. The existing visual character of the Project site is agricultural land surrounded by urbanized development and agricultural land. Multiple subdivisions exist to the north of the Project site. To the east and west lie agricultural land, with more agricultural land and a SCE rector substation to the south. The Project would offer attractive landscaping and architectural design to reduce any visual effect to the surrounding properties and conform with the existing character of the neighboring community. There are no existing regulations governing scenic quality, nor would there by regulations in the R-1-5 zone district that the Project would be subject to. Any impacts would be less than significant. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. Development of the Project would create new sources of light typical of urban development, typical of the subdivisions found at the perimeter of the project site . Nighttime lighting levels near the Project site would increase over current levels, as sources of new and nighttime lighting and illumination would include, but are not necessarily limited to, lighting from new residential uses, lights associated with vehicular travel (i.e., car headlights), and street lighting . The Project would have to comply with the development standards of t he Subdivision Ordinance ( Title 16) and Chapter

17.30 of the Zoning Ordinance which regulates light spillage , Visalia Public Works Standards, and the California Building Code. Streetlights are required to be full cut -off. These requirements would assist in reducing potential impacts associated with daytime glare and nighttime light. In addition, the Project site is situated near other residential subdivisions that produce like l ighting, so the impacts of the Project would be consistent with the existing setting to the north. Therefore, the Project would not generate substantial light or glare would adversely affect views in the area. Impacts would be less than significant.

549
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-7

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Table 4-2: Agriculture and Forest Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?

d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?

e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?

Baseline Conditions
Agriculture has been the predominant land use in the Project area since the late 1800s. Due to the region’s rich soils, water resources, and favorable geographic and climatic conditions, agricultural activity in and around Visalia is highly productive. Visalia’s agricultural heritage has contributed significantly to the City’s economy – much of the region’s economic activity is related to the cultivation, processing, and distribution of agricultural products – as well as its visual and cultural character. Historically, City’s General Plan policies have acknowledged the value of the areas agricultural resources and sought to preserve them through urban growth management strategies and monitoring despite a prevalence of development pressures on local landowners and a growing urban population.4
Farmland, consisting primarily of pecan and walnut orchards, is the prominent land use within the Project Site which is approximately 67.70 acres. The Project site is located in Tier II of the City’s Urban Development Boundary.

4 (Dyett & Bhatia Urban and Regional Planners 2014)
550
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-8
Applicable Regulations
Federal
Federal Farmland Protection Policy Act
The NRCS oversees the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) (7 U.S. Code [USC] Section 4201, et seq.; see also 7 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 658). The FPPA (a subtitle of the 1981 Farm Bill) is national legislation designed to protect farmland. The FPPA states its purpose is to “minimize the extent to which federal programs contribute to the unnecessary conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses.” The FPPA applies to projects and programs that are sponsored or financed in whole or in part by the federal government. The FPPA does not apply to private construction projects subject to federal permitting and licensing, projects planned and completed w ithout assistance from a federal agency, federal projects related to national defense during a national emergency, or projects proposed on land already committed to urban development. The FPPA spells out requirements to ensure federal programs to the extent practical are compatible with State, local, and private programs and policies to protect farmland and calls for the use of the Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) system to aid in analysis. Because the City may ultimately seek some federal funding for transportation or other capital improvements related to this Project, this document addresses the FPPA as an applicable regulation.

State
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection As part of the Farmland Mapping & Mon itoring Program (FMMP), t he California Department of Conservation (DOC) applies the NRCS soil classifications to identify agricultural lands, and these agricultural designations are used in planning for the present and future of California’s agricultural l and resources.

These designated agricultural lands are included in the Important Farmland Maps . The FMMP was established in 1982 to assess the location, quality, and quantity of agricultural lands and the conversion of these lands. The FMMP provides analys is of agricultural land use and land use changes throughout California. The DOC has a minimum mapping unit of 10 acres, with parcels that are smaller than 10 acres being absorbed into the surrounding classifications.

The list below provides a comprehensive description of all the categories mapped by the DOC. • Prime Farmland. Farmland that has the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long ‐term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. • Farmland of Statewide Importance. Farmland similar to Prime Farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.
• Unique Farmland. Farmland of lesser quality soils use d for the production of the State’s leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated but may include non-irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been cropped at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.
• Farmland of Local Importance. Land of importance to the local agricultural economy as determined by each county’s board of supervisors and a local advisory committee. 551
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-9
• Grazing Land. Land on which the existing vegetation is sui ted to the grazing of livestock. This category was developed in cooperation with the California Cattlemen Association, University of California Cooperative Extension, and other groups interested in the extent of grazing activities.

The minimum mapping unit for Grazing Land is 40 acres.
• Urban and Built-up Land. Land occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to

1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10‐acre parcel. This land is used for residential, industrial, commercial, inst itutional, public administrative purposes, railroad and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes.
• Other Land. Land not included in any othe r mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities; strip mines and borrow pits; and water bodies smaller than 40 acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as Other Land.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan
• LU-P-14: Recognize the importance of agriculture-related business to the City and region, • LU-P-25: Provide planning and technical support for the relocation of agricultural operations currently located in the City to compatible locations in the Planning Area or the County. • LU-P-30: Maintain greenbelts, or agricultural/open space buffer areas, between Visalia and other communities by implementing growth boundaries and working with County and land developers to prevent premature urban growth north of the St. Johns River and other sensitive locations within the timeframe of this General Plan.
• LU-P-34: In addition to supporting regional efforts to prevent urban development of agricultural lands, the City shall create and adopt a mitigation program to address conversion of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance in Tiers II and III. This mitigation program shall require a 1:1 ratio of agricultural land preserved to agricultural land converted and require agricultural land preserved to be equivalent to agricultural land converted. The mitigation program shall also require that the agricultural land preserved demonstrate adequate water supply and agricultural zoning, and shall be located outside the City UDB, and within the southern San Joaquin Valley. The mitigation program shall, to the extent feasible and practicable, be integrated with the agricultural easement programs adopted by the County and nearby cities. The City’s mitigation program shall allow mitigation to be provided by purchase of conservation ease ment or payment of fee, but shall indicate a preference for purchase of easements. The mitigation program shall require easements to be held by a qualifying entity, such as a local land trust, and require the submission of annual monitoring reports to the City. The mitigation program shall specifically allow exemptions for conversion of agricultural lands in Tier I, or conversion of agricultural lands for agricultural processing uses, agricultural buffers, public facilities, and roadways. • LU-P-44: Develop l and use and site design measures for areas adjacent to high -voltage power facilities. Measures will include landscape buffers and mandatory setbacks from substations and transmission towers and lines.
552
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-10
• OSC-O-2: Work with County and other organizations to pr otect prime farmland and farmland of Statewide importance outside the City’s Urban Development Boundary for agricultural production, and to preserve areas for groundwater recharge.
• OSC-P-1: Conduct an annual review of cancelled Williamson Act contracts an d development proposals on agricultural land within the Planning Area Boundary to foresee opportunities for acquisition, dedication, easements, or other techniques to preserve agricultural open space or for groundwater recharge.
• OSC-O-9: Protect agricultural land from premature urban development. • OSC-P-24: To allow efficient cultivation, pest control and harvesting methods, require buffers and transition areas between urban development and adjoining or nearby agricultural lands. • OSC-P-25: Require new development to implement measures, as appropriate to mini mize soil erosion related to grading, site preparation, land scaping and construction.

Impact Analysis
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated . The Project consists of land within an unincorporated area of Tulare County currently zoned AE -20 (Exclusive Agriculture-20 acres minimum), within Tiers II and III, and proposed for annexation into the City. This land is designated Prime Farmland. As such, the area is subject to the City’s agricultural mitigation policy (See AGR-1, below).

The General Plan identifies the need for the conversion of agricultural land to urban development. The City has set aside three-tiered areas planned for development which contain land designated as Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance. The Project is within Tier II and Tier III, which has been deemed as land to be converted from agricultural land to urban development.

The 2014 General Plan Policy LU -P-34 contained a requirement for an Agricultural Mitigation Program to address the conversion of Prime Fa rmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance within the Tier II and Tier III growth boundaries. Policy LU-P-34 requires the adoption of this type of program notwithstanding that such a program would not reduce the environmental effects from the loss of such farmland to a level of less than significant. In order to meet the requirements of this policy, the City has prepared an Agricultural Preservation Ordinance applicable to properties within Tier II and Tier III that requires a 1:1 ratio of agricultural lan d preserved to agricultural land converted towards urban development. The Ordinance is anticipated to be adopted in May 2023 and must be adopted for other pending entitlements submitted to the City of Visalia that are located within Tier II to be developed. The Ordinance will require that an equivalent amount of agricultural land converted be preserved outside the urban development boundary and within the southern San Joaquin Valley, or that a project comply with regulations within the Ordinance that will c ause an equivalent amount of agriculture land to be preserved. Additionally, the preserved agricultural land must demonstrate adequate water supply and agricultural zoning. Policy LU-P- 34 notes that such a program shall, to the extent feasible and practica ble, be integrated with the agricultural easement programs adopted by Tulare County and nearby cities. The City of Visalia’s program shall allow for compliance with the preservation ordinance to be completed by purchase of easements, and that such easements be held by a qualifying entity, such as a local land trust, and require the submission of 553
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-11
annual monitoring reports to the City. Prior to the adoption of the Ordinance the Project proponent could mitigate for the loss of agricultural land and begin conversion of agricultural lands by providing verification to the City that it has preserved agricultural land at a 1:1 ratio using easements that meet the requirements identified in Policy LU -P-34 or participation in an agricultural preservation program adopte d by another agency within the southern San Joaquin Valley that meet the these requirements for preserving agricultural land.

As this is a requirement for consistency with the General Plan, the Project’s compliance is mandatory.

Therefore, compliance with General Plan Policy LU-P-34 will allow the Project to convert Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance and preserve offsite farmland outside of the urban development boundaries at an equivalent ratio. As a result, impacts would be less than significant. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is zoned as AE -20 as per the Tulare County zoning designation. This project will propose an annexation by the City of Visalia as well as zoning the property to a residential zone district , in accordance with the pre -zoning of the General Plan Land Use Map, in order to facilitate the proposed use of a housing development. Although the Project site is within an agriculture zone district, it is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberla nd (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? No Impact. The Project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. The Project would result in the annexation of the Project site from Tulare County into the City of Visalia, p re-zoning the site for residential use. The Visalia General Plan has not designated the Project site or surrounding areas as Forest Land, Timberland, or timberland zoned for Timberland Production. The Project site has historically been utilized for agricultural use. Therefore, there would be no impact.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use. The Project would result in the construction of a new subdivision on land that would be annexed into the City of Visalia, which has historically been utilized for agriculture. This would not require the loss or conversion of a forest to a non-forest use. Therefore, there would be no impact. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Less than Significant Impact . The Project would result in the conversion of approximately 68 acres of farmland into a new subdivision. While the Project would convert farmland into another use, the Project site is substantially surrounded by urban uses. The development of the project site is bordered by existing barriers, such as the TID Canal, Cameron Creek, and the San Joaquin Railroad line. Therefore, agricultural encroachment impacts would be less than significant.

554
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-12
Mitigation
AGR-1 Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, the Project proponent shall mitigate impacts for loss of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance on the Project site at a 1:1 ratio. The Project proponent shall implement one or more of the following measures to mitigate the loss: Paym ent of In -Lieu Fees, Mitigation Banks, Fee Title Acquisition, Conservation Easements, and/or Land Use Regulation on land(s)within the Southern San Joaquin Valley of California, specifically within Kern County, Tulare County, Kings County, Fresno County, or Madera County. The City shall require, at a minimum:
evidence that the preserved land has adequate water supply, agricultural zoning, evidence of land encumbrance documentation, documentation that the easement/regulations are permanent and monitored, and documentation that the mitigation strategy is appropriately endowed. This mitigation shall be verified by the City prior to issuance of grading or building permits. Should the City of Visalia develop an Agricultural Mitigation Program before future construction within the Project begins, the Project proponent shall mitigate for the loss of agricultural land pursuant to the Program that is adopted by the City.

555
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-13

Figure 4-1: Farmland Map
556
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-14

4.3 AIR QUALITY
Table 4-3: Air Quality Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard?

c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?

Baseline Conditions
The subject property is composed of an existing orchard spanning approximately 67 acres. Typical cultivation operations include traversing the site with all-terrain vehicles and pickup trucks, application of pesticides and fertilizers, removal and replanti ng of orchards, and the picking of fruit. Such activities are likely to disturb the site’s bare dirt, causing an unquantifiable amount of particulate matter emissions.

Applicable Regulations
Federal
United States Environmental Protection Agency
The Clean Air Act (CAA), first adopted in 1967 and periodically amended since then, established federal ambient air quality standards. A 1987 amendment to the CAA sets a deadline for the attainment of these standards. That deadline has since passed. The oth er CAA Amendments, passed in 1990, share responsibility with the State in reducing emissions from mobile sources. The USEPA is responsible for enforcing the 1990 amendments.

CAA and the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) identify levels of a ir quality for six “criteria” pollutants, which are considered the maximum levels of ambient air pollutants considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect public health and welfare. The six criteria pollutants include ozone, CO, NO 2, SO 2, PM2.5 and PM 10, and lead (Pb). Two types of NAAQS have been established: primary standards, which protect public health, and secondary standards, which protect public welfare from non - health-related adverse effects such as visibility restrictions.

The CA A also required each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as a State Implementation Plan (SIP). The CAA Amendments of 1990 added requirements for states with nonattainment areas to revise their SIPs to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution.

The SIP is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions inventories, planning documents, and rules 557
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-15
and regulations of the air basins as reported by their jurisdictional agencies. The USEPA has responsibility to review all state SIPs to determine conformance with the mandates of the CAA, and the amendments thereof, and determine if implementation would achieve air quality goals. If the USEPA determines a SIP to be inadequate, a Federal Implementation Plan may be prepared for the nonattainment area that imposes additional control measures.

CAA Section 176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) and USEPA transportation conformity regulations (40 CFR 93 Subpart A) require that each new Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Transportatio n Improvement Program (TIP) be demonstrated to conform to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) before the RTP and TIP are approved by the metropolitan planning organization, in this case the County Association of Governments (TCAG) or accepted by the United States Department of Transportation (DOT). The conformity analysis is a federal requirement designed to demonstrate compliance with the NAAQS. However, because the San Joaquin Valley State Implementation Plan for CO, PM 10, PM2.5 and ozone address attainme nt of both the State and federal standards for these pollutants, demonstrating conformity to the federal standards is also an indication of progress toward attainment of the State standards. Compliance with the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) is provided on the pages following this federal conformity discussion.

The USEPA approved San Joaquin Valley reclassification of the ozone (8 -hour) designation to extreme nonattainment in the Federal Register on May 5, 2010, even though the San Joaqui n Valley was initially classified as serious nonattainment for the 1997 8 -hour ozone standard. In accordance with the CAA, USEPA uses the design value at the time of standard promulgation to assign nonattainment areas to one of several classes that reflect the severity of the nonattainment problem; classifications range from marginal nonattainment to extreme nonattainment. In the Federal Register on October 26, 2015, the USEPA revised the primary and secondary standard to 0.070 ppm to provide increased pu blic health protection against health effects associated with long - and short-term exposures. The previous ozone standard was set in 2010 at 0.075 ppm.

National Environmental Policy Act
NEPA provides general information on the effects of federally funded projects. The act was implemented by regulations included in the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 6). The code requires careful consideration concerning environmental impacts of federal actions or plans, including local projects that receive federal funds. The regulations address impacts on land uses and conflicts with state, regional, or local plans and policies, among others. They also require that projects requiring NEPA review seek to avoid or minimize adverse effects of proposed actions and to restore and enhance environmental quality as much as possible. The Project is subject to NEPA compliance because of the potential for federal grant funding for construction of the Project. The air quality assessment required under federal air quality standards and regulations covers the basic outline for project -level assessment under NEPA guidelines. The CAA also requires a parallel “Conformity” in addition to the basic impact assessment.

Toxic Substances Control Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act first authorized the USEPA to regulate asbestos in schools and public and commercial buildings under Title II of the law, which is also known as the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) . AHERA requires Local Education Agencies to inspect their schools for Asbestos- Containing Building Materials and prepare management plans to reduce the asbestos hazard. The Act also established a program for the training and accreditation of individuals performing certain types of asbestos work.
558
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-16
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Pursuant to the CAA, the USEPA established the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.

These are technology -based source-specific regulations that limit allowable emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs).

State
California Air Resources Board and the California Clean Air Act The CARB is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of state and local air pollution control programs in California and for implementing its own air quality legislation called the California Clean Air Act (CCAA), adopted in 1988. CARB was created in 1967 from the merging of the California Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board and the Bureau of Air Sanitation and its Laboratory.

CARB has primary responsibility in California to develop and implement air pollution control plans designed to achieve and maintain the NAAQS established by the USEPA. Whereas CARB has primary responsibility and produces a major part of the SIP for pollution sources that are statewide in scope, it relies on the local air districts to provide additional strategies for sources under their jurisdiction. CARB combines its data with all local district data and submits the completed SIP t o the USEPA. The SIP consists of the emissions standards for vehicular sources and consumer products set by the CARB, and attainment plans adopted by the Air Pollution Control Districts (APCDs) and Air Quality Management Districts (AQMDs) and approved by CARB. The SJVAPCD is one of 35 AQMDs that have prepared air quality management plans to accomplish a five percent annual reduction in emissions documenting progress toward the CAAQS.

States may establish their own standards, provided the state standards are at least as stringent as the NAAQS. California has established the CAAQS pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 39606(b) and its predecessor statutes.

HSC Section 39608 requires CARB to “identify” and “classify” each air basin in the state on a pollutant-by- pollutant basis. Subsequently, the CARB designated areas in California as nonattainment based on violations of the CAAQS. Designations and classifications specific to the SJVAB can be found in the next section of this document. Areas in the state were also classified based on severity of air pollution problems.

For each nonattainment class, the CCAA specifies air quality management strategies that must be adopted.

For all nonattainment categories, attainment plans are required to demonstrate a five percent-per-year reduction in nonattainment air pollutants or their precursors, averaged every consecutive three -year period, unless an approved alternative measure of progress is developed. In addition, air districts in violation of CAAQS are required to prepare an Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP) that lays out a program to attain and maintain the CCAA mandates.

Other CARB duties include monitoring air quality. CARB has established and maintains, in conjunction with local APCDs and AQMDs, a network of sampling stations (called the State and Local Air Monitoring Stations [SLAMS] Network), which monitors the present pollutant levels in the ambient air.

All of County, including the City, is in the SJVAB. Table 4-5 contains a summary of State and federal air quality standards and the SJVABs attainment status for common pollutants.

CARB Mobile-Source Regulation
CARB is responsible for controlling emiss ions from the operation of motor vehicles in the state. Rather than mandating the use of specific technology or the reliance on a specific fuel, CARBs motor vehicle standards specify the allowable grams of pollution per mile driven. In other words, the r egulations focus 559
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-17
on the reductions needed rather than on the manner in which they are achieved. Towards this end, CARB has adopted regulations that require auto manufacturers to phase in less-polluting vehicles.

The CCAA was first signed into law in 1988 and is administered by CARB. The CCAA provides a comprehensive framework for air quality planning and regulation, and spells out, in statute, the States air quality goals, planning and regulatory strategies, and performance. The CAAQS, established pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 39606(b), are similar to, but more stringent than, the NAAQS.

Assembly Bills 1807 & 2588 - Tanner Air Toxics Act
California regulates TACs primarily through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (AB 1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588). The Tanner Act sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as a TAC. This includes research, public participation, and scientific peer review before CARB can designate a substance as a TACs. To date, CARB has identified more than 21 TACs and has adopted USEPAs list of HAPs as TACs. Most recently, diesel PM was added to the CARB list of TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB then adopts an Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for sources that emit that particular TAC. CARB list of TACs is provided below:
▪ Benzene
▪ Ethylene Dibromide
▪ Ethylene Dichloride
▪ Hexavalent chromium
▪ Asbestos
▪ Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Dibenzofurans
▪ Cadmium
▪ Carbon Tetrachloride
▪ Ethylene Oxide
▪ Methylene Chloride
▪ Trichloroethylene
▪ Chloroform
▪ Vinyl chloride
▪ Inorganic Arsenic
▪ Nickel
▪ Perchloroethylene
▪ Formaldehyde
▪ 1,3-Butadiene
▪ Inorganic Lead
▪ Particulate Emissions from Diesel -Fueled
Engines
▪ Environmental Tobacco Smoke
▪ USEPA Hazardous Air Pollutants (187)

If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to minimize emissions.

California Assembly Bill 170
Assembly Bill 170, Reyes (AB 170), was adopted by state lawmakers in 2003 creating GC Section 65302.1 which requires cities and counties in the San Joaquin Valley to amend their general plans to include data and analysis, comprehensive goals, policies and feasible implementation strategies designed to improve air quality.

State Tailpipe Emission Standards
To reduce emissions from off -road diesel equipment, on -road diesel trucks, and harbor craft, CARB established a series of increasingly strict emission standards for new engines. New construction equipment used for the Project, including heavy duty trucks, off-road construction equipment, tugboats, and barges, would be required to comply with the standards.

Local
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
The SJVAPCD is the agency responsible for monitoring and regulating air pollutant emissions from stationary, area, and indirect sources within the County and throughout the SJVAB. The District also has 560
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-18
responsibility for monitoring air quality and setting and enforcing limits for source emissions. The CARB is the agency with the legal responsibility for regulating mobile source emissions. The District is precluded from such activities under State law.

The District was formed in mid-1991 and prepared and adopted the San Joaquin Valley AQAP, dated January 30, 1992, in response to the requirements of the CCAA. The CCAA requires each non -attainment district to reduce pertinent air contaminants by at least five percent (5%) per year until new, more stringent, 1988 State air quality standards are met.

Activities of the SJVAPCD include the preparation of plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adoption and enforcement of rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, issuance of permits for stationary sources of air pollution, inspection of stationary sources of air pollution and response to citizen complaints, monitoring of ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implementation of programs and regulations required by the CAA and the CCAA.

The SJVAPCD has prepared the 2013 Ozone Plan to achieve federal and State standards for improved air quality in the SJVAB regarding ozone. It provides a comprehensive list of regulatory and incentive-based measures to reduce emissions of ozone and particulate matter precursors throughout the SJVAB, and calls for major advancements in pollution control technologies for mobile and stationary sources of air pollution, a 75 -percent reduction in ozone -forming oxides of nitrogen emissions, and addresses the remaining requirement under the 1979 revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

The EPA in 2006 issued a Final Rule determining that the Basin had attained the NAAQS for PM 10, it did however note that the Final Rule did not constitute a redesignation to attainment until all of the CAA requirements under Section 107(d)(3) were met. In response, the SJVAPCD prepared the 2007 PM 10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Redesignation (2007 PM 10 Plan). The SJVAPCD has prepared the 2012 PM2.5 Plan to achieve federal and State standards for improved air quality in the SJVAB. The 2012 PM 2.5 Plan provides a comprehensive list of regulatory and incentive-based measures to reduce PM2.5.

The Guide for Assessing and Mitigat ion Air Quality Impacts was prepared in 2015, which is an advisory document that provides Lead Agencies, consultants, and project applicants with analysis guidance and uniform procedures for addressing air quality impacts in environmental documents. It describes the criteria that SJVAPCD uses when reviewing and commenting on the adequacy of environmental documents and recommends thresholds for determining whether or not projects would have significant adverse environmental impacts, identifies methodologies for predicting project emissions and impacts, and identifies measures that can be used to avoid or reduce air quality impacts.

The SJVAPCD documents identified above represent the SJVAPCDs plan to achieve both State and federal air quality standards. The regulations and incentives contained in these documents must be legally enforceable and permanent. These plans separate emissions reductions and compliance into different emissions source categories. The SJVAPCD Rules and Regulations that are applicable to the Project include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Regulation VIII (Fugitive Dust Prohibitions), Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081): This regulation is a series of rules designed to reduce particulate emissions generated by human activity, including construction and demolition activities, carryout and trackout, use of paved and unpaved roads and traffic areas, bulk material handling and storage, open space areas, etc. If a non-residential area is five or more acres in size, a Dust Control Plan must be submitted as specified in Section 6.3.1 of Rule 8021. Additional requirements may apply, depending on total area of disturbance. 561
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-19
• Rule 8021 – Construction, Demolition, Excavation, and Other Earthmoving Activities: District Rule 8021 requires owners or operators of construction projects to submit a Dust Control Plan to the District if at any time the project involves non-residential developments of five or more acres of disturbed surface area or moving, depositing, or relocating of more than 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials on at least three days of the project. The Project will meet these criteria and will be required to submit a Dust Control Plan to the District in order to comply with this rule. • Rule 9510 – Indirect Source Review: Rule 9510, Indirect Source Review (ISR), fulfills the SJVAPCD emission reduction commitments in the PM 10 and Ozone Attainment Plans through emission reductions associated with construction and operational activities for projects subject to the rule.

Since the project contains more than 20,000 square feet of recreational space it will be required to comply w ith Rule 9510. Compliance with Rule 9510 is separate from the CEQA process, although the control measures used to comply with Rule 9510 may be used to mitigate CEQA impacts.
• Rule 4641 – Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations: If asphalt paving will be used, then paving operations of the Project will be subject to Rule 4641. This rule applies to the manufacture and use of cutback asphalt, slow cure asphalt , and emulsified asphalt for paving and maintenance operations.
• Regulatory Attainment Designations: Under the CCAA, CARB is required to designate areas of the state as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified with respect to applicable standards. An “attainment” designation for an area signifies that pollutant c oncentrations did not violate the applicable standard in that area. A “nonattainment” designation indicates that a pollutant concentration violated the applicable standard at least once, excluding those occasions when a violation was caused by an exception al event, as defined in the criteria. Depending on the frequency and severity of pollutants exceeding applicable standards, the nonattainment designation can be further classified as serious nonattainment, severe nonattainment, or extreme nonattainment, wi th extreme nonattainment being the most severe of the classifications. An “unclassified” designation signifies that the data does not support either an attainment or nonattainment designation. The CCAA divides districts into moderate, serious, and severe a ir pollution categories, with increasingly stringent control requirements mandated for each category.

The USEPA designates areas for ozone, CO, and NO 2 as “does not meet the primary standards,” “cannot be classified,” or “better than national standards.” For SO2, areas are designated as “does not meet the primary standards,” “does not meet the secondary standards,” “cannot be classified,” or “better than national standards.” However, CARB terminology of attainment, nonattainment, and unclassified is more f requently used. The USEPA uses the same sub -categories for nonattainment status: serious, severe, and extreme. In 1991, USEPA assigned new nonattainment designations to areas that had previously been classified as Group I, II, or III for PM10 based on the likelihood that they would violate national PM 10 standards. All other areas are designated “unclassified.”
The SJVAB is currently designated as a nonattainment area with respect to the state PM10 standard, ozone, and PM2.5 standards. The SJVAB is designated nonattainment for the national 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 standards. On September 25, 2008, the USEPA redesignated the San Joaquin Valley to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS and approved the PM10 Maintenance Plan.

Table 4-4 shows the SJVAPCD thresholds of significance for both construction - and operation -related emissions from a given project.
562
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-20
Table 4-4: SJVAPCD Thresholds of Significance
SJVAPCD Thresholds of Significance (tons/yr)
Pollutant Construction Emissions Operation Emissions
ROG 10 10
NOx 10 10
CO 100 100
SOx 27 27
PM10 15 15
PM2.5 15 15
Source: SJVAPCD, May 2015.

City of Visalia General Plan
• Policy AQ-P-2: Require use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce particulate emission as a condition of approval for all subdivisions, development plans and grading permits, in conformance with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Fugitive Dust Rule. • Policy AQ -P-9: Continue to mitigate short -term construction impacts and long -term stationary impacts on air quality on a case -by-case basis and continue to assess air quality impacts through environmental review. Require developers to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce air pollutant emissions associated with the construction and operation of development projects.

City of Visalia Climate Action Plan
The City Climate Action Plan (CAP) was created as one of the first key steps to guiding the development and enhancement of actions designed to reduce Visalia’s GHG emissions. The CAP represents the results of a GHG emissions inventory effort which serves as a starting point for the development of a comprehensive municipal and community strategy for addressing GHG emission reduction goals.

The major long-term objectives of the City’s CAP for the City government and the community as a whole include the following:
▪ Reduce net GHG emissions from both municipal operations and community activities; ▪ Promote cleaner and healthier air to breathe;
▪ Help the City and its residents save on energy costs; ▪ Reduce vulnerability to changes in energy availability and price; and ▪ Increase public awareness of climate change issues.

The City selected the years 2020 and 2030 to establish mitigation targets for the CAP. A reduction of 15% below the 2005 baseline year level is the target for 2020. A reduction of 30% below the 2005 baseline year level is the target for 2030. The City established two mitigation milestones to correlate with the planning horizon of the 2030 General Plan Update, and to ensure that the City is working towards the States goal of an 80% reduction below baseline by 2050.

The City has instituted various actions in an effort to meet the year 2020 and 2030 mitigation targets. The measures identified to achieve mitigation targets are organized into five categories: Energy Systems, Transportation, Water and Resource Conservation, Transportation / Land Use, and Waste and R esource Conservation. Included in the Transportation category is a measure regarding the expansion of bicycle paths.
563
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-21
Table 4-5: Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Designation Pollutant Averaging
Time
California Standards* National Standards*
Concentration* Attainment
Status Primary Attainment
Status
Ozone
(O3)
1-hour 0.09 ppm Nonattainment/
Severe
– No Federal
Standard
8-hour 0.070 ppm Nonattainment 0.075 ppm Nonattainment
(Extreme)**
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
AAM 20 μg/m3 Nonattainment – Attainment
24-hour 50 μg/m3 150 μg/m3
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
AAM 12 μg/m3 Nonattainment 12 μg/m3 Nonattainment
24-hour No Standard 35 μg/m3
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
1-hour 20 ppm Attainment/
Unclassified
35 ppm Attainment/
Unclassified 8-hour 9 ppm 9 ppm
8-hour
(Lake Tahoe)
6 ppm –
Nitrogen
Dioxide
(NO2)
AAM 0.030 ppm Attainment 53 ppb Attainment/
Unclassified 1-hour 0.18 ppm 100 ppb
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
AAM – Attainment -- Attainment/
Unclassified 24-hour 0.04 ppm --
3-hour – 0.5 ppm
1-hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb
Lead (Pb) 30-day Average 1.5 μg/m3 Attainment – No
Designation/
Classification
Calendar Quarter – --
Rolling 3 -Month
Average
– 0.15 μg/m3
Sulfates (SO4) 24-hour 25 μg/m3 Attainment No Federal Standards Hydrogen
Sulfide (H2S)
1-hour 0.03 ppm
(42 μg/m3)
Unclassified
Vinyl Chloride
(C2H3Cl)
24-hour 0.01 ppm
(26 μg/m3)
Attainment
Visibility-
Reducing
Particle Matter
8-hour Extinction coefficient:

0.23/km-visibility of
10 miles or more due
to particles when the
relative humidity is
less than 70%.

Unclassified
* For more information on standards visit: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf ** No Federal 1-hour standard. Reclassified extreme nonattainment for the Federal 8-hour standard ***Secondary Standard
Source: CARB 2015; SJVAPCD 2015

564
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-22
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact . CEQA requires that certain projects be analyzed for consistency with the applicable air quality plan. For a project to be consistent with SJVAPCD air quality plans, the pollutants emitted from a project should not exceed the SJVAPCD emission thresholds or cause a significant impact on air quality. In addition, emission reductions achieved through implementation of offset requirements are a major component of the SJVAPCD air quality plans. As discussed below, construction of the project would not result in t he generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed SJVAPCD thresholds of significance. Implementation of SJVAPCD Regulation VIII would further reduce construction dust impacts.

Operational emissions associated with the project would not exceed SJVA PCD established significance thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, sulfur oxides (SOX), PM10, or PM2.5 emissions. The Project does exceed the minimum dwelling unit count to be subject to Rule 9510, Indirect Source Review. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of SJVAPCD air quality plans. Impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less than Significant Impact. Construction-generated emissions are temporary in duration, site improvements and construction of the homes will take place over 21 months. The construction of the Project would result in the temporary generation of emissions associated with site grading and excavation, motor vehicle exhaust associated with construction equipment and worker trips, as well as the movement of construction equipment on unpaved surfaces. Estimated construction -generated emissions and operational emissions are summarized in Table 4-6. Operational emissions would occur from vehicular trips, area sources such as fireplaces, and energy sources from the combustion of natural gas. These emissions are summarized in
Table 4-7.

Table 4-6: Unmitigated Short-Term Construction-Generated Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants Source
Annual Emissions (Tons/Year) (1)
ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 SOx
Maximum Annual Proposed Project Emissions: 1.5627 2.9580 3.1400 0.5041 0.2433 <0.0001 SJVAPCD Significance Thresholds: 10 10 100 15 15 27
Exceed SJVAPCD Thresholds? No No No No No No
Emissions were quantified using CalEEmod Output Files Version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for modeling results and assumptions. Totals may not sum due to rounding.
565
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-23

Table 4-7: Unmitigated Long-Term Operational Emissions
Source
Annual Emissions (Tons/Year) (1)
ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 SOx
Maximum Annual Project Emissions: 3.0406 1.9511 11.5568 2.6819 0.7598 0.0274 SJVAPCD Significance Thresholds: 10 10 100 15 15 27
Exceed SJVAPCD Thresholds? No No No No No No
Emissions were quantified using CalEEmod Output Files Version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for modeling results and assumptions. Totals may not sum due to rounding.

As Project emissions will not exceed established thresholds, impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. The Project would generate diesel particulate matter during construction and during project operations when solid waste is being collected from the site. These emissions are short in duration, temporary, and consistent with emissions found in the project vicinity. Furthermore, the conversion of farmland would likely result in similar emission reductions. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact. Land uses that are typically identified as sources of objectionable odors include landfills, transfer stations, sewage treatment plants, wastewater pump stations, composting faciliti es, feed lots, coffee roaster, asphalt batch plants, and rendering plants, among other uses. The Project does not include any of these activities or land uses. The Project would therefore have no impact with respect to generation of emissions leading to odors or other adverse or objectionable emissions.

566
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-24

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Table 4-8: Biological Resources Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but
not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?

Baseline Conditions
General
The proposed Project is located in the City of Visalia within Tulare County about one mile west of the census designated place of Linnell Camp, California. This area lies within the Central Valley of California near the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range. The topography is relatively flat with elevations ranging from approximately 300 to 400 feet, with underlying rock formations of sandstone.

Like most of California, the San Joaquin Valley experiences a Mediterranean climate. Warm, dry summers are followed by cool, moist winters. Summer temperatures often reach above 90 degrees Fahrenheit, and 567
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-25
the humidity is generally low. Winter temperatures are often below 60 degrees Fahrenheit during the day and rarely exceed 70 degrees. On average, the Central Valley receives approximately 12 inches of precipitation in the form of rainfall yearly, most of which occurs between October and April.

Water
The nearest surface waters are Cameron Creek which runs along the eastern and southern portions of the APE and the TID Canal that runs along the western portion of the APE . Cameron Creek and the TID Canal did not have any surface water present during the survey. There were canine tracks near both the creek and canal that were consistent with that of a domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris).

Watersheds are made up of many smaller subwatersheds that drain into a particular stream, river, or lake.

The Project site lies within the Middle Branch Cross Creek watershed; Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC):
1803000714 and a single subwatershed: Cameron Creek subwatershed; HUC: 180300071402. A watershed is the topographic region that drains into a stream, river, or lake. The nearest surface waters are Cameron Creek which runs along the east and southeast portion of the APE. The creek did not have any visible water present during the survey.

The Middle Branch Cross Creek watershe d is comprised of stormwater or snowmelt collected in upland areas which flows down into Lion Lake. Lone Pine Creek exits Lion Lake and flows into Tamarack Lake.

Hamilton Creek flows from Precipice Lake downstream before it combines with Lone Pine Creek to become the Middle Fork Kaweah River. Granite Creek, Cliff Creek, Buck Creek, Castle Creek, Mehrten Creek, Panther Creek, Dome Creek, and Paradise Creek all flow into the Middle Fork Kaweah River. Farther downstream the Middle Fork Kaweah River combines wi th the Marble Fork Kaweah River and forms the start of the Kaweah River. Elk Creek and Salt Creek flows into the Kaweah River which then goes into Kaweah Lake which exits as Kaweah River. This river then receives inputs from Dry Creek, and Lane Slough before flowing into Cameron Creek along with Deep Creek. Cameron Creek then runs along the east and southeast portion of the APE. Cameron Creek exits the APE and runs southwest and through Mooney Grove Park and empties into a basin. Cameron Creek then picks up further downstream near the City of Paige and connects to a canal that empties into the Tule River which terminates in a canal within the former Tulare Lake.

Soil
Two soil mapping units representing two soil types were identified within the APE and are l isted in Table 4-9. Within the two soil mapping units there are also minor units within the APE. The soils are displayed with their core properties according to the Major Land Resource Area of California (MLRA) 19 map area.

Both soil types are primarily used for farmland, if irrigated.

Table 4-9: List of Soils Located Onsite and Their Basic Properties Soil Soil Map Unit Percent
of APE
Hydric
Unit
Hydric
Minor
Units
Drainage Permeability Runoff
Grangeville
Sandy loam,
drained, 0 to 2
percent slopes

59.8% Yes Yes
Somewhat
poorly
drained
Moderate
permeability
Negligible
runoff
Nord Sandy loam, 0 to
2 percent slopes 40.2% No Yes Well drained Moderate
permeability
Negligible
runoff
The full soil report can be found in Appendix B: Biological Evaluation at the end of this document. 568
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-26
Wildlife and Plant Species
A thorough search of the CNDDB for published accounts of special status plant and animal species was conducted for the Visalia and Exeter 7.5-minute quadrangles that contain the APE, and for the 10 surrounding quadrangles: Traver, Monson, Ivanhoe, Woodlake, Rocky Hill, Lindsay, Cairns Corner, Tulare, Paige, and Goshen. Appendix B: Biological Evaluation shows the Project’s 7.5-minute quadrangle, according to United States Geological Survey Topographic Maps. These species, and their potential to occur within the APE, are listed in Table 4-11 and Table 4-12 below. Raw data obtained from CNDDB and IPaC is available in Appendix B: Biological Evaluation at the end of this document. All relevant sources of information, as discussed in the Study Methodology section of this report were used to determine if any special status species are known to be within the APE.

A tree survey was performed on April 7, 2022. Ten Valley Oak trees were found within the APE and their height and Diameter Breast Height (DBH) were measured (see Figure 4-2 for their individual locations within the Project site) . Results from the tree survey can be found in Table 4-10. All ten Valley Oak trees found within the APE have a DBH of eighteen (18) inches or greater and will require a tree removal permit and subsequent mitigation as written in the City of Visalia Oak Tree Ordinance. A map showing the locations of the trees within the APE can be found in Appendix B: Biological Evaluation.

Of the 22 regionally occurring special status plant species, 22 are considered absent from or unlikely to occur within the APE due to past or ongoing disturbance and/or the absence of suitable habitat. These species include: alkali-sink goldfields, brittlescale, ca lico monkeyflower, California alkali grass, California jewelflower, California satintail, Coulter’s goldfields, Earlimart orache, Greene’s tuctoria, heartscale, Hoover’s spurge, Kaweah brodiea, lesser saltscale, recurved larkspur, San Joaquin adobe sunburs t, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, Sanford’s Arrowhead, spiny -sepaled button-celery, stiped adobe -lily, subtle orache, vernal pool, and Winter’s sunflower.

Table 4-10: Results from the Valley Oak Tree Survey
Species Height (feet) (DBH) (Inches)
Protected
under the Oak
Tree Ordinance
Valley Oak
Tree #1 67.4 44.01 Yes
Valley Oak
Tree #2 104.8 53.34 Yes
Valley Oak
Tree #3 117.4 32.32 Yes
Valley Oak
Tree #4 128 66.34 Yes
Valley Oak
Tree #5 61.4 22.83 Yes
Valley Oak
Tree #6 98.4 62.20 Yes
Valley Oak
Tree #7 77.9 51.18 Yes
Valley Oak
Tree #8 85.7 39.00 Yes
Valley Oak
Tree #9 43.4 18.90 Yes
569
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-27
Species Height (feet) (DBH) (Inches)
Protected
under the Oak
Tree Ordinance
Valley Oak
Tree #10 55.1 52.75 Yes

Table 4-11: List of Special Status Animals with Potential to Occur Onsite and/or in the Vicinity Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
American badger
(Taxidea taxus) CSC
Grasslands, savannas, and mountain
meadows near timberline are preferred.

Most abundant in drier open spaces of
shrub and grassland. Burrows in soil.

Unlikely. The only recorded regional
occurrence of this species occurred
approximately four miles northeast of the
APE in 1994. The APE is frequently
disturbed area with stray and domestic
dogs that would this species from living
here.

Blunt-nosed leopard
lizard
(Gambelia sila)

FE, CE,
CFP
Inhabits semi-arid grasslands, alkali flats,
low foothills, canyon floors, large
washes, and arroyos, usually on sandy,
gravelly, or loamy substrate, sometimes
on hardpan. Often found where there
are abundant rodent burrows in dense
vegetation or tall grass. Cannot survive
on lands under cultivation. Known to
bask on kangaroo rat mounds and often
seeks shelter at the base of shrubs, in
small mammal burrows, or in rock piles.

Adults may excavate shallow burrows
but rely on deeper pre-existing rodent
burrows for hibernation and
reproduction.

Absent. There are no recorded regional
observations of this species in CNDDB. The
species is listed on IPaC. The most recent
recorded observation is from iNaturalist in
2019 approximately 20 miles of the APE.

Suitable habitat is not present within the
APE. There are frequently disturbed
agricultural fields. Rodent burrows in this
area are not abundant.

Burrowing Owl
(Athene cunicularia) CSC
Resides in open, dry annual or perennial
grasslands, deserts, and scrublands with
low growing vegetation. Nests
underground in existing burrows
created by mammals, most often
ground squirrels.

Unlikely. There are ten recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
occurred approximately nine miles north of
the APE in 2006. The APE does not have an
abundant amount of ground squirrel
burrows that would be suitable habitat for
this species.

California red-legged
frog
(Rana draytonii)

FT, CSC
Inhabits perennial rivers, creeks, and
stock ponds with vegetative cover
within the Coast Range and northern
Sierra foothills.

Absent. The APE is outside of this species
known range. There are no recorded
regional observations of this species in
CNDDB. The species is listed in IPaC as a
Federally Threatened species. The nearest
observation on iNaturalist is from 2015
approximately 70 miles southwest of the
APE.

California tiger
salamander
(Ambystoma
californiense)

FT, CT,
CWL
Requires vernal pools or seasonal ponds
for breeding and small mammal
burrows for aestivation. Generally found
in grassland and oak savannah plant
communities in central California from
sea level to 1500 feet in elevation.

Unlikely. There are 13 recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
occurred approximately nine miles north of
the APE in 2002. Cameron Creek has been
historically dry and the TID canal does not
provide suitable habitat for this species.

Upland habitat required by this species is
570
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-28
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
also absent from the APE and surrounding
areas.

Delta smelt
(Hypomesus
transpacificus)
FT, CE
This pelagic and euryhaline species is
Endemic to the Sacramento-San Joaquin
River Delta, upstream through Contra
Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, and
Solano Counties.

Absent. The APE is outside of this species
known range. There are no recorded
regional observations of this species in
CNDDB. This species is listed in IPaC as
federally threatened. The nearby canal is
dry and there are no tributaries that
connect with a known delta smelt
waterway.

Foothill yellow-legged
frog
(Rana boylii)

CCT, CSC
Frequents rocky streams and rivers with
rocky substrate and open, sunny banks
in forests, chaparral, and woodlands.

Occasionally found in isolated pools,
vegetated backwaters, and deep,
shaded, spring-fed pools.

Absent. The APE is outside of this species
known range. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately 12.5 miles northeast of the
APE in 1941 but is listed as extirpated.

There is no suitable habitat present for this
species.

Giant gartersnake
(Thamnophis gigas) FT, CT
Occurs in marshes, sloughs, drainage
canals, irrigation ditches, rice fields, and
adjacent uplands. Prefers locations with
emergent vegetation for cover and
open areas for basking. This species
uses small mammal burrows adjacent to
aquatic habitats for hibernation in the
winter and to escape from excessive
heat in the summer.

Unlikely. There are no recorded regional
observations of this species in CNDDB. The
species is listed on IPaC as federally
threatened. There are some mammal
burrows in the area, but Cameron Creek
and the TID Canal do not provide suitable
habitat as they lack surface water and
emergent vegetation.

Loggerhead Shrike
(Lanius ludovicianus) CSC
Frequents open habitats with sparse
shrubs and trees, other suitable
perches, bare ground, and low
herbaceous cover. In the Central Valley,
nests in riparian areas, desert scrub, and
agricultural hedgerows.

Unlikely. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately 12 miles northwest of the
APE in 1992. There are multiple
observations of the species on iNaturalist.

The nearest observation is from 2019
approximately 7.5 miles south of the APE in
the Herbert Wetland Prairie Preserve. The
walnut groves and frequent maintenance
and disturbance in the APE would deter this
species.

Northern California
legless lizard (Anniella
pulchra)
CSC
Found primarily underground,
burrowing in loose, sandy soil. Forages
in loose soil and leaf litter during the
day. Occasionally observed on the
surface at dusk and night.

Possible. The nearest contemporary
observation of this species occurred
approximately 4.5 miles east of the APE in
2015. The most recent recorded
observation is from iNaturalist in 2021
approximately 6 miles southeast of the APE.

Soils within the APE and leaf litter from the
Valley oaks in the APE could provide
suitable habitat for the species.

Northern leopard frog
(Lithobates pipiens) CSC
Inhabits grassland, wet meadows,
potholes, forests, woodland,
brushlands, springs, canals, bogs,
marshes, and reservoirs. Generally,
prefers permanent water with abundant
riparian vegetation.

Absent. There are two recorded regional
observations of this species. Both
observations of this species occurred
approximately 12 miles north of the APE in
1961 and are listed as transplants outside of
native habitat/range. The habitat required
for this species is not present within or
nearby the APE.

Pallid bat (Antrozous
pallidus) CSC
Found in grasslands, chaparral, and
woodlands, where it feeds on ground-
and vegetation-dwelling arthropods,
Possible. Multiple tree cavities were present
in an orchard within the APE. The biological
survey was conducted during the day so
571
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-29
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
and occasionally takes insects in flight.

Prefers to roost in rock crevices, but
may also use tree cavities, caves,
bridges, and other man-made
structures.
nighttime surveys would be needed to
determine presence or absence of this
species. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately four miles northeast of the
APE in 2004.

San Joaquin kit fox
(Vulpes macrotis
mutica)
FE, CT
Underground dens with multiple
entrances in alkali sink, valley grassland,
and woodland in valleys and adjacent
foothills.

Unlikely. There are 25 recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
observation of this species occurred
approximately 0.5 miles southwest of the
APE in 1975. There is an observation on
iNaturalist from 2017 approximately 45
miles southwest of the APE. There are
multiple domestic and stray dogs in the
area that would deter the species from
living here.

Swainson’s Hawk
(Buteo swainsoni) CT
Nests in large trees in open areas
adjacent to grasslands, grain or alfalfa
fields, or livestock pastures suitable for
supporting rodent populations.

Possible. There are 34 recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
observation of this species occurred
approximately seven miles south of the APE
in 2016. There is an observation on
iNaturalist from 2021 approximately 5 miles
to the east of the APE in the Kaweah Oaks
Preserve. Oak trees within the APE are tall
enough to support nests.

Tipton kangaroo rat
(Dipodomys
nitratoides
nitratoides)
FE, CE Burrows in soil. Often found in grassland
and shrubland.

Unlikely. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately 12 miles south of the APE in
1943. A more recent regional observation
was found in iNaturalist from 2019
approximately 50 miles southwest of the
APE. No tail drags were observed on APE.

Tricolored Blackbird
(Agelaius tricolor) CT, CSC
Nests colonially near fresh water in
dense cattails or tules, or in thickets of
riparian shrubs. Forages in grassland
and cropland. Large colonies are often
found on dairy farm forage fields.

Unlikely. There are three recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
observation of this species occurred
approximately ten miles east of the APE in
2000. There is also a recent observation
from 2020 approximately 22 miles east of
the APE on iNaturalist. No riparian shrubs or
dense cattails present on APE. Cameron
Creek and the TID Canal do not provide
suitable habitat as they lack surface water
or riparian shrubs.

Valley elderberry
longhorn beetle
(Desmocerus
californicus
dimorphus)
FT
Lives in mature elderberry shrubs of the
Central Valley and foothills. Adults are
active March to June.

Absent. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately eight miles northeast of the
APE in 1991. The APE is absent of
elderberry shrubs that this species requires.

Vernal pool fairy
shrimp (Branchinecta
lynchi)
FT
Occupies vernal pools, clear to tea-
colored water, in grass or mud-
bottomed swales, and basalt depression
pools.

Absent. Suitable habitat for the species is
absent from the APE and surrounding areas.

The soils within the APE are sandy-loam and
do not compact like clay to create vernal
pools. Further vernal pools were not
observed during the field survey.
572
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-30
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
Vernal pool tadpole
shrimp (Lepidurus
packardi)
FE
Occurs in vernal pools, clear to tea-
colored water, in grass or mud-
bottomed swales, and basalt depression
pools.

Absent. Suitable habitat for the species is
absent from the APE and surrounding areas.

The soils within the APE are sandy-loam and
do not compact like clay to create vernal
pools. Further vernal pools were not
observed during the field survey.

Western mastiff bat
(Eumops perotis
californicus)
CSC
Found in open, arid to semi-arid
habitats, including dry desert washes,
flood plains, chaparral, oak woodland,
open ponderosa pine forest, grassland,
and agricultural areas, where it feeds on
insects in flight. Roosts most commonly
in crevices in cliff faces but may also use
high buildings and tunnels.

Unlikely. There are no cliff faces, high
buildings, or tunnels in or nearby the APE
that would be suitable habitat for this
species.

Western pond turtle
(Emys marmorata) CSC
An aquatic turtle of ponds, marshes,
slow-moving rivers, streams, and
irrigation ditches with riparian
vegetation. Requires adequate basking
sites and sandy banks or grassy open
fields to deposit eggs.

Unlikely. There is one recorded regional
observation of this species with an
unknown location in the vicinity of Visalia in
1879. The only creek beds or canals nearby
have been historically dry and surrounding
areas lack upland habitat required by this
species.

Western spadefoot
(Spea hammondii) CSC
Prefers open areas with sandy or
gravelly soils, in a variety of habitats
including mixed woodlands, grasslands,
coastal sage scrub, chaparral, sandy
washes, lowlands, river floodplains,
alluvial fans, playas, alkali flats, foothills,
and mountains. Vernal pools or
temporary wetlands, lasting a minimum
of three weeks, which do not contain
bullfrogs, fish, or crayfish are necessary
for breeding.

Unlikely. Suitable habitat for the species is
absent from the APE and surrounding areas.

The soils within the APE are sandy-loam and
do not compact like clay to create vernal
pools. There are no vernal pools or
temporary wetlands in or near the APE that
would provide suitable habitat for this
species.

Western Yellow-billed
Cuckoo (Coccyzus
americanus
occidentalis)
FT, CE
Suitable nesting habitat in California
includes dense riparian willow-
cottonwood and mesquite habitats
along a perennial river. Once a common
breeding species in riparian habitats of
lowland California, this species currently
breeds consistently in only two locations
in the State: along the Sacramento and
South Fork Kern Rivers.

Absent. There is one historical recorded
regional observation of this species which
occurred in 1919 in the vicinity of Visalia. It
is listed as extirpated. There are no willow-
cottonwood habitats along a perennial river
in or nearby the APE that would provide
suitable habitat for this species.

Table 4-12: List of Special Status Plants with Potential to Occur Onsite and/or in the Vicinity Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
Alkali-sink goldfields
(Lasthenia chrysantha) CNPS 1B
Found in vernal pool and wet saline flat
habitats. Occurrences documented in
the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys
at elevations below 656 feet. Blooms
February - April.

Absent. There are six recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observations of this species
occurred four miles west of the APE on an
unknown date in the 1990’s. There are no
vernal pools or saline flat areas that would
be suitable habitat for this species.
573
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-31
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
Brittlescale
(Atriplex depressa) CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
Sacramento Valley in alkaline or clay
soils, typically in meadows or annual
grassland in at elevations below 1050
feet. Sometimes associated with vernal
pools. Blooms June–October.

Absent. There are two recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observation of this species is a
historical occurrence which occurred in
the vicinity of Visalia in 1881. The other
recorded observation is approximately

13.5 miles northwest of the APE in 1968.

The required soils for the species are not
present in or near the APE.

Calico monkeyflower
(Diplacus pictus /
Mimulus pictus /
Eunanus pictus)
CNPS 1B
Found in the Sierra Nevada foothills and
the Tehachapi mountains in bare,
sunny, shrubby areas, and around
granite outcrops within foothill
woodland communities at elevations
between 450 feet and 4100 feet.

Blooms March – May.

Absent. There are two recorded regional
observations of this species. The closest
observation of this species occurred
approximately eight miles west of the APE
in 1935. The elevation requirement for this
species to occur is not present within the
APE. There are no granite outcrops within
foothill woodland communities required
for this species.

California alkali grass
(Puccinellia simplex) CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
other parts of California in saline flats
and mineral springs within valley
grassland and wetland-riparian
communities at elevations below 3000
feet. Blooms March–May.

Unlikely. There are five recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
occurred approximately nine miles west of
the APE in 1925 and is listed as possibly
extirpated. Although the APE meets the
elevation requirement for this species, but
the required soils are absent.

California jewelflower
(Caulanthus
californicus)

FE, CE,
CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
Western Transverse Ranges in sandy
soils. Occurs on flats and slopes,
generally in non-alkaline grassland at
elevations between 230 feet and 6100
feet. Blooms February–April.

Unlikely. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately seven miles southwest of
the APE in 1932 and is listed as extirpated.

There are no grasslands in or near the APE
that would be required for the species.

California satintail
(Imperata brevifolia) CNPS 2B
Although this facultative species is
equally likely to occur in wetlands and
non-wetlands, it is often found in wet
springs, meadows, streambanks, and
floodplains at elevations below 1600
feet. Blooms September – May.

Unlikely. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred at an
unknown location in the vicinity of Visalia
in 1895. The creek and canal adjacent to
the APE lacked surface water and riparian
vegetation.

Coulter’s goldfields
(Lasthenia glabrata
ssp. coulteri)
CNPS 1B
Found on alkaline or saline soils in
vernal pools and playas in grassland at
elevations below 4500 feet. Blooms
April–May.

Absent. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately 11.5 miles north of the APE
in 2015. There are no vernal pools or
playas in grassland in or near the APE. The
required soils for this species are absent.

Earlimart orache
(Atriplex cordulata var.
erecticaulis)
CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley in saline
or alkaline soils, typically within valley
and foothill grassland at elevations
below 375 feet. Blooms August–
September.

Absent. There are four recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
occurred approximately 11.5 miles
northwest of the APE in 2017. The
required soils are absent from the APE and
surrounding areas.
574
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-32
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
Greene’s tuctoria
(Tuctoria greenei)

FE, CR,
CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
other parts of California in vernal pools
within valley grassland, wetland, and
riparian communities at elevations
below 3500 feet. Blooms May –
September.

Unlikely. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred at an
unknown location in the vicinity of
Woodlake in 1936 and is listed as
extirpated. There are no vernal pools
within valley grassland, wetland or riparian
communities in or near the APE that would
support this species.

Heartscale (Atriplex
cordulata var.
cordulata)
CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
Sacramento Valley in saline or alkaline
soils within shadescale scrub, valley
grassland, and wetland-riparian
communities at elevations below 230
feet. Blooms June–July.

Absent. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred at an
unknown location in the vicinity of Goshen
approximately nine miles west of the APE
in 1938. There are no valley grassland or
wetland riparian communities that would
support this species. The required soils for
this species are absent from the APE.

Hoover’s spurge
(Euphorbia hooveri)
FT,
CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
Sacramento Valley in vernal pools
within valley grassland, freshwater
wetland, and riparian communities at
elevations below 800 feet. Blooms July
– September.

Absent. There are five recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
occurred approximately nine miles north
of the APE in 2011. There are no vernal
pools, freshwater wetland, or riparian
communities in or near the APE that would
support the species.

Kaweah brodiaea
(Brodiaea insignis)
CE,
CNPS 1B
Found in the Sierra Nevada foothills in
foothill woodland and valley grassland
communities at elevations between 650
feet and 1650 feet. Blooms May – June.

Unlikely. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately 15 miles northeast of the
APE in 1989. There are no valley grassland
communities in or near the APE to support
the species.

Lesser saltscale
(Atriplex minuscula) CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley in
sandy, alkaline soils in alkali scrub,
valley and foothill grassland, and alkali
sink communities at elevations below
750 feet. Blooms April–October.

Absent. There are eight recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
occurred approximately 9 miles west of
the APE in 2002. The required soils for the
species are not present in or near the APE.

Recurved larkspur
(Delphinium
recurvatum)
CNPS 1B
Occurs in poorly drained, fine, alkaline
soils in grassland and alkali scrub
communities at elevations between 100
feet and 2600 feet. Blooms March–
June.

Absent. There are six recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
contemporary recorded observation of
this species occurred approximately 10
miles south of the APE in 2010. The soils
required for the species is not present in
or near the APE.

San Joaquin adobe
sunburst
(Pseudobahia
peirsonii)

FT, CE,
CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and the
Sierra Nevada Foothills in bare dark clay
soils in valley and foothill grassland and
cismontane woodland communities at
elevations between 325 feet and 2950
feet. Blooms March–May.

Absent. There are four recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
contemporary recorded observation of
this species that has not been extirpated
occurred approximately 13.5 miles
northeast of the APE in 1992. The soils
required for the species are not present in
or near the APE.

San Joaquin Valley
Orcutt grass (Orcuttia
inaequalis)

FT, CE,
CNPS 1B
Found in the eastern San Joaquin Valley
and the Sierra Nevada foothills in vernal
pools within valley grassland,
freshwater wetland, and wetland-
riparian communities at elevations
Absent. There are two recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
contemporary recorded observation of
this species that has not been extirpated
occurred approximately 9.5 miles north of
575
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-33
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
below 2600 feet. Blooms April –
September.
the APE in 2017. There are no vernal
pools, valley grasslands, or freshwater
wetlands in or near the APE to support the
species.

Sanford’s arrowhead
(Sagittaria sanfordii) CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
other parts of California in freshwater-
marsh, primarily ponds and ditches, at
elevations below 1000 feet. Blooms
May–October.

Absent. There are two recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
occurred approximately ten miles north of
the APE in 2018. The creek and canal
adjacent to the APE lacked surface water
and riparian vegetation.

Spiny-sepaled button-
celery (Eryngium
spinosepalum)
CNPS 1B
Found in the Sierra Nevada Foothills
and the San Joaquin Valley. Occurs in
vernal pools, swales, and roadside
ditches. Often associated with clay soils
in vernal pools within grassland
communities. Occurs at elevations
between 50 feet and 4160 feet. Blooms
April–July.

Unlikely. There are 16 recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
recorded contemporary observation of
this species occurred approximately nine
miles north of the APE in 1992. There are
no vernal pools or swales in or near the
APE that would support the species.

Striped adobe-lily
(Fritillaria striata)
CT,
CNPS 1B
Found in the Sierra Nevada foothills in
adobe soil within valley grassland and
foothill woodland communities at
elevations below 3300 feet. Blooms
February – April.

Absent. The only recorded regional
observation of this species occurred
approximately ten miles east of the APE in
1938 and is now listed as extirpated. The
soils required for the species are absent
from the APE or surrounding areas.

Subtle orache (Atriplex
subtilis) CNPS 1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley in saline
depressions in alkaline soils within
valley and foothill grassland
communities at elevations below 330
feet. Blooms June–October.

Absent. The only recorded contemporary
observation of this species in the region
occurred approximately 10.5 miles south
of the APE in 1999. The soils required for
the species are not present in the APE or
surrounding areas.

Vernal pool smallscale
(Atriplex persistens) CNPS 1B
Occurs in the San Joaquin Valley and
Sacramento Valley in alkaline vernal
pools at elevations below 375 feet.

Blooms June–September.

Absent. There are two recorded regional
observations of this species. Both
observations occurred approximately 12
miles north of the APE in 2010. There are
no alkaline vernal pools in or near the APE
that would support the species.

Winter’s sunflower
(Helianthus winteri) CNPS 1B
Found in the Sierra Nevada foothills on
steep, south-facing grassy slopes, rock
outcrops, and road-cuts at elevations
ranging from 600 feet to 1500 feet.

Blooms year-round.

Absent. There are eight recorded regional
observations of this species. The nearest
observation of this species occurred
approximately 8.5 miles north of the APE
in 2018. There are no south-facing grassy
slopes, rock outcrops or road cuts in or
near the APE that would support the
species.

EXPLANATION OF OCCURRENCE DESIGNATIONS AND STATUS CODES

Present: Species observed on the site at time of field surveys or during recent past.

Likely: Species not observed on the site, but it may reasonably be expected to occur there on a regular basis.

Possible: Species not observed on the site, but it could occur there from time to time.

Unlikely: Species not observed on the site, and would not be expected to occur there except, perhaps, as a transient.

Absent: Species not observed on the site and precluded from occurring there due to absence of suitable habitat.

STATUS CODES
FE Federally Endangered CE California Endangered
FT Federally Threatened CT California Threatened
CCT California Threatened (Candidate)
576
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-34
CFP California Fully Protected
CSC California Species of Concern
CWL California Watch List
CR California Rare

CNPS LISTING
1B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in. 2B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere. California, but more common elsewhere.

CT California Threatened
CSC California Species of Concern
Applicable Regulations
Federal
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) was enacted as an amendment to the federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, which outlined the basic structure for regulating discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States (WOTUS). The CWA serves as the primary federal law protecting the quality of the nation’s surface waters, including lakes, rivers, and coastal wetlands.

The CWA empowers the USEPA to set national water quality standards and effluent limitations and includes programs addressing both point-source and nonpoint-source pollution. Point-source pollution is pollution that originates or enters surface waters at a single, discrete location, such as a n outfall structure or an excavation or construction site. Nonpoint-source pollution originates over a broader area and includes urban contaminants in stormwater runoff and sediment loading from upstream areas. The CWA operates on the principle that all discharges into the nations waters are unlawful unless specifically authorized by a permit; with permit review being the CWAs primary regulatory tool. The following sections provide additional details on specific sections of the CWA.
• Section 404: CWA Section 404 regulates the discharge of dredged and fill materials into WOTUS. In 2020, the USEPA and USACE published the Navigable Water Protection Rule defining the jurisdiction of what is considered WOTUS. WOTUS jurisdiction applies to navigable waters a nd includes four categories of water: territorial seas and traditional navigable water; tributaries of such waters; certain lakes, ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters; and wetlands adjacent to other jurisdictional waters. The new rule also def ines what is not considered WOTUS.

The rule provide that groundwater is not a jurisdictional water and explicitly excludes ephemeral features that flow only in direct response to precipitation, diffuse stormwater runoff, ditches, prior converted cropland, artificially irrigated water or lakes, water -filled depressions constructed or excavated incidental to mining or construction activities, and water filled pits excavated for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel.

As determined by the United Stat es Supreme Court in the 2001 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 121 S.CT. 675, 2001, (commonly referred to as the “SWANCC” decision) ” Based on SWANCC, the USACE no longer has jurisdiction or regulates isolated wetlands that have no hypothetical or observed hydrologic connection with a WOTUS).

A June 19, 2006, federal ruling on two consolidated cases ( Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States Army Corps of Engineers ), often referred to as the Ra panos decision, affects whether adjacent waters or wetlands are considered jurisdictional under the CWA. The directive of the court follows the opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy, which states that the test for waters 577
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-35
of the United States should be determi ned on a case -by-case basis by USACE on the basis of whether a particular water body has “significant nexus” to navigable waters.

Applicants must obtain a permit from the USACE for all discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States , including adjacent wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed activity. The USACE may issue either an individual permit evaluated on a case -by-case basis, or a Nationwide general permit (NWP) evaluated at a program level for a series of related activiti es.

NWP are preauthorized activities that have been determined to cause only minimal adverse environmental effects. Each NWP provides specific conditions that must be met for the NWP to apply to a project. Potential WOTUS found within the project area would be under the jurisdiction of the Sacramento District of the USACE.

Compliance with CWA Section 404 requires compliance with several other environmental laws and regulations. The USACE cannot issue an individual permit or verify the use of a NWP until the requirements of the NEPA, ESA, and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) have been met.

In addition, the USACE cannot issue or verify any permit until a CWA Section 401 water quality certification or a waiver of certification has been issued. This is discussed further below. • Section 402: CWA Section 402 regulates construction -related stormwater discharges to surface waters through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, administered by the USEPA. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has authority to oversee the NPDES program and is implemented through the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) (see further related discussions under “Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act” below). The APE would be under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley RWQCB.

NPDES permits are required for projects that disturb one (1) acre or more of land. The NPDES permitting process requires the applicant to file a NOI to discharge stormwater and prepare and implement a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP includes a site map and a description of proposed construction activities. In addition, it describes the BMPs that would be implemented to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction-related pollutants (e.g., petroleum products, solvents, paints, and cement) that may contaminate nearby water resources.

Permittees are required to conduct annual monitoring and reporting to ensure that BMPs are correctly implemented and effective in controlling the discharge of stormwater-related pollutants. • Section 401: In 2020, California regulations protecting wetland and state waters were approved by the SWRCB and have updated defined procedures for discharges of dredge or fill material to waters of the State. The new procedures consist of four major elements: a wetland definition; framework for determining if a feature meets the wetland definition; delineation procedures; and procedures for the submittal, review and approval of applications for water quality certification and waste discharge requirements (WDRs). Discharges into waters of the State that are also waters of the United States require a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB as a prerequisite to obtaining certain federal permits, such as a CWA Section 404 permit. Waters of the State also include wetlands Discharges into all waters of the State, even those that are not also Waters of the United States, may require WDRs, or waivers of WDRs, from the RWQCB. 578
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-36
Executive Order 13186 – Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), 16 United States Government Code 703–711, prohibits the take of any migratory bird or any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird.5 Under the act, “take” is defined as the action of or attempt to “pursue, hunt, shoot, capture, collect, or kill”. This act applies to all persons and agencies in the United States, including federal agencies.

Executive Order 13186 requires that any project with federal funding, permitting, or action must address the impacts of the project on migratory birds. The order is designed to assist federal agencies in their efforts to comply with the MBTA and does not constitute any legal authorization to take migratory birds. The order also requires federal funding, permitting, or action-taking agencies to work with the USFWS to develop a memorandum of u nderstanding (MOU). Protocols developed under the MOU must promote the conservation of migratory bird populations through:
• Avoiding and minimizing, to the extent practicable, adverse impacts on migratory bird resources when conducting agency actions;
• Restoring and enhancing the habitat of migratory birds, as practicable; and • Preventing or abating the pollution or detrimental alteration of the environment for the benefit of migratory birds, as practicable.

Executive Order 13112: Invasive Species
EO 13112, signed February 3, 1999, directs all federal agencies to prevent and control the introduction of invasive species in a cost -effective and environmentally sound manner. The EO requires consideration of invasive species in NEPA analyses, including their identification and distribution, their potential effects, and measures to prevent or eradicate them.

Executive Order 11990: Protection of Wetlands
Executive Order 11990, signed May 24, 1977, directs all federal agencies to refrain from assisting in or giving financial support to projects that encroach on publicly or privately -owned wetlands. It further requires that federal agencies support a policy to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands.

State
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA is the regulatory framework by which California public agencies identify and mitigate significant environmental impacts. The CEQA statute is set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. and the Guidelines implementing the Act (State CEQA Guidelines) are set forth in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq. A project normally is considered to result in a significant environmental impact on biological resources if it substantially affects a rare or endangered species or the habitat of that species, substantially interferes with the movement of resident or migratory fish or wildlife, or substantially diminishes habitat for fish, wildlife, or plants.

California Endangered Species Act
California implemented California Endangered Species Act ( CESA) in 1984. The act prohibits the take of endangered and threatened species; however, habitat destruction is not included in the States definition of take. Under CESA, “take” is defined as an activity that would directly or indirectly hunt, pursue, catch,

5 Executive Order 13186, 2001. Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds. Federal Register. Vol. 66, No. 11. https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/nepapub/nepa_documents/RedDont/Req-EO13186migratorybirds.pdf Date Accessed:
11/6/2017.
579
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-37
capture, or kill an individual of a species . Section 2090 of CESA requir es State agencies to comply with endangered-species protection and recovery and promote conservation of these species. CDFW administers the act and authorizes take through Section 2081 agreements (except for species designated as fully protected). Regarding rare plant species, CESA defers to the California Native Plant Protection Act of 1977, which preserves, protects, and enhances rare and endangered plant species and prohibits importing/exporting or the sale of rare and endangered plants. All State plants that have been designed as rare, threatened, endangered , or listed as a candidate or species of special concern are protected. In addition to federal and State protection the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) has a ranking system that places native plants into categories or ranks reflecting degrees of concern and which also needs to be addressed during CEQA review.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
Water Code Section 13260 requires “any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, in any region that could affect the waters of the state to file a report of discharge (an application for waste discharge requirements)”. Under the Porter -Cologne definition, the term “waters of the State” (as distinguished from Waters of the United States) is defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state”. The SWANCC ruling and Rapanos decision, described above, have no bearing on the Porter-Cologne definition. Although all waters of the United States that are within the borders of California are also waters of the State, the converse is not true (i.e., in California, waters of the United States represent a subset of waters of the state). Thus, California retains authority to regulate discharges of waste into any waters of the state, regardless of whether the USACE has concurrent jurisdiction under CWA 404.

If the USACE determines a wetland is not subject to regulation under CWA 404, CWA 401 water quality certification is not required. However, the RWQCB may impose WDRs if fill material is placed into waters of the state.

California Fish and Game Code
• Section 1602: Under Fish and Game Code Section 1602, public agencies are required to notify CDFW before undertaking any project that would divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow, bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake. Preliminary notification and project review occur generally 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 resources. These modifications are formalized in a streambed -alteration agreement that becomes part of the plans, specifications, and bid documents for the project. • Sections 3503 and 3503.5: Fish and Game Code Section 3503 prohibits the destruction of bird nests.

Section 3503.5 prohibits the killing of raptor species and the destruction of raptor nests. • Section 3511 (Fully Protected Birds): The Fish and Game Code p rovides protection from take for a variety of species of birds, referred to as fully protected species. Section 3511 lists fully protected birds and prohibits take of these species. The Fish and Game Code defines take as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill”. Except for take related to scientific research, all take of fully protected species of birds is prohibited. 580
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-38
California Oak Woodlands Conservation Act
The California Oak Woodlands Conservation Act was enacted in 2001 to protect oak woodland habitats that were being diminished due to development, firewood harvesting, and agricultural conversions.6 The Oak Woodlands Conservation Program was established as a result of the act and is intended to provide project funding opportunities for private landowners, conservation organizations, and cities and counties to conserve and restore oak woodlands. The program authorizes the Wildlife Conservation Board to purchase oak woodland conservation easements and provide grants for land improvements and oak restoration efforts. The Planning Area contains a large stand of California Valley Oak Woodland and also contains scattered oak woodland stands that have been preserved throughout the City.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan Update
Objective OSC-O-7
Preserve and enhance Planning Area waterways and adjacent corridors as valuable community resources which serve as plant and wildlife habitats, as groundwater recharge facilities, as flood control and irrigation components, and as connections between open space areas.

Policy OSC-P-8
Protect, restore and enhance a continuous corridor of native riparian vegetation along Planning Area waterways, including the St. Johns River; Mill, Packwood, and Cameron Creeks; and segments of other creeks and ditches where feasible, in conformance with the Parks and Open Space diagram of this General Plan.

Objective OSC-O-10
Protect and enhance natural vegetation throughout the Planning Area, especially types that are considered sensitive natural communities by the Department of Fish and Game.

Policy OSC-P-28
Protect significant stands of Valley Oak woodlands from further development by designating them for Conservation, creating habitat management plans, where needed, and undertaking restoration activities as appropriate.

Policy OSC-P-31
Protect and enhance habitat for special status species, designated under state and federal law.

Require protection of sensitive habitat areas and special status species in new development in the following order: (1) avoidance; (2) onsite mitigation, and (3) offsite mitigation.

Visalia City Oak Tree Ordinance
The City of Visalia has an ordinance preventing the premature removal of native oak trees. The APE hosts 10 Valley oak trees. A table and map of the oak trees within the APE that are subject to this ordinance are available in Appendix B: Biological Evaluation. If oak trees are to be removed, it must comply with the ordinance identified below.

6 (California Wildlife Conservation Board 2023)
581
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-39

Chapter 12.24 of the Visalia Municipal Code, Oak Tree Preservation, provides requirements intended to discourage the premature removal of oak trees.

Section 12.24.020 Definitions.
“Oak Tree” means Valley Oak Tree ( Quercus lobata), with a trunk diameter of eighteen (18) inches or greater at a point 4.5 feet above the root crown (Also referred to as “18 inches Diameter Breast Height (D.B.H.)”). “Oak tree” may also mean a “landmark tree.” “Landmark tree” means any native or non-native tree recognized by city council resolution for its age, size, location outstanding habitat value, superior beauty, historical, and/or cultural significance.

Section 12.24.030 Oak Tree Removal Permit Required.

A. Any person desiring to destroy or remove an oak tree on private or public property must first apply for and obtain a removal permit. Such application shall be in writing to the city clerk, who shall forward such application to the city manager of the city. The application shall contain the number, size and location of the oak trees and a brief statement of the reason of the requested action. The city manager shall charge a fee for said permit, to be established by the city council's annual designation of city fees.

B. Within five calendar days of receipt of such application, the city manager shall post a notice on the subject tree, in a manner reasonably intended to inform the general public, stating that an application for removal of the tree has been filed and is pending with the city manager. Within fourteen calendar days of receipt of such application, the city manager shall inspect the premises whereon such oak trees are located, and shall issue an intended decision in writing as to whether or not the application will be approved, and if so, what mitigation shall be required as a condition to approval, consistent with Section 12.24.035 below; provided, however, that failure to render an intended decision within such period shall not be deemed approval.

C. The city manager shall not grant a removal permit unless one of three findings enumerated in Section 12.24.035 can be made bas ed on substantial evidence and, where necessary, expert advice of a certified arborist. The applicant may submit his or her own supporting material, including a report of an independent certified arborist, for consideration by the city manager.

However, the City manager shall retain the discretion for determining the weight and value to be given to such independent reports.

D. Upon determination that one of the three findings enumerated in Section 12.24.035 can be met and a removal permit may be granted, the city manager shall establish mitigation requirements in a manner consistent with the policy to be developed and implemented pursuant to Section

12.24.037. No mitigation shall be required for oak trees removed pursuant to subsections A. or C. of section 12.24.035, unless the city manager determines that the applicant's negligence or willful conduct contributed to the decline of the health of the oak tree. The mitigation requirements established by the city manager shall attach to the permit as conditions and shall be enforceable as a lien against the applicant's real property. In no event shall the availability of mitigation measures, or the willingness of the applicant to agree to such measures, be a factor in determining whether removal of the tree is warra nted. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.037 Mitigation requirements.
582
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-40
In recognition and furtherance of the purposes of this Chapter, as enumerated in Section

12.24.010, it is the policy of the City of Visalia that property owners who are granted a permit to remove an oak tree pursuant to Subparagraph B. of section 12.24.035 offset the loss of the oak tree by either replacing the oak tree removed with new oak trees on the same property (in- kind mitigation) or by paying mitigation fees intended to be used for the establishment of new oak trees on other property or on public property for the benefit of the general public (in -lieu mitigation). In furtherance of this policy, the city manager shall develop an Oak Tree Mitigation Policy establishing in-kind and in-lieu mitigation measures to be required for oak tree removals.

The Oak Tree Mitigation Policy, and any subsequent amendment thereto, shall be submitted to the city council for approval by resolution. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007) Impact Analysis
a) Would the project 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? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated . The APE contains suitable nesting and/or foraging habitat for a variety of avian species. Swainson’s Hawk was identified as the only special status species likely to occur within the APE.

Implementation of the following measures BIO-1 through BIO-3 will reduce potential impacts to nesting raptors, migratory birds, and special status birds to a less than significant level under CEQA and ensure compliance with State and federal laws protecting these avian species.

Pallid bat was identified as the only special status bat species possible to occur within the APE. Roosting habitat becomes especially sensitive to bat populations during the maternity season (March 1 to September 30) while pups are maturing.

A pre-construction focused survey for bats would be required to identify if Project activities would impact existing bat habitat, presence of high -quality roosting habitat, and/or foraging areas within the APE.

Existing oak and agricultural trees within the APE may contain hollowed out tree cavities that could potentially be used as roosting habitat for bat species.

Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-4 through BIO-8 outlined below will reduce potential impacts to roosting and foraging bats to a less than significant level under CEQA and ensure compliance with State and federal laws protecting these bat species. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The CDFW and USFWS often designates areas of “Critical Habitat” when it lists species as threatened or endangered. Critical Habitat is a specific geographic area that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and would require special management or protection. There are no CNDDB -designated “natural communities of special concern” recorded within the APE or surrounding lands. Therefore, there would be no impact. 583
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-41
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Less than Significant Impact. Typical wetlands, and vernal pools communities were not observed onsite at the time of the biological survey. Cameron Creek which runs along the eastern and southern portion of the APE will not be impacted by the Project. The TID Canal which runs along the western portion of the APE would have a bridge constructed across the Canal to connect the APE to the adjacent property.

The bridge would be approximately 7 feet across by up to 60 feet wide and would be located near Lot

31. Since the TID canal connects to the Kaweah River and Cameron Creek which are jurisdictional waters, it may be considered jurisdictional by regulatory agencies. If the agencies determine the canal to be jurisdictional, an aquatic resource delineation would be performed, and all required permits would be obtained before bridge work begins.

Since construction will involve ground disturbance over an area greater than one acre, the Project will also be required to obtain a Construction General Permit under the Construction Storm Water Program administered by the RWQCB. A prerequisite for this permit is the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to ensure construction activities do not adversely affect water quality. Impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact. Wildlife movement corridors are routes that animals regularly and predictably follow during seasonal migration, dispersal from native ranges, daily travel within home ranges, and inter -population movements. Movement corridors in California are typically associated with valleys, ridgelines, and rivers and creeks supporting riparian vegetation.

The APE does not contain features that would be likely to function as wildlife movement corridors.

Further, a portion of the APE located in the median is disturbed by ongoing traffic and the remainder of the APE is completely surrounded by a fence, which would discourage dispersal and migration. There would be no impacts.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than Significant Impact. Ten Valley Oak trees were identified within the APE. The City of Visalia Oak Tree Ordinance states (12.24.025):
“It is unlawful for any person to willingly remove, destroy, damage, mutilate, poison, or attempt to kill an oak tree in the city, except as may be allowed pursuant to a removal permit as provided for in Section

12.24.020 of this Chapter, or as designated in a notice to prune an oak tree that satisfies Article 3 of this chapter.”7
The ordinance goes on to define “oak tree” as (12.24.020):

7 (American Legal Publishing 2023)
584
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-42
”Oak tree” means Valley Oak Tree (Quercus lobata), with a trunk diameter of eighteen (18) inches or greater at a point 4.5 feet above the root crown (Also referred to as “18 inches Diameter Breast Height (DBH)”).”
A removal permit must be obtained to remove or destroy them. As the Project will require compliance with the removal permit, impacts will be less than significant. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natur al Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The Project is not located within the boundaries of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communities Conservation Plan, or other appr oved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. There would be no impact.

Mitigation
Nesting Raptors, Migratory Birds, and Special Status Birds (Avoidance): The Project’s construction activities will occur, if feasible, between September 16 and J anuary 31 (outside of nesting bird season) in an effort to avoid impacts to nesting birds.
(Pre-construction Surveys): If activities must occur within nesting bird season (February 1 to September 15), a qualified biologist would conduct pre -construction surveys for Swainson’s hawk nests onsite and within a 0.5 -mile radius. This survey would be conducted 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, 2000) or current guidance. The pre -construction survey would also provide a presence/absence survey for all other nesting birds within the APE and an additional 50 feet, no more than 7 days prior to the start of construction. All raptor nests would be considered “active” upon the nest-building stage. (Establish Buffers): On discovery of any active nests or breeding colonies near work areas, the biologist will determine appropriate construction setback distances based on applicable CDFW and/or USFWS guidelines and/or the biology of the species in question.

Construction buffers will be identified with flagging, fencing, or other easily visible means, and will be maintained until the biologist has determined that the nestlings have fledged and are no longer dependent on the nest.

Bats
(Avoidance): The Project’s construction activities will occur, if feasible, between November 1 and February 28 (outside of bat maternity season) in an effort to avoid impacts to maternity roosts.
(Pre-Construction Survey): A pre-construction focused survey for bats will be performed if construction activities fall between March 1 and September 30 (bat maternity season) and include tree removal. The survey will be focused on trees to be removed during 585
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-43
construction and be conducted by a qualified biologist within (7) seven days prior to tree removal.
(Establish Buffers): On discovery of any bat roosts near work areas, a qualified biologist should determine appropriate construction setback distances (buffer zones) base d on applicable CDFW and/or USFWS guidelines, if appropriate. Construction buffers will be identified with flagging, fencing, or other easily visible means, and should be maintained until the biologist has determined that the roost will no longer be impact ed by construction.
(Operational Hours): Construction activities will be limited to daylight hours to reduce potential impacts to special status bats that could be foraging onsite.

Northern California legless lizard
(Avoidance): The Project’s construction activities will occur, if feasible, where discing or ground disturbance has previously occurred and avoid areas that contain loose soil and leaf litter.
(Pre-construction Surveys): If activities must occur in areas that contain loose soil and leaf litter a qualified biologist will conduct pre-construction surveys within 48 hours prior to beginning ground disturbing activities. Any loose substrate in which lizards could bury themselves will be gently raked with a hand tool (e.g., a garden rake) to a depth of two inches to locate any lizards that could be under the surface.

586
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-44

Figure 4-2: Oak Trees within the Project Site
587
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-45

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Table 4-13: Cultural Resources Impacts
Would the project:

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

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

Baseline Conditions
As the oldest Central Valley city south of Stockton, Visalia hosts an impressive collection of historic sites and structures, including four that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Numerous distinctive architectural styles are present in Visalia, concentrated in the city’s historic core; particularly notable examples are recorded in the city’s local registry.8 Visalia was settled in 1852 and incorporated as a city in 1874. In its early years the City was a supply center for nearby gold mining operations, and had an agricultural economy based on livestock. The construction of the Southern Pacific Railroad through the Valley in 1872 triggered a shift in the agricul tural economy from cattle toward field crops. The next major economic change was brought about by the availability of irrigation water, resulting in the conversion of large grain fields to small farms, where citrus, grapes, olives, and deciduous fruits were raised. These crops are a mainstay of the region’s economy today. 9 Class III Inventory/Phase I Survey
A Phase I Survey of the Project APE was conducted by ASM Associates in July 2022. The field methods employed included intensive pedestrian examination of the ground surface for evidence of archaeological sites in the form of artifacts, surface features (such as bedrock mortars, historical mining equipment), and archaeological indicators (e.g., organically enriched midden soil, burnt animal bone); the identification and location of any discovered sites, should they be present; tabulation and recording of surface diagnostic artifacts; site sketch mapping; preliminary evaluation of site integrity; and site recording, following the California Office of Historic Preservation Instructions for Recording Historic Resources and the BLM 8100 Manual, using DPR 523 forms. (See Appendix C: Cultural Resources Study) The survey fieldwork conducted in June 2022, used parallel transects spaced at 15-meter intervals walked across the Project APE, totaling approximately 68-acres. One linear resource (P -54-004877, Cameron Creek) had been recorded as intersecting the study area; however, this was due to inaccuracies in the plotted location and Cameron Creek is actually located entirely outside of the study area. An additional five

8 (City of Visalia 2014) General Plan Chapter 3 Historic Preservation 9 Ibid.
588
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-46
previous studies had been completed within 0.5 -mi of the study area, resulting in the recordat ion of six resources within that outer radius. (See Appendix C: Cultural Resources Study) Records Search
A records search from the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), located at California State University, Bakersfield was conducted in May 2022. The SSJVIC records search includes a review of all recorded archaeological and built-environment resources as well as a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the California Points of Historical Interest, the California Historical Landmarks, the California Register of Historical Resources, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and the California State Built Environment Resources Directory listings were reviewed for the above referenced APE and an additional

0.5-mile radius. Due to the sensitive nature of cultural resources, archaeological site locations are not released. Additional sources included the State Office of Historic Preservation Historic Properties Directory, Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, and the California In ventory of Historic Resources. (See Appendix C: Cultural Resources Study)
Native American Outreach
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) in Sacramento was contacted in May 2022. NAHC was provided with a brief description of the Project and a map showing its location with a request that the NAHC perform a search of the Sacred Lands File to determine if any Native American resources have been recorded in the immediate APE. The NAHC identifies, catalogs, and protects Native American cultural resources -- ancient places of special religious or social significance to Native Americans and known ancient graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on pr ivate and public lands in California. The NAHC is also charged with ensuring California Native American tribes’ accessibility to ancient Native American cultural resources on public lands, overseeing the treatment and disposition of inadvertently discovere d Native American human remains and burial items, and administering the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, among many other powers and duties. NAHC provide a current list of Native American Tribal contacts to notify of the project. The thirteen tribal representatives representing eight tribes identified by NAHC were contacted in either writing via United States Postal Service in a letter mailed June 13, 2022, or by email on July 18, 2022, informing each Tribe of the Project.

1. Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians, Elizabeth D. Kipp, Chairperson

2. Dunlap Band of Mono Indians, Benjamin Charley Jr., Tribal Chair

3. Dunlap Band of Mono Indians, Dirk Charley, Tribal Secretary

4. Kern Valley Indian Community, Julie Turner, Secretary

5. Kern Valley Indian Community, Brandy Kendricks

6. Kern Valley Indian Community, Robert Robinson, Chairperson

7. North Fork Mono Tribe, Ron Goode, Chairperson

8. Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, Leo Sisco, Chairperson

9. Tubatulabals of Kern County, Robert Gomez, Chairperson

10. Tule River Indian Tribe, Neil Peyron, Chairperson

11. Tule River Indian Tribe, Kerri Vera, Environmental

12. Tule River Indian Tribe, Joey Garfield, Tribal Archaeologist

13. Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson

589
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-47
Applicable Regulations
Federal
National Register of Historic Places
The NHPA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to establish a NRHP, an inventory of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant on a n ational, state, or local level in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. The National Register is maintained by the National Park Service, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, SHPO, and grants-in-aid programs.

State
Office of Historic Preservation
The mission of the OHP and the State Historical Resources Commission is to preserve and enhance California's irreplaceable historic heritage as a matter of public interest so that its vital legacy of cultural, educational, recreational, aesthetic, economic, social, and environmental benefits will be maintained and enriched for present and future generations. Public Resources Code ( PRC) Section 5024 requires consultation with the SHPO when a project may impact historical resources located on State-owned land.

California Register of Historic Resources
The SHPO maintains the CRHR. Historic properties listed, or formally designated for eligibility to be listed, on the National Register are automatically listed on the CRHR (PRC Section 5024.1). State Landmarks and Points of Interest are also automatically listed. The California Register can also include properties designated under local preservation ordinances or identified through local historic resource surveys.

For a historic resource to be eligible for listing on the California Register, it must be significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following four criteria:
• It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local and regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; • It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; • It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or • It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation (California Public Resources Code).

California Environmental Quality Act
PRC Section 21083.2 Archaeological Resources: CEQA directs the lead agency to include in its environmental assessment for the project a determi nation of the project effec ts on unique archeological resources; defines unique archeological resource; enables a lead agency to require an applicant to make a reasonable effort to preserve or mitigate impacts to any affected unique archeological resource; sets 590
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-48
requirements for the applicant to provide payment to cover costs of mitigation; and restricts excavation as a mitigation measure.

PRC Section 21084.1 Historic Resources: CEQA establishes that adverse effects on a historic resource qualifies as a significant effect on the environment; and defines historical resource.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5: This section defines three ways that a property can qualify as a significant historical resource for the purposes of CEQA review:
• If the resource is list ed in or determined eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources;
• If the resource is included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC S ection 5020.1(k), or is identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g) unless a preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant; or
• If the lead agency determines the resource to be significant as supported by substantial evidence (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5)
In addition to determining the significance under CEQA and eligibility of any identified historical resource for the California Register, historic properties must be evaluated under the criteria for the National Register should federal funding or permitting become involved in any undertaking subject to this document.

CEQA Guidelines on Mitigation of Cultural Resources Impacts CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 states that “public agencies should, whenever feasible, se ek to avoid damaging effects on any historical resources of an archeological nature.” The Guidelines further state that preservation-in-place is the preferred approach to mitigate impacts on archaeological resources. However, according to Section 15126.4, if data recovery through excavation is “the only feasible mitigation,” then a “data recovery plan, which makes provision for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information from and about the historical resources, shall be prepared and adopted prior to any excavation being undertaken.” Data recovery is not required for a resource of an archaeological nature if “the lead agency determines that testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the scientifically consequential information from and about the archaeological or historical resource.” The section further states that its provisions apply to those archaeological resources that also qualify as historic resources.

Native American Heritage Act
Also relevant to the evaluation and mitigation of impacts to cultural resources is the Native American Heritage Act of 1976 which established the NAHC and protects Native American religious values on state property (see PRC Section 5097.9).

Public Notice to California Native American Indian Tribes GC Section 65092 includes California Native American tribes that are on the contact list maintained by the NAHC in the definition of “person” to whom notice of public hearings shall be sent by local governments.

Disposition of Human Remains (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5) When an initial study identifies the existence, or the probable likelihood, of Native American human remains within the project, a lead agency shall work with the appropriate Native Ameri can groups or individuals as identified by the NAHC as provided in PRC Section 5097.98. The applicant may develop an agreement for treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any items associated with Native American burials. Furthermore, HSC Section 7050.5 requires that construction or 591
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-49
excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the county coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner must contact the NAHC.

California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 2001 HSC Sections 8010-8011 establish a State repatriation policy intent that is consistent with and facilitates implementation of NAGPRA. The Act strives to ensure that all California Indian human remains, and cultural items are treated with dignity and respect. It encourages voluntary disclosure and return of remains and cultural items by publicly funded agencies and museums in California. It also states the intent for the state to provide mechanisms for aiding California Indian tribes, including non-federally recognized tribes, in filing repatriation claims and getting responses to those claims.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan Update
• Policy OSC -P-39: Establish requirements to avoid potential impacts to sites suspected of being archaeologically, paleontologically, or historically significant or of concern, by:
o Requiring a records review for development proposed in areas that are consid ered archaeologically or paleontologically sensitive;
o Determining the potential effects of development and construction on archaeological or paleontological resources (as required by CEQA);
o Requiring pre -construction surveys and monitoring during any groun d disturbance for all development in areas of historical and archaeological sensitivity; and o Implementing appropriate measures to avoid the identified impacts, as conditions of project approval.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
See section below.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
a and b) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. A CHRIS records search, from the SSJVIC, was conducted by ASM in June 2022 and confirmed there have been no previous cultural resource studies conducted within the Project area. There have been five pre vious cultural resource studies conducted within the one -half mile radius, TU-01167, 01383, 01690, 01764, 01770 . The search also confirmed that there are seven recorded resources within one -half mile radius of the Project site . It is unlikely that the Project has the potential to result in significant impacts or adverse effects to any known unknown cultural or historical resources, such as archaeological remains, artifacts or historic properties or structures. However, in the improbable event that cultural resources are encountered during Project construction, implementation of mitigation measure CUL-1 outlined below, would reduce impacts to any historical or archaeological resource to less than significant. 592
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-50
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. There is no evidence in the record that indicates the Project has the potential to be an unknown burial site or the site of buried human remains.

In the unlikely event of such a discovery, mitigation shall be implemented. With incorporation of mitigation measure CUL-2 outlined below, impacts resulting from the discovery of remains interred on the Project site would be less than significant.

Mitigation
CUL-1 Should archaeological remains or artifacts be unearthed during any stage of project activities, work in the area of discovery shall cease until the area is evaluated by a qualified archaeologist. If mitigation is warranted, the project proponent shall abide by recommendations of the archaeologist.

CUL-2 In the event that any human remains are discovered on the Pro ject site, the Tulare County Coroner must be notified of the discovery (California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5) and all activities in the immediate area of the find or in any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains mus t cease until appropriate and lawful measures have been implemented. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not recent, but rather of Native American origin, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) in Sacramento within 24 hours to permit the NAHC to determine the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American.

593
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-51

4.6 ENERGY
Table 4-14: Energy Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?

b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?

Baseline Conditions
The subject property is composed of a n orchard spanning approximately 67 acres. Typical current cultivation operations include traversing the site with all -terrain vehicles and pickup trucks, removal and replanting of orchards, and the picking of fruit.

Applicable Regulations
Federal
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act, enacted by Congress in 2007, is designed to improve vehicle fuel economy and help reduce the United States’ dependence on foreign oil. It expands the production of renewable fuels, reducing dependence on oil and confronting climate change. Specifically, it does the following:
• Increases the supply of alternative fuel sources by setting a mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard that requires fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022. • Reduces United States demand for oil by setting a national fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, an increase in fuel economy standards of 40 percent as compared to 2007 levels.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 also set energy efficiency standards for lighting (specifically light bulbs) and appliances. Development would also be required to install photosensors and energy-efficient lighting fixtures consistent with the requirements of 42 United States Code Section 17001 et seq.

Energy Policy and Conservation Act
Enacted in 1975, this legislation established fuel economy standards for new light-duty vehicles sold in the United States. The la w placed responsibility on the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) for establishing and regularly updating vehicle standards. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) administers the Corporate Average Fuel Economy program, which determines vehicle manufacturers’ compliance with existing fuel economy standards. Since the inception of the 594
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-52
Corporate Average Fuel Economy program, the average fuel economy for new light -duty vehicles steadily increased from 13.1 miles per gallon for the 1975 model year to 30.7 miles per gallon for the 2014 model year and is proposed to increase to 54.5 by 2025. Light -duty vehicles include autos, pickups, vans, and sport-utility vehicles.

Energy Star Program
Energy Star is a voluntary labeling program introduced by U.S. EPA to identify and promote energy-efficient products to reduce GHG emissions. The program applies to major household appliances, lighting, computers, and building components such as windows, doors, roofs, and heating and cooling systems.

Under this program, appliances that meet specifications for maximum energy use established under the program are certified to display the Energy Star label. In 1996, the U.S. EPA joined with the Energy Department to expand the program, which now also includes certifying commercial and industrial buildings as well as homes.

Construction Equipment Fuel Efficiency Standard
The U.S. EPA sets emission standards for construction equipment. The current iteration of emissions standards for constru ction equipment are the Tier 4 efficiency requirements contained in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 1039, 1065, and 1068. Emissions requirements for new off -road Tier 4 vehicles were completely phased in by the end of 2015.

State
Senate Bill 350
The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 (SB 350) requires a doubling of the energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas for retail customers through energy efficiency and conservation by December 31, 2030.

California Renewable Portfolio Standard and Senate Bill 100 Approved by former Governor Brown on September 10, 2018, SB 100 accelerates the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard program, which was last updated by SB 350 in 2015. SB 100 requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.

Title 24, California Code of Regulations
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6, is California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Non-residential Buildings. The CEC established Title 24 in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to create uniform building codes to reduce California’s energy consumption and provide energy efficiency standards for residential and nonresidential buildings. The standards are updated on an approximately three-year cycle to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new efficient technologies and methods. In 2022, the CEC updated Title 24 standards with more stringent requirements effective January 1, 2023. All buildings for which an application for a building permit is submitted on or after January 1, 2023, must follow the 2022 standards. Energy efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases GHG emissions.

California Green Building Standards Code (2019), California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11
California’s Green Building Code, referred to as CalGreen, was developed to provide a consistent approach to green building in the State. Having taken effect in January 2023, the most recent version of CalGreen lays out the minimum requirements for newly constructed residential and nonresidential bu ildings to reduce GHG emissions through improved energy efficiency and process improvements. It also includes 595
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-53
voluntary tiers to further encourage building practices that improve public health, safety, and general welfare by promoting a more sustainable design.
2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan
On December 14, 2017, the CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework for achieving the State’s 2030 GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap- and-Trade Program, and implementation of recently adopted policies and legislation. The 2017 Scoping Plan includes a wide variety of goals related to energy efficiency and renewable energy that are intended to help meet the State’s 2030 target, including goals specifically targeted at the water sector.

Local
Visalia General Plan
The City of Visalia implements the following policies that are applicable to the Project related to energy consumption:

AQ-P-16. Support State efforts to reduce greenhouse gases and emissions through local action that will reduce motor vehicle use, support alternative forms of transportation, require energy conservation in new construction, and energ y management in public buildings, in compliance with AB 32.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than Significant Impact. The Project would comply with Building Energy Efficiency Standards included in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which requires new residential development to incorporate energy efficiency stand ards into Project designs. In addition, the Project would implement the aforementioned General Plan polic y. The Project proposes the construction of residence that will comply with the energy conservation requirements of the California Building Code and wi ll be adjacent to an existing bicycle route.

Natural gas for the Project and the surrounding area are serviced by SoCalGas. The Project site does not currently have a demand for natural gas usage and the Project would represent an increase in natural gas usage. However, SoCalGas has indicated it can meet the increased demand for natural gas with its existing facilities and through engaging in Energy Efficiency (EE) programs.

Current regulations for construction equipment, heavy -duty equipment, and earthmovi ng equipment used in construction contributes to reductions in energy as well as reduction in pollutant emissions.

California implemented its In-Use Off-Road Diesel Fueled Fleets regulations (off -road regulation) which applies to all self -propelled off -road diesel vehicles 25 horsepower or greater and most two -engine vehicles. The Small Off -Road Engines program was implemented by California to apply to categories of outdoor powered equipment and specialty vehicles often used in construction.

Through compliance with energy reduction standards and regulations aimed at reducing consumption of transportation related energy consumption, as well as the energy provider’s energy reduction programs, the Project will have less than significant impacts related to energy usage during Project operations and 596
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-54
construction and its impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption overall, would be less than significant.
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local p lan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not conflict with any of the applicable plans including Title 24, AB 32, SB 32, SB 350, and SB 100, therefore the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and would be less than significant.

597
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-55

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Table 4-15: Geology and Soils Impacts
Would the project:

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

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

ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994) creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of wastewater?

f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?

Baseline Conditions
Geology and Soils
Surface soils exhibit various characteristics dependent on location, slope, parent rock, climate, and drainage. The Project site currently contains Grangeville San dy Loam, 0 to 2 percent slope and Nord Fine Sandy Loam, 0 to 2 percent slope.10

10 (United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service 2019) 598
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-56
Faults and Seismicity
The Project is not located within an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and there are no known active faults within the City of Visalia. The nearest maj or faults are the Owens Valley and San Andreas Fault, located approximately 58 miles east and 72 miles southwest of the Project site, respectively. The San Andreas fault is the dominant active tectonic feature of the Coast Ranges and represents the boundary of the North American and Pacific plates. The Kern Canyon Fault is located approximately 42 miles east and the Poso Fault is located approximately 50 miles south of the Project site.

Liquefaction
The potential for liquefaction, which is the loss of soil strength due to seismic forces, is dependent on soil types and density, the groundwater table, and the duration and intensity of ground shaking. Although no specific liquefaction hazard areas have been identified in Tulare County or the City of Visalia, this potential is recognized throughout the San Joaquin Valley where unconsolidated sediments and a high -water table coincide. Soil types along the Valley floor are not generally conducive to liquefaction because they are generally too coarse. Furthermore, a ccording to the California Department of Water Resources Live Groundwater Levels map, the groundwater levels measured at a location approximately one mile to the east of the Project site was approximately 131.7 feet below ground surface as of March 17, 202 1; this further reduces potential for liquefaction.

Soil Subsidence
Subsidence occurs when a large land area settles due to over -saturation or extensive withdrawal of groundwater, oil, or natural gas. These areas are typically composed of open-textured soils, high in silt or clay content, that become saturated. Although some areas in Tulare County have experienced subsidence due to groundwater overdraft, the City of Visalia’s elevation has remained relatively unchanged.

Soils of the Project site consist of Grangeville Sandy Loam and Nord Fine Sandy Loam, which are coarse - textured, low in clay content, and have a low shrink-swell potential. Therefore, soils onsite represent a low risk of subsidence.

Dam and Levee Failure
The nearest dam with a high likelihood of breaching is the Bravo Lake Reservoir Dam, located approximately

10.5 miles to the northeast.11
Applicable Regulations
State
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (1972)
The Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (formerly the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act) requires the delineation of zones along active faults in California. The purpose of the Alquist-Priolo Act is to regulate development on or near active fault traces to reduce the hazard of fault rupture; however, surface fault rupture is not necessarily restricted to the area within the Alquist-Priolo Zone. The Alquist - Priolo Act prohibits the location of most structures for human occupancy across active fault traces. Within these zones, cities and counties must reg ulate certain development, which includes withholding permits

11 (California Department of Water Resources 2022)
599
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-57
until geologic investigations demonstrate that development sites are not threatened by future surface displacement. There are no designated Alquist-Priolo zones in the Project area. The risk of surface fault rupture is not necessarily restricted to the area within a Fault Rupture Hazard Zone, as designated under the Alquist-Priolo Act.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act was developed to protect the public from the effects of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, or other ground failure, and from other hazards caused by earthquakes.

This act requires the State Geologist to delineate various seismic hazard zones and requires cities, counties, and other local permitting agencies to regulate certain development projects within these zones. Before a development permit is granted for a site within a Seismic Hazard Zone, a geotechnical investigation of the site must be conducted, and appropriate mitigation measures inco rporated into the project design.

Geotechnical investigations conducted within Seismic Hazard Zones must incorporate standards specified by CGS Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards.12 The purpose of the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act is to identify where special provisions, beyond those contained in the California Building Code (C BC), are necessary to ensure public safety. This need has not been recognized for the hazard of ground shaking.

Design provisions contained in the CBC are believed to be representative of current knowledge and capability in earthquake -resistant design. 13 No portion of County has been mapped under the Seismic Hazards Zoning Program.

California Building Standards Code
The CBC, codified in Title 24 Part 2 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), is administered by the California Building Standards Commission which by law is responsible for coordinating all building standards. The purpose of the CBC is to establish minimum standards to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare through structural strength, means of egress facilities, and general stability by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, loc ation, and maintenance of all building and structures within its jurisdiction. The current version took effect January 1, 2020, and contains necessary California amendment s based on the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Minimum Design Standards 7 -05. ASCE 7 -05 provides requirements for general structural design and includes means for determining earthquake loads as well as other loads (flood, snow, wind, etc.) for inclusion into building codes. The provisions apply to the construction, alteration, movement, replacement, and demolition of every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to such buildings or structures throughout California.

The earthquake design requirements take into account the occupancy category of the structure, site class, soil classifications, and various seismic coefficients which are used to determine a Seismic Design Category (SDC) for a project. The SDC is a classification system that combines the occupancy categories with the level of expected ground motions at the site and ranges from SDC A (very small seismic vulnerability) to SDC E/F (very high seismic vulnerability and near a major fault). Design specifications are then determined according to the SDC.

California Department of Transportation
Caltrans jurisdiction includes State and interstate routes within California. Any work within the right-of-way of a federal or State transportation corridor is subject to Caltrans regulations governing allowable actions and modifications to the right-of-way. Caltrans standards incorporate the CBC and contain numerous rules

12 (California Geological Survey 2008)
13 (ICC Digital Codes 2020)
600
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-58
and regulations to protect the public from seismic hazards such as surface fault rupture and ground shaking.

In addition, Caltrans standards require that projects be constr ucted to minimize potential hazards associated with cut and fill operations, grading, slope instability, and expansive or corrosive soils, as described in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM). The southern portion of the Project site abuts SR 198, and Houston Avenue (SR 216) abuts the northern portion of the site; any work that is done within Caltrans right-of-way would be coordinated with Caltrans.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan
• Objective S -O-1: Minimize risks of property damage and personal inju ry posed by geologic and seismic hazards.
• Policy OCS-P-25: Require new development to implement measures, as appropriate, to minimize soil erosion related to grading, site preparation, landscaping and construction.

City of Visalia General Plan Seismic Safety Element
The Visalia General Plan incorporates the Sei smic Safety Element completed in 1974 by the Five-County Seismic Safety Committee, with participation from the Tulare Council of Governments. The Safety Element determines that ground shaking is the main potential hazard in the southern Central Valley, and the risk of ground shaking in the Visalia area is low. The Element includes a number of policies, calling for the creation of a public relations and education program to build awareness; development of an Earthquake Disaster Plan; consideration of seismic hazards in the environmental impact assessment process; and adoption and enforcement of the Uniform Building Code (since replaced by the CBC), among others.

City of Visalia Building Code
The City has adopted the 2022 CBC as the City’s building code and o rdinance (Title 15: Buildings and Construction).

Tulare County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan A hazard mitigation plan is a formal document that outlays the plans to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from natura l or manmade hazards. Visalia participates in the preparation of the Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJ -LHMP) which covers the County and eleven participating cities. The latest adopted MJ-LHMP was prepared in 2018. The plan has been designed to meet four goals; (1) significantly reduce life loss and injuries, (2) minimize damage to structures and property, as well as disruption of essential services and human activities, (3) protect the environment, and (4) promote hazard mitigation as an integrated public policy.

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

See section below.

601
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-59
ii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? i and ii) Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located in an area traditionally characterized by relatively low seismic activity. The site is not located in an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone as established by the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Act (Section 2622 of Chapter 7.5, Division 2 of the California Public Resources Code). The nearest major faults are the Owens Valley and San Andreas Fault, located approximately 58 miles east and 72 miles southwest of the Project site, respectively. The San Andreas fault is the dominant active tectonic feature of the Coast Ranges and represents the boundary of the North American and Pacific plates. The Kern Canyon Fault is located approximately 42 miles east and the Poso Fault is located approximately 50 miles south of the Project site.

Although there are no known earthquake faults within the vicinity of the Project and strong ground shaking is unlikely, construction of the proposed residential structures would comply wi th the most recent seismic standards as set forth in the California Building Standards Code. Compliance with these standards would ensure potential impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. Liquefaction occurs when loose, water -saturated sediments lose strength and fail during strong ground shaking. Although no specific liquefaction hazard areas have been identified in Tulare County and the City of Visalia , this potential is recognized throug hout the San Joaquin Valley where unconsolidated sediments and a high -water table coincide. Using the U nited States Department of Agriculture (USDA) NRCS soil survey, an analysis of the soils onsite was performed. Soils in the area consists of Grangeville Sandy Loam and Nord Fine Sandy Loam , which are well-drained and co arse- textured, representing a low risk for liquefaction or seismic -related ground failure. In addition, using California Department of Water Resources Live Groundwater Levels map, the groundwater levels measured at a location approximately one mile to the southwest of the Project site was approximately 131.7 feet below ground surface as of March 17, 2022; this further reduces potential for liquefaction. 14 Furthermore, as mentioned above in I mpact Assessments 4.7.3 a) i-ii, strong seismic ground shaking is unlikely to occur. Any impacts related to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, would be less than significant.
iv. Landslides?
No Impact. Landslides usually occur in locations with steep slopes and unstable soils. The Project is located on the Valley floor where no major geologic landforms exist, and the topograp hy is essentially flat and level. The nearest foothills are approximately 9 miles east of the Project site . Therefore, the Project site has minimal-to-no landslide susceptibility, and there would be no impact. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. Earthmoving activities associated with the Project would include excavation, trenching, grading, and construction over an area of approximately 67.7 acres. These activities could expose soils to erosion processes and the extent of erosion would vary depending on slope steepness/stability, vegetation/cover, concentration of runoff, and weather conditions. Dischargers whose projects disturb one (1) or more acres of soil or whose projects disturb less than one acre but are

14 (California Department of Water Resources 2022)
602
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-60
part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original li ne, grade, or capacity of the facility. The Construction General Permit requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer. Since the Project site has relatively flat terrain with a low potential for soil erosion and would comply with the State Water Resource Board requirements, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the pro ject, and potentially result in on - or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
See section below.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? c and d) Less than Significant Impact. Soils of the Project site consist of Grangeville Sandy Loam and Nord Fine Sandy Loam , which are coarse-textured, low in clay content, and well-drained. These soils have a low shrink-swell potential and a low plasticity index, and therefore, are not considered expansive soils.

Furthermore, the aforementioned physical properties of these soils make subsidence, liquefaction, lateral spreading, or other ground failure unlikely. Any impacts would be considered less than significant. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. Septic installation or alternative wastewater disposal systems are not necessary for the Project. The Project would be required to connect to the City of Visalia’s wastewater system. There would be no impact.
f) Would the project direct ly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. No known paleontological resources have been identified at the Project site. However, if a paleontological resource is found then the construction impacts can make a significant impact unless mitigated properly. The Project would be less than significant with GEO-1 incorporated.

Mitigation
GEO-1 Should paleontological resources be encountered on the Project site, all ground disturbing activities in the area shall stop. A qualified paleontologist shall be contacted to assess the discovery. Mitigation may include monitoring, recording the fossil locality, data recovery and analysis, a final report. Public educational outreach may also be appropriate. Upon completion of the assessment, a report documenting methods, findings, and recommendations shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Visalia for 603
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-61
review, and (if paleontological materials are recovered) a paleontological repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology.

604
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-62

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Table 4-16: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?

b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?

Baseline Conditions
The subject property is composed of an orchard spanning approximately 67 acres. Typical current cultivation operations include traversing the site with all -terrain vehicles and pickup trucks, removal and replanting of orchards, and the picking of fruit.

Applicable Regulations
Federal
Section 202 GHG Regulation of Cars and Light Duty Trucks This rule was proposed jointly by USEPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to create a national program of GHG emission standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards. The standards apply to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, covering model years 2012 through 2016. The standards are designed to achieve a national vehicle fleet whose emissions and fuel economy performance improves year after year. The goal is to reduce CO2 emissions by 960 million metric tons and save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of vehicles sold in model years 2012 through 2016.15 The final rule was signed on April 1, 2010, and became effective 60 days after its publication in the Federal Register.

Greenhouse Gas Findings (2009)
In the United States Supreme Court case Massachusetts v. USEPA (2007), 12 states, three cities, and 13 environmental groups filed suit that the USEPA should be required to regulate carbon dioxide and other GHG as pollutants under the Federal Clean Air Act. In April 2007, the United States Supreme Court found that the USEPA has a statutory authority to formulate standards and regulations to address GHG, which it historically has not done. On December 7, 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator finalized two findings to be effective January 14, 2010. The findings are related to GHG under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. These findings do not them selves impose any requirements on industry or other entities.

15 USEPA, 2010.
605
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-63
• Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well -mixed greenhouse gases —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6)—in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. • Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well- mixed GHG from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution, which threatens public health and welfare.16 Executive Order 13154 Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance
On October 5, 2009, President Obama issued Executive Order 13154, which instructs federal agencies to set or achieve various emissions reduction and energy and environmental benchmarks by 2015, 2020, and 2030. The order requires agencies to set GHG emissi ons reduction targets for 2020 within 90 days and requires Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to set a federal government target for 2020 within 120 days. The order also sets out required reductions in vehicle fleet petroleum use and requires increases in water and energy efficiency and in recycling and waste diversion rates. The order also mandates adoption of certain contract and procurement practices designed to promote energy and water efficiency and environmentally preferable products.

Energy Policy and Conservation Act, and CAFE Standards
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975 declared it to be United States policy to establish a reserve of up to 1 billion barrels of petroleum and established nationwide fuel economy standards in order to conserve oil. Pursuant to this Act, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, part of the DOT is responsible for revising existing fuel economy standards and establishing new vehicle fuel economy standards.

The Corporate Averag e Fuel Economy program was established to determine vehicle manufacturer compliance with the government’s fuel economy standards. Compliance with CAFE standards is determined based on each manufacturer’s average fuel economy for the portion of their vehicles produced for sale in the United States. The USEPA calculates a CAFE value for each manufacturer based on city and highway fuel economy test results and vehicle sales. The CAFE values are a weighted harmonic average of the USEPA city and highway fuel eco nomy test results. Based on information generated under the CAFE program, the DOT is authorized to assess penalties for noncompliance.

CAFE rules require the average fuel economy of all vehicles of a given class that a manufacturer sells in each model year to be equal or greater than the standard. CAFE standards apply to passenger cars and light trucks (gross vehicle weight of 8,500 pounds or less). Heavy -duty vehicles (i.e. gross vehicle weight over 8,500 pounds) are not currently subject to fuel economy s tandards. The EPCA was reauthorized in 2000 (49 CFR 533). The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 revised CAFE standards for the first time in 30 years, followed quickly by Section 202 GHG Regulation of Cars and Light Duty Trucks, which calls for further revision of the CAFE standards. Both of those regulations are described above.

Energy Policy Acts of 1992, 2005, etc. (EPAct)
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) was passed to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign petroleum and improve air quality. EPAct includes several parts intended to build an inventory of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) in large, centrally fueled fleets in metropolitan areas. EPAct requires certain federal, state, and local government and private fleets to purchase a percentage of light duty AFVs capable

16 USEPA, 2009.
606
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-64
of running on alternative fuels each year. In addition, financial incentives are also included in EPAct. Federal tax deductions would be allowed for businesses and individuals to cover the incremental cost of AFVs. The Act also requires states to consider a variety of incentive programs to help promote AFVs. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 includes updated provisions for renewed and expanded tax credits for electricity generated by qualified energy sources, such as landfi ll gas; provides bond financing, tax incentives, grants, and loan guarantees for clean renewable energy and rural community electrification; and establishes a federal purchase requirement for renewable energy.

Global Change Research Act (1990)
The purpose of the legislation was: “…to require the establishment of a United States Global Change Research Program aimed at understanding and responding to global change, including the cumulative effects of human activities and natural processes on the environment, to promote discussions towards international protocols in global change research, and for other purposes.” To that end, the Global Change Research Information Office was established in 1991 (it began formal operation in 1993) to serve as a clearinghouse of information. The Act requires a report to Congress every four years on the environmental, economic, health and safety consequences of climate change; however, the first and only one of these reports to-date, the National Assessment on Climate Change, was not published until 2000. In February 2004, operational responsibility for Global Change Research Program shifted to the U.S. Climate Change Science Program.

State
There are a variety of statewide rules and regulations which have been implemented or are in development in California which mandate the quantification or reduction of GHGs. Under CEQA, an analysis and mitigation of emissions of GHGs and climate change in relation to a Project is required where it has been determined that a project would result in a significant addition of GHGs. Certain APCDs have proposed their own levels of significance. The SJVAPCD, which has regulatory authority over the air emissions from this project, has not established a significance threshold.

California Air Resources Board
CARB is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of State and local air pollution control programs in California and for implementing its own air quality legislation, the CCAA, adopted in 1988. CARB was created in 1967 from the merging of the California Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board and the Bureau of Air Sanitation and its Laboratory.

The CARB has primary responsibility in California to develop and implement air pollution control plans designed to achieve and mai ntain the NAAQS established by the USEPA. Whereas the CARB has primary responsibility and produces a major part of the SIP for pollution sources that are statewide in scope, it relies on the local air districts to provide additional strategies for sources under their jurisdiction. The CARB combines its data with all local district data and submits the completed SIP to the USEPA. The SIP consists of the emissions standards for vehicular sources and consumer products set by the CARB, and attainment plans adopted by APCDs and AQMDs and approved by CARB.

States may establish their own standards, provided the state standards are at least as stringent as the NAAQS. California has established the CAAQS pursuant to HSC Section 39606(b) and its predecessor statutes.

HSC Section 39608 requires that CARB “identify” and “classify” each air basin in the state on a pollutant - by-pollutant basis. Subsequently, CARB designated areas in California as nonattainment based on violations 607
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-65
of the CAAQSs. Designations and classifica tions specific to the SJVAB can be found in the next section of this document. Areas in the state were also classified based on severity of air pollution problems. For each nonattainment class, the CCAA specifies air quality management strategies that must be adopted. For all nonattainment categories, attainment plans are required to demonstrate a five percent-per-year reduction in nonattainment air pollutants or their precursors, averaged every consecutive three -year period, unless an approved alternative measure of progress is developed. In addition, air districts in violation of CAAQS are required to prepare an Air Quality Attainment Plan that lays out a program to attain and maintain the CCAA mandates.

Other duties of CARB include monitoring air quality, which has established and maintains, in conjunction with local APCDs and AQMDs, and SLAMS network, which monitor the present pollutant levels in the ambient air.

California Attorney General
The Attorney General has a special role in protecting the environ ment and public health in California. By law, the Attorney General has independent authority, acting directly in the name of the People, "to act to protect the natural resources of the State of California from pollution, impairment, or destruction." The Attorney General plays a leading role in the oversight and enforcement of CEQA and the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65). The Attorney General also prosecutes civil and criminal violations of environmental laws in the name of the People of the State of California and on behalf of client agencies.

CEQA Guidelines Appendix F: Energy Conservation
Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines describes the types of information and analyses related to energy conservation that are to be in cluded in the EIR process. Energy conservation is described in terms of decreasing per capita energy consumption; decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil; and increasing reliance on renewable energy sources. To assure that energy implications are considered in project decisions, EIRs must include a discussion of the potentially significant energy impacts of Projects (to the extent relevant and applicable to the Project), with particular emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy.

Executive Order S-3-05: Executive Order S-3-05 was established by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in June 2006.

Executive Order S-3-05 establishes statewide emission reduction targets through the year 2050:
• by 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;
• by 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and
• by 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.

This Executive Order does not include any specific requirements that pertain to the Project. However, actions taken by the State to implement these goals may affect the Project, depending on the specific implementation measures that are developed.

Senate Bill 1368: Senate Bill 1368 (SB 1368) was enacted in 2006 and required the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to establish a CO 2 emissions standard for base load generation owned by or under long-term contract with publicly owned utilities. The CPUC established a GHG Emissions Performance 608
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-66
Standard (EPS) of 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour. SB 1368 also requires the posting of notices of public deliberations by publicly owned companies on the CPUC website and establishes a process to determine compliance with the EPS. The Project, as a renewable energy generation facility, is determined by rule to comply with the GHG Emission Performance Standard requirements of SB 1368.

Assembly Bill 32: California passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32, codified at HSC Sections 38500-38599). AB 32 establishes re gulatory, reporting, and market mechanisms to achieve quantifiable reductions in GHG emissions and establishes a cap on statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. This reduction would be accomplished by enforcing a statewide cap on GHG emissions that would be phased in starting in 2012. To effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directs CARB to develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions from stationary sources. AB 32 specifies that regulations adopted in response to AB 1493 should be used to address GHG emissions from vehicles. However, AB 32 also includes language stating that if the AB 1493 regulations cannot be implemented, then CARB should develop new regulations to control vehicle GHG emissions under the authorization of AB 32.

AB 32 requires CARB to adopt a quantified cap on GHG emissions representing 1990 emissions levels and disclose how it arrived at the cap; institute a schedule to meet the emissions cap; and dev elop tracking, reporting, and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that the state reduces GHG emissions enough to meet the cap. AB 32 also includes guidance on instituting emissions reductions in an economically efficient manner, along with conditions to ensu re that businesses and consumers are not unfairly affected by the reductions. Using these criteria to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 would represent an approximate 25 to 30 percent reduction in current emissions levels. However, CA RB has discretionary authority to seek greater reductions in more significant and growing GHG sectors, such as transportation, as compared to other sectors that are not anticipated to significantly increase emissions. Under AB 32, CARB was required to ado pt regulations by January 1, 2011, to achieve reductions in GHGs to meet the 1990 emission cap by 2020. In 2019, CARB disclosed that emissions in 2017 were 7 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MMT CO2e) below the State 2020 limit.

Senate Bill 375 : SB 375, signed in September 2008 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008), aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to adopt a sustainable community strategy (SCS) or alternative planning strategy (APS) that would prescribe land use allocation in that MPOs regional transportation plan. CARB, in consultation with MPOs, would provide each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035.

These reduction targets would be updated every eight years but can be updated every four years if advancements in emissions technologies affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. CARB is also charged with reviewing each MPOs SCS or APS for consistency with its assigned targets.

This law also extends the minimum time period for the regional housing needs allocation cycle from five years to eight years for local governments located within an MPO that meets certain requirements. City or county land use policies (including general plans) are not required to be consistent with the regional transportation plan (and associated SCS or APS). However, new provisi ons of CEQA would incentivize (through streamlining and other provisions) qualified projects that are consistent with an approved SCS or APS, categorized as "transit priority projects."
Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory: Consistent with SB 97, on June 19, 2008, Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released its Technical Advisory on CEQA and Climate Change, which was developed in 609
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-67
cooperation with the Resources Agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), and CARB. The Technical Advisory offers the informal interim guidance regarding the steps lead agencies should take to address climate change in their CEQA documents, until CEQA guidelines are developed pursuant to SB 97 on how state and local agencies should analyze, and when necessary, mitigate GHG.

According to OPR, lead agencies should determine whether GHG may be generated by a Project, and if so, quantify or estimate the GHG emissions by type and source. Second, the lead agency must assess whether those emissions are individually or cumulatively significant. When assessing whether a project’s effects on climate change are “cumulative ly significant” even though project specific GHG contribution may be individually limited, the lead agency must consider the impact of the project when viewed in connection with the effects of past, current, and probable future projects. Finally, if the le ad agency determines that the GHG emissions from the project as proposed are potentially significant, it must investigate and implement ways to avoid, reduce, or otherwise mitigate the impacts of those emissions.

On April 13, 2009, OPR sent proposed amend ments of the CEQA Guidelines to the Secretary of the Resources Agency for promulgation. The proposed amendments contain Model Policies for GHGs in General Plan. OPR recommended changes to fourteen sections of the existing guidelines, including: the determination of significance as well as thresholds; statements of overriding consideration; mitigation; cumulative impacts; and specific streamlining approaches. The proposed Guidelines also include an explicit requirement that EIRs analyze GHG emissions resulting from a project when the incremental contribution of those emissions may be significant. OPR adopted new amendments in 2018; however, these amendments to the CEQA Guidelines apply prospectively only.

California Energy Code: Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations , called the California Energy Code, includes standards mandating energy efficiency measures in new construction, as well as retrofitting existing buildings. Since its establishment in 1977, the building efficiency standards (along with standards for energy efficiency in appliances) , which regulate energy consumed in buildings for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting , have contributed to a reduction in electricity and natural gas consumption in California. The standards are updated every three years to allow new energy efficiency technologies to be considered. The latest update to Title 24 standards became effective January 1, 2020.

California Green Code: CalGreen, the nation’s first Green Building Standar ds Code, became effective in August 2009 for voluntary compliance and local adoption, and became effective for mandatory compliance on January 1, 2011. This Code establishes minimum standards for new construction that are intended to help the State achieve the AB 32 goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In addition to energy efficiency standards, CalGreen includes mandatory measures for water conservation, storm water drainage and retention, material conservation, and construction waste reduction. The requirements for nonresidential construction also include parking, landscaping, and other standards. Local jurisdictions have the option of adopting procedures by ordinance to improve the level of construction beyond the CalGreen minimum standard.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan
• Objective AQ-O-3: Reduce emissions of greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change in accord with federal and State law.
610
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-68
• Policy AQ-P-12. Support the implementation of Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreements (VERA) with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (the District) for individual development projects that may exceed District significance thresholds.

A VERA is a volun tary mitigation measure where a project proponent provides p ound-for-pound mitigation of emissions increases through a process that develops, funds, and implements emissions reduction projects, with the District serving a role of administrator of emissions reduction programs and verifier of successful mitigation ef fort. To implement a VERA, the project proponent and the District enter into a contractual agreement in which the project proponent agrees to mitigate project-specific emissions by providing funds for the District’s Strategies and Incentives Program.

The funds are disbursed in the form of grants for projects that achieve emission reductions.

Visalia Climate Action Plan (CAP)
The City ’s CAP includes a baseline GHG emissions inventory of municipal and community emissions, identification and analysis of existing and proposed GHG reduction measures, and reduction targets to help Visalia work toward the States goal of an 80 percent reduction below baseline emissions by 2050. The plan sets 2020 and 2030 reduction targets, and includes reduction actions for energy, transportation, and waste and resource conservation. The CAP includes targets and action steps for the municipal and community sectors. The CAP has been prepared concurrently with the proposed General Plan (GP), is evaluated in this EIR together with the proposed GP and includes objectives and specific policies from the proposed GP to address long-term emissions reduction efforts by the City.

Visalia’s Climate Change Initiatives
In January 2007, Visalia’s mayor signed the “Cool Cities” pledge, part of the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. By entering into this agreement, the City originally adopted the goal of reducing citywide GHG emissions to 7% below 1990 levels by 2012. As detailed in the CAP, this goal was subsequently expanded in response to CARBs recommended reduction target of 15% below the 2005 baseline, and the City added a 2030 mitigation target to correlate with the 2030 GP Update and the goal of achieving an 80% reduction by 2050.

In 2008, the City also became a partner with the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJVCEO), which is a non-profit serving the eight-county region. This partnership led to the development of the Valley Innovative Energy Watch, which is a partnership with SCE, Southern California Gas Company (SoCa lGas), Pacific Gas & Electric, SJVCEO, and other public jurisdictions in Tulare and Kings Counties. One major task in this initiative was assisting each of the local government partners to develop comprehensive clean energy/GHG reduction plans, including the identification of baseline GHG emissions and energy use.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would generate 5,325 MTCO2e/yr using an operational year of 2005, which includes area, energy, mobile, waste, and water sources. “Business as usual” (BAU) is referenced in CARBs AB 32 Scoping Plan as emissions projected to occur in 2020 if the average baseline emissions during the 2002-2004 period grew to 2020 levels, without control or BPS offsets. As a result, an estimate of the Project s operational emissions in 2005 were compared to operational emissions in 2024 in order to determine if the Project meets the 29% emission reduction. The SJVAPCD has reviewed relevant scientific information related to GHG emissions and has determined that they are not able to 611
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-69
determine a specific quantitative level of GHG emissions increase, above which a project would h ave a significant impact on the environment, and below which would have an insignificant impact. As a result, the SJVAPCD has determined that projects achieving at least a 29% GHG emission reduction compared to BAU would be determined to have a less than s ignificant individual and cumulative impact for GHG.

Results of the analysis show GHG emissions in the year 2020 as 3,435 MTCO2e/yr. This represents an achievement of 35% GHG emission reduction on the basis of BAU, which does meet the 29% GHG emission reduction target. Based on the assessment above, the Project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact o n the environment.

Therefore, any impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than Significant Impact. To assist lead agencies, project proponents, permit applicants, and interested parties in assessing and reducing the impacts of project-specific GHG on global climate change, the SJVAPCD has adopted the guidance: Guidance for Valley Land -use Agencies in Ad dressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA and the policy: District Policy – Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency. The guidance and policy rely on the use of performance -based standards, otherwise known as BPS, to assess significance of project-specific greenhouse gas emissions on global climate change during the environmental review process, as required by CEQA. Use of BPS is a method of streamlining the CEQA process of de termining significance and is not a required emission reduction measure. Projects implementing BPS would be determined to have a less than cumulatively significant impact. Otherwise, demonstration of a 29 percent reduction in GHG emissions, from BAU, is re quired to determine that a project would have a less than cumulatively significant impact.

The Project incorporates a recreational park that will encourage biking, jogging, and walking and provide neighboring residential neighborhoods with direct access to its facilities. The types of facilities incorporated into the Project coincide with the pedestrian infrastructure -based mitigation measures included in the SJVAPCDs Mitigation Measures document. Those measures include providing pedestrian enhancing infrastructure that includes sidewalks and pedestrian paths and direct pedestrian connections.

The City’s CAP was created as one of the first key steps to guiding the development and enhancement of actions designed to reduce Visalia’s GHG emissions. The CAP re presents the results of a GHG emissions inventory effort which serves as a starting point for the development of a comprehensive municipal and community strategy for addressing GHG emission reduction goals. The CAP identifies existing and proposed communi ty measures designed to reduce GHG emissions. The Project incorporates the following identified existing and proposed community measures assisting the City achieve its 2020 15% and 2030 30% reduction goals:

Expansion of bicycle paths, lanes, and trails: As part of the Project and pursuant to the General Plan and the Waterways and Trails Master Plan, the Project would dedicate the subject property’s portion of the Segment 4 Preferred Trail Alignment, which would run adjacent to Cameron Creek within the Proj ect area. This trail would be a Class I Bike Trail and would maintain views of Cameron Creek. Based on the assessment above, the Project would further the achievement of the City’s greenhouse gas reduction goals and would not conflict with applicable plans , policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG. Therefore, any impacts would be less than significant.

612
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-70

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Table 4-17: Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?

b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?

d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?

e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or
working in the project area?

f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?

g) Expose people or structures, either directly
or indirectly to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires?

Baseline Conditions
Hazardous Materials
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by th e State, local agencies, and developers to comply with CEQA requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. Government Code (GC) Section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is responsible for a portion of the information contained in the Cortese List. Other State and local government agencies are required to provide additional h azardous material release information for the Cortese List. DTSC's EnviroStor database provides DTSC's component of Cortese 613
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-71
List data (DTSC, 2010). In addition to the EnviroStor database, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Geotracker database provides information on regulated hazardous waste facilities in California, including underground storage tank (UST) cases and non -UST cleanup programs, including Spills -Leaks- Investigations-Cleanups sites, Department of Defense sites, and Land Disposal pr ogram. A search of the DTSC EnviroStor17 database and the SWRCB Geotracker18 performed on March 29, 2022 determined that there are no known active hazardous waste generators or hazardous material spill sites within the Project site or immediate surrounding vicinity.

Airports
The Project site would be located approximately 9.8 miles west of the Visalia Municipal Airport. The Project would not be located within an adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP).

Emergency Response Plan
The City of Visalia has an Emergency Operations Plan that was adopted in 2011. The plan lays out the planned procedures that the City would follow in the event of an emergency.

Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive Receptors are groups that would be more affected by air, noise, and light pollution, pesticides, and other toxic chemicals than others. This includes infants, children u nder 16, elderly over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. High concentrations of these groups would include, daycares, residential areas, hospitals, elder care facilities, schools and parks. The nearest sensitive receptors include the single-family residences at the northwest corner of the Project site.

Applicable Regulations
Federal
Occupational Health and Safety Administration
The Occupational Health and Safety Administration published standard 1910.120, addressing dangers that hazardous materials pose in the workplace. The standard requires that employers evaluate the potential health hazard that hazardous materials pose in the workplace and communicate information concerning hazards and appropriate protective measures to employees.

State
Department of Toxic Substances Control
The USEPA has delegated much of its regulatory authority to the individual states. The DTSC of Ca lEPA enforces hazardous materials and waste regulations in California in conjunction with the USEPA. The DTSC is responsible for regulating the management of hazardous substances , including remediation of sites contaminated by hazardous substances. California hazardous materials laws incorporate federal standards but are often more strict than federal laws.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The RWQCB is authorized by the SWRCB to enforce provisions of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969. This act gives the RWQCB authority to require groundwater investigations when the quality of groundwater or surface waters of the state are threatened and to remediate the site, if necessary.

17 (California Department of Toxic Substances Control 2022) 18 (State of California 2022)
614
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-72
State Underground Storage Tank Program
State laws also regulate Underground Storage Tanks ( USTs) and Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs) containing hazardous substances. These laws are primarily found in the Health and Safety Code, and, combined with CCR Title 23, establish the requirements of the State UST program. The laws contain requirements for UST permitting, construction, installation , leak detection monitoring, repairs and corrective actions and closures. In accordance with State laws, the County Department of Health Services Environmental Health Division implements UST and AST regulations in County.

Hazardous Materials Worker Safety Requirements
The Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) are the agencies responsible for assuring worker safety in the handling and use of chemicals in the wo rkplace. The federal regulations pertaining to worker safety are contained in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 29 (29 CFR) as authorized in the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. They provide standards for safe workplaces and work practices, including standards relating to hazardous materials handling. In California, Cal/OSHA assumes primary responsibility for developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations; Cal/OSHA standards are generally more stringent than federal regulations.

The State regulations concerning the use of hazardous materials in the workplace are included in Title 8 of the CCR, and contain requirements for safety training, availability of safety equipment, accident and illness prevention programs, hazardous substance exposure warnings, and emergency action and fire prevention plan preparation. Cal/OSHA also enforces hazard communication program regulations, which contain worker safety training and hazard information requirements, such as procedures for identifying and labeling hazardous substances, communicating hazard information relating to hazardous substances and their handling, and preparation of health and safety plans to protect workers and employees at hazardous waste sites.

Local
Tulare County Environmental Health Division
In Visalia, the Tulare County Environmental Health Services Division (TCEH SD) is the local agency responsible for the implementation of the State-mandated Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program (MJLHMP). County has prepared a Hazardous Materials Business Plan and the aforementioned MJLHMP, which serves as the County’s emergency response plan for hazardous materials emergency incidents. In addition, the TCEHSD acts as lead agency to ensure proper remediation of leaking underground petroleum storage tank sites and certain other contaminated sites.

TCEHSD provides three permanent Household Hazardous Waste drop-off facilities in the County including one in Visalia and operates mobile collection events throughout the year. These services are available free of charge to any County resident.

City of Visalia and Tulare County Fire Departments
The Visalia Fire Department (VFD) provides fire and life safety services for residents located within the city limits while the County Fire Department provides additional services for unincorporated areas of County.

VFD staffs five paramedic engine companies, one truck company and a Battalion Chief daily, from six fire station locations. The engines and truck companies are staffed with three personnel, giving the VFD a daily minimum staffing of 19 .19 All stations are staffed with a paramedic at all times. The City requires all new development and subdivisions to meet or exceed California Fire Code provisions, an d the City’s Fire Department reviews development applications during the plan check process.

19 (CIty of Visalia, Dyett & Bhatia, Urban and Regional Planners, ICF International, Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group, Omni -Means, Transportation Planners and Engineers 2014)
615
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-73
The VFD also provides oversight of hazardous materials. The VFD is responsible for conducting inspections for code compliance and fire -safe practices, and for scen e management and investigation of fire and hazardous materials incidents. According to Chapter 8.32 (Hazardous Materials) of the Visalia Municipal Code, an emergency situation created by a hazardous material release which poses an imminent risk to the life, health or safety of persons, property, or to the environment shall be mitigated in the manner prescribed and pursuant to the direction of the VFD. The VFD regulates explosive and hazardous materials under the California Fire Code, and permits the handlin g, storage and use of any explosive or other hazardous material. The City hosts “Dump-On-Us” events four times a year for city residents to drop off residential hazardous waste. Accepted items include small appliances, cell phones, fencing material, air conditioning/ heating units, tires, scrap metal, mattresses, yard waste, and other types of waste.

Waste Disposal Regulations
The disposal of contaminated soil is regulated by the RWQCB, in this case the Central Valley Region, and is regulated based on the c oncentrations of chemical constituents that are present. Soils having concentrations of contaminants higher than certain acceptable levels must be handled and disposed as hazardous waste when excavated. CCR Title 22, Section 66261.20 -24 contains technical descriptions of characteristics that would cause a soil to be classified as a hazardous waste.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
See section below.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
a and b) Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Potential impacts during construction of the Project could occur from potential spillage of fuels and lubricants associated with construction equipment. These potential impacts would be temporary in nature and would be reduced to less than significant levels through compliance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations, as well as the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Project operations would consist of consumer grade pesticides, fertilizers, and petroleum -based fuels. However, these potentially hazardous materials would not be of a type or occur in suffici ent quantities to pose a significant hazard to public health and safety or the environment. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations would minimize hazards associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials to the maximum extent practicable. In addition, compliance with applicable laws and regulations would lower any potential impacts from foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment to a less than significant level. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

616
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-74
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The Project would not handle construction related hazardous materials in the form of fuels and solvents during construction of the Project within a quarter mile a school. Therefore, there would be no impact.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. The Project site is not on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, according to the Envirostor and Geotracker databases mentioned above in Section

4.9.1. As a result, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment due to the Project being located on an existing hazardous material site. Therefore, there would be no impact. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the p roject result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The Project site is not located within an ALUCP, nor is it located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, there would be no impact. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. While construction would result in truck deliveries, hauling of materials, and construction crews, improvement plans and any work completed in existing roadways would be required to be approved by the City Engineer before they could occur. Streets within the subdivision have been designed to City specifications and have adequate site access for emergency vehicles. The Project does not generate an amount of traffic that warrants analysis of congestion. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The Project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. As discussed more thoroughly in Section 4.20, the Project site is not located in an area that has been designated as being a State Responsibility Area (SRA) or as being a very high fire hazard severity zone. The Project site would be annexed to the City of Visalia as a part of the Project and is substantially surrounded by urban uses. Therefore, there wo uld be no impact.
617
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-75

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Table 4-18: Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?

b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:

i. result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site;
ii. substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
off-site;

iii. create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or

iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?

e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?

Baseline Conditions
According to the website, “ Best Places”, the climate in Tulare County can be classified as Mediterranean with average rainfall rates of 14.9 inches annually, occurring primarily between November and March. 20 Hydrology in the Project area is associated with the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region, c ontaining three main subbasins. The Tulare Lake subbasin is in the northern alluvial fan and basin subarea characterized by southwest to south flowing rivers, creeks, and irrigation canal systems that convey water from the Sierra Nevada to the west toward the Tulare Lake Bed. The southern portion of the basin is internally drained by

20 (Best Places 2022)
618
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-76
the Kings, Kaweah, Tule, and Kern Rivers. 21 The Tulare Lake Basin comprises the drainage area of the San Joaquin Valley south of the San Joaquin River and is essentially a closed basin because surface water drains north into the San Joaquin River only in years of extreme rainfall. The Project site consists of irrigated farmland served by groundwater. The Project site is bordered by both a Tulare Irrigation District irrigation ditch and Cameron Creek.

The approximately 67.7-acre Project site is currently utilized for agricultural production. According to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, crops in California has been surveyed to use an average of 2.9 acre -feet per acre,22 or a total of 196.33 acre-feet annually on the Project site, specifically.

The City of Visalia’s water is managed by the California Water Service Visalia District. Groundwater is the sole source of water supply for the Visalia District. Groundwater used by Visalia is extracted from the underlying Kaweah and Tule Subbasins. The Project site itself is located within the Greater Kaweah Groundwater Sustainability Agency’s boundary.23
Applicable Regulations
Federal
Federal Clean Water Act
The CWA, described in more detail in Appendix B: Biological Evaluation, requires the U SEPA to develop, publish, and periodically update ambient water quality criteria for the protection of human health. In 1980, the USEPA published water quality criteria for 64 pollutants and pollutant classes and considered non - cancer, cancer, and taste and odor effects. Over the years, these criteria have evolved and have included additional pollutants and pollutant classes.

During the last decade, policy has shifted from a program -by-program, source-by-source, pollutant-by- pollutant approach to more watershed -based strategies. Ultimately, these criteria are used by states for establishing water quality standards under Section 303 (c) of the CWA and provide a basis for controlling discharges or releases of pollutants.

Section 401 – Water Quality Certification
CWA Section 401 requires that an applicant pursuing a federal permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge of a pollutant obtain a water quality certification (or waiver). Water quality certifications are issued by RWQCBs in California. Under CWA, the state (as implemented by the relevant board) must issue or waive CWA 401 water quality certification for the Project to be permitted under CWA 404. Water quality certification requires the evaluation of water quality considerations associated with dredging or the placement of fill materials into waters of the United States. Construction of individual projects within the City would require CWA 401 certification for the Project if CWA 404 were triggered.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Waste Discharge Regulations The 1972 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act established the NPDES permit program to control discharges of pollutants from point sources (CWA 402) , as discussed in Section 4.4. The 1987 amendments to CWA created a new section of CWA devoted to stormwater permitting (CWA 402[p]). The USEPA has granted California primacy in administering and enforcing the provisions of CWA and the NPDES permit program, which is the pr imary federal program that regulates point -source and nonpoint -source

21 (California Department of Water Resources. Natural Resources Agency 2015) 22 (United States Department of Agriculture 2019)
23 (California Department of Water Resources 2018)
619
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-77
discharges to waters of the United States. SWRCB issues both general and individual permits for certain activities. Relevant general and individual NPDES permits are discussed below.

Phase II MS4 Permit
The SWRCB, in response to the USEPA, issued Water Quality Order No. 2013 -001-DWQ NPDES General Permit No. CAS000004, Waste Discharge Requirements for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Systems (MS4s) in February 2 013 which went into effect July 2013. The MS4 Permit requires urban municipalities with predetermined inclusion reequipments to file an application and comply with prescriptive tasks over the 5-year permit term. The prescriptive tasks include, but are not limited to, public outreach and involvement, illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE), construction site runoff control, post -construction storm water management, municipality facility and operation good housekeeping, water quality monitoring, and municipality assessment and reporting.

Construction Stormwater NPDES Permit
A Construction NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit (CGP), Water Quality Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ) is required for dischargers or projects who disturb one acre or more of soil or whose project disturbs less than one acre, but which is part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one acre or more. This CGP was adopted in September 2009 and went into effect July 2010.

The CGP requires the development of Permit Registration Documents (PRDs) which include the development and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP must contain a site map(s) which shows the construction site pe rimeter, existing and proposed buildings, lots, roadways, stormwater collection and discharge points, general topography both before and after construction, and drainage patterns across the project. The SWPPP must list /describe BMPs the discharger would use to prevent polluted stormwater runoff and show the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program, a chemical monitoring program for “non -visible” pollutants, and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment. Attachment B of the CGP describes the elements that must be contained in a SWPPP. Additional PRD requirements are described in Attachments C-E in the CGP.

General Dewatering Permit
Small amounts of construction -related dewatering are covered under the CGP. Large amounts of dewatering, particularly over lengthy periods of time would be required to comply with the General Dewatering Permit. Project-related dewatering is likely to be limited in nature and scope and would likely be covered under the CGP. However, some projects may result in larger amount s of dewatering than covered under the CGP and a Low Threat Discharge and Dewatering Permit would need to be obtained from the Central Valley RWQCB.

Section 404
CWA Section 404 regulates the discharge of dredged and fill materials into Waters of the United States, which include oceans, bays, rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. Project proponents must obtain a permit from the USACE for al l discharges of dredged or fill material into Waters of the United States, including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed activity. Before any actions that may impact surface waters are carried out, a delineation of jurisdictional waters of the Unit ed States must be completed following USACE protocols (Environmental Laboratory 1987) to determine whether a particular project area encompasses wetlands or other waters of the United States that qualify for CWA protection. These include any or all of the following:
620
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-78
• Areas within the ordinary high -water mark of a stream, including nonperennial streams with a defined bed and bank, and any stream channel that conveys natural runoff, even if it has been realigned; or
• Seasonal and perennial wetlands, including coastal wetlands.

Wetlands are defined for regulatory purposes as areas “inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR 328.3; 40 CFR 230.3).

Under the CWA 404 permit program, general permits (known as nationwide permits) have been adopted, and coverage under nationwide permits is possible when the amount o f fill is relatively small (usually less than 0.5 acre). Individual projects within the City that do not qualify for a nationwide permit must obtain an individual permit.

National Flood Insurance Program
Congress passed the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973.

The intent of these acts was to reduce the need for large, publicly funded flood control structures and disaster relief by restricting development on floodplains.

Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) administers the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to provide subsidized flood insurance to communities that comply with FEMA regulations limiting development in floodplains. FEMA issues Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for communities participating in the NFIP.

Executive Order 11988
Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management) addresses floodplain issues related to public safety, conservation, and economics. It generally requires federal agencies constructing, permitting, or funding to 1) avoid incompatible floodplain development; 2) be consistent with the standards and criteria of the NFIP; and 3) restore and preserve natural and beneficial floodplain values.

State
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969
The Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act established the SWRCB and divided the state into nine regional basins, each with a RWQCB. The SWRCB is the primary state agency responsible for protecting the quality of the States surface and groundwater supplies, while the regional bo ards are responsible for developing and enforcing water quality objectives and implementation plans. The Project would be within the jurisdiction of Central Valley RWQCB.

The act authorizes the SWRCB to enact State policies regarding water quality in accordance with the CWA Section 303. In addition, the act authorizes the SWRCB to issue WDRs for projects that would discharge to state waters. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act requires that the SWRCB or the Central Valley RWQCB adopt water quality control plans (basin plans) for the protection of water quality. A basin plan must:
• Identify beneficial uses of water to be protected;
• Establish water quality objectives for the reasonable protection of the beneficial uses; and • Establish a program of implementation for achieving the water quality objectives. 621
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-79
Basin plans also provide the technical basis for determining waste discharge requirements, taking enforcement actions, and evaluating clean water grant proposals. Basin plans are updated and reviewed every 3 years in accordance with Article 3 of Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act and CWA 303(c) (Central Valley RWQCB 2004 with approved amendments).

California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region – Basin Plan Water quality in streams and aquifers of the region is guided and regulated by the Central Valley RWQCB Tulare Lake Basin Plan. 24 State policy for water quality control is directed at achieving the highest water quality consistent with the maximum benefit to the people of the state. To develop water quality standards consistent with the uses of a water body, the Central Valley RWQCB classifies historical, present, and potential future beneficial uses as part of its basin plan. The Central Valley RWQCB Basin Plan identifies the beneficial uses of the Tulare Lake basin.

Although the Cameron Creek is not specifically listed on the Tulare Lake Basin Plan, the Valley Floor Creeks are listed for agriculture, industrial, process water, recreation, warm water habitat, wild habi tat, rare species habitat, and groundwater recharge. A detailed discussion of beneficial uses and water quality objectives can be found in the Basin Plan.

The Central Valley RWQCB Basin Plan has also established the water quality objectives for dissolved oxygen in various habitats. The objective for warm water beneficial use habitats is 5mg/L minimum; and for cold water habitats is 7mg/L minimum.25
The Central Valley RWQCB Basin Plan also states that turbidity shall not be increased by more than 1 Nephelometric Turbidity Unit (NTU) when ambient turbidity is between 0 and 5 NTU. Turbidity shall not be increased by more than 20 percent when ambient turbidity is between 5 and 50 NTU. Finally, when ambient turbidity is greater than 100 NTU, turbidity shall not be increased by more than 10 percent.26 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
In September 2014, the California Legislature enacted a three -bill law (A B 1739, SB 1168, and SB 1319), known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA was cre ated to provide a framework for the sustainable management of groundwater supplie s and intended to empower local agencies to adopt groundwater management plans that are tailored to the resources and needs of their communities, such that sustainable managem ent would provide a buffer against drought and climate change, and ensure reliable water supplies regardless of weather patterns. SGMA is considered part of the statewide, comprehensive California Water Action Plan that includes water conservation, water recycling, expanded water storage, safe drinking water, and wetlands and watershed restoration. It protects existing surface water and groundwater rights and does not affect current drought response measures.27 SGMA requires that local agencies form a local groundwater sustainability agency within 2 years (i.e., by 2017). This process is not subject to LAFCo purview. Agencies located within high - or medium -priority basins must adopt groundwater sustainability pla ns within 5 to 7 years. The time frame for basins determined by DWR to be in a condition of “critical overdraft” is 5 years (i.e., by 2020). Local agencies would have 20 years to fully implement groundwater sustainability plans after the plans have been ad opted.

Intervention by the SWRCB would occur if a groundwater sustainability agency is not formed by the local agencies, and/or if a groundwater sustainability plan is not adopted or implemented. 28

24 (California Water Boards 2022)
25 (California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region 2018) 26 Ibid.
27 (California Department of Water Resources 2023)
28 (California Department of Water Resources 2023)
622
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-80
Streambed Alteration Agreement
The CDFW regulates streambed alterations in accordance with the California Fish and Game Code 1601 – 1616: Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreements. Whenever a project proposes to alter a streambed, channel, or bank, an agreement with CDFW is required. The agreement is a legally binding document that describes measures agreed to by both parties to reduce risks to fish and wildlife in the stream system during the project. This is a separate process from CEQA approval but is usually coordinated with CEQA compliance. Agreements typically have fewer procedural and legal requirements than CEQA in order to work with small-scale projects that are important to fish. Timeframes for agreements are 30 days for CDFW to determine the completeness of an application and an additional 60 days to pro vide a draft agreement to the applicant.

Local
Phase II MS4 Permit
The Municipal Storm Water Permitting Program established under NPDES regulates storm water discharges from MS4s. In the first phase, the SWRCB issued permits to medium and large municipalit ies, typically grouped as co -permittees in a metropolitan region. In the second phase, the SWRCB adopted a General Permit for the Discharge of Storm Water from Small MS4s. In 2013, SWRCB, in response to the USEPA, issued Water Quality Order No. 2013 -001-DWQ NPDES General Permit No. CAS000004, Waste Discharge Requirements for Storm Water Discharges from Small MS4s in February 2013, which went into effect July 2013. The MS4 Permit requires urban municipalities with predetermined inclusion reequipments to file an application and comply with prescriptive tasks over the 5-year permit term. The prescriptive tasks include, but are not limited to, public outreach and involvement, IDDE, construction site runoff control, post - construction storm water management, munic ipality facility and operation good housekeeping, water quality monitoring, and municipality assessment and reporting.

The City applied with the SWRCB under the Phase II MS4 Permit in July 2013, covering the City itself, and the Storm Water Management Program for County, which covers all unincorporated parts of the County, including the Project site. The City, under previous permit issuances, developed and adopted Stormwater Management Plans in 2005 and 2008, respectively.

Visalia Urban Water Management Plan
California Water Service Company 29 Visalia District 20 20 UWMP evaluates water demand and potential supply based on projected population and urban area growth. Water Code Section 10644(a) requires urban water suppliers t o file UWMPs with the DWR, the California State Library, and any city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies. The UWMP describes the water system, system demands, system supplies, water supply reliability and water shortage contingency planning, and demand management measures.

City of Visalia General Plan
• Objective OSC -O-6: Protect water resources vital to the health of the community residents and important to the Planning Area’s ecological and economic stability. • Objective OSC -O-7: Preserve and enhance Planning Area waterways and adjacent corridors as valuable community resources which serve as plant and wildlife habitats, as groundwater recharge facilities, as flood control and irrigation components, and as connections between open sp ace areas.

29 California Water Service Company is an investor-owned corporate purveyor of water to the City of Visalia. 623
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-81
• Objective OSC-O-8: Continue to participate in a waterway program involving the Tulare Irrigation District, irrigation companies, private water companies and state agencies. • Policy OSC-P-18: Establish a liability agreement between the City, Tular e Irrigation District, water conservation districts and ditch companies related to public access and trail use and riparian corridor enhancement programs.

City of Visalia Municipal Code: Flood Plain Management Ordinance Chapter 15.60 Chapter 15.60, “Flood Plain Management Ordinance,” of the City of Visalia Municipal Code is intended to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions designed to:
• Protect human life and health;
• Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects; • Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding events and generally undertaken at the expense of the general public;
• Minimize prolonged business interruptions;
• Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains; electric, telephone and sewer lines; and streets and bridges located in special flood hazard areas; • Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of special flood hazard areas so as to minimize future blighted areas caused by flood damage; • Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is located in a special flood hazard area; and • Ensure that those who occupy properties located in special flood hazard areas assume responsibility for their actions.

Methods to reduce flood losses through this chapter involve regulations pertaining to the following:
• Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety and property due to water or erosion hazards;
• Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; • Control the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel floodwaters;
• Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage; and • Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert floodwaters or which may increase flood hazards in other areas.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherw ise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less than Significant Impact. Surface runoff from the subdivision and the surrounding developments would be accommodated by the proposed ponding basin park on the eastern edge of the Project sit e.

The basin is sized in accordance with lot coverage and runoff coefficients, and therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Runoff generated as a result of the increase permeability of the Project site would be accommodated by the proposed park basin. Connection to City facilities would not violate any waste discharge requirements. Water quality for domestic/potable use is controlled by the City itself pursuant to State water quality regulations. It is not anticipated that the Project would degrade either surface- or ground-water quality. In addition, the Project would be required to complete and comply with a SWPPP 624
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-82
prior to and during construction of the subdivision. Thus, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
b) Would the project su bstantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less than Significant Impact. Cal Water delivers local groundwater and operate s 59 wells across the Visalia service area, which would include the Project site once annexed into the City. According to the Visalia District 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), in 2020, the total system demand was 30,152 af.30. In 2020, single family uses used 19,359 af, which accounted for 64 percent of the total water used.

The UWMP projected water demands for potable and non-potable water. Projected water demand from 2025 through 2045 are shown in Table 4-19.

Table 4-19: Use for Potable and Non-Potable Water – Projected Use for Potable and Non-Potable Water – Projected
Use Type Additional Description
(as needed)
Projected Water Use (AF)
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Single Family 20,815 22,593 24,604 26,513 28,705
Multi-Family 1,583 1,686 1,815 1,945 2,070
Commercial 5,634 6,009 6,448 6,891 7,364
Institutional/Governmental 2,854 3,152 3,483 3,819 4,164 Industrial 308 308 308 308 308
Other Potable 223 223 223 223 223
Landscape (b) 0 0 0 0 0
Losses (c) 1,102 1,304 1,429 1,559 1,695
Total 32,520 35,276 38,310 41,258 44,529
NOTES:
(a) District’s billing system does not track this use type separate from other use types (b) Real and apparent losses
The Project consists of 273 dwelling units and the average household size in Visalia is 2.99; therefore, the Project would house approximately 816 people.31 According to the UWMP, the amount of groundwater pumped during the year 2020 was 30,152-acre feet or 26.9 million gallons per day.

The proposed 273-lot subdivision would be expected to use approximately 178,704 gallons of water per day (816 people x 219 gallons/day) under normal operation, including domestic and landscape irrigation.

30 (California Water Service 2021)
31 (United States Census Bureau 2020)
625
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-83
This equates to approximately 200.17 -acre feet per year. Therefore, given existing conditions, water consumption would increase by 4 acre-feet per year. Although the Project would utilize groundwater for domestic purposes, the amount of water used is not considered significant and would not significantly lower the groundwater table of the aquifer or interfere substantially with the recharge of the underground aquifer.

The Project would pay its fair share of installation of improvements and pay all development fees related to water service. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; See section iv.
ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
See section iv.
iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
See section iv.
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
c i-iv) Less than Significant Impact. The Project would result in some soil erosion and the loss of topsoil due to Project re lated construction activities. The drainage pattern of the new subdivision would be altered to flow to the proposed park basin that would be constructed as a part of the Project . Through the completion of a SWPPP and the implementation of the applicable be st management practices, any potential impacts from the altering of drainage patterns would be limited to less than significant. d) Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundations?
Less than S ignificant Impact. Cameron Creek and a Tulare Irrigation District ditch run along the easternmost and westernmost portions of the Project site, respectively. Furthermore, the eastern half of the Project is located in a 100-year floodplain (see
Figure 4-3), and thus the Project would be required to elevate the proposed structures to be located one foot above the flood elevation. In order to minimize erosion and run-off during construction activities, a SWPPP would be implemented, and the contractor would comply with all Cal/OSHA regulations regarding regular maintenance and inspection of equipment, spill prevention, and spill remediation in order to reduce the potential for incidental release of pollutants or hazardous substances onsite. While the Project 626
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-84
would be located within a 100-year flood zone, the measures listed above would diminish any potential impacts to a less than significant level.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located within the Greater Kaweah Groundwater Sustainability Agency’s boundary, whose Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) was adopted in January 2020. As the Project w ould not result in a significant decrease in groundwater compared to baseline conditions, and would follow the policies of the GSP, the Project w ould not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the GSP. Impacts would be less than significant impact. 627
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-85

Figure 4-3: FEMA Flood Map
628
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-86

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Table 4-20: Land Use and Planning Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

Baseline Conditions
The Project site currently consists of orchards. The Project site is surrounded by a subdivision to the north, agricultural land to the west and east, and a Southern California Edison substation to the south. The City of Visalia General Plan Update land us e diagram designates the Project site as Low Density Residential. The Project site is currently zoned AE-20 (Exclusive Agricultural, 20-acre minimum parcel size) by the County of Tulare and prezoned by the City as R -1-5. General Plan land use designations and Zone Districts of the 629
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-87
Project site and surrounding areas are illustrated in

630
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-88
Figure 2-4 and

Figure 2-5.
631
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-89
Applicable Regulations
Federal
There are no federal regulations, plans, programs, or guidelines associated with land use that are applicable to the Project.

State
Regional Housing Needs Plan
California General Plan law requires each city and county to have land zoned to accommodate a fair share of the regional housing need. (Government Code section 65584, et seq.) The share is known as a regional housing needs assessment or RHNA and is based on a regional housing needs plan or RHNP developed by each council of government. The state-mandated RHNA process (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires Tulare COG to develop a methodology that determines how to divide and distribute an overall allocation that the region receives from the State. Currently there are no RHNA assignments as sociated with the Project site.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan
• Objective LU-O-7: Preserve and enhance qualities that make Visalia an ideal place to do business and promote a positive image of Visalia as a desirable place to live, visit, and do business. • Objective LU-O-16: Create a safe, walkable and attractive urban environment for current and future generations of residents.
• Objective LU-O-23: Provide a range of housing types and prices within new neighborhoods to meet the needs of all segments of the community.
• Objective LU-O-25: Create an open space system that links neighborhoods, complements adjacent land uses and serves multiple needs.
• Policy LU-P-21: Allow annexation and development of residential […] land to occur within the Urban Development Boundary (Tier II) […] consistent with the City’s Land Use Diagram, according to the following phasing thresholds:
o “Tier II”: Tier II supports a target buildout population of approximately 178,000. The expansion criteria for land in Tier II is that land would only become availa ble for development when building permits have been issued in Tier I at the following levels, starting from April 1, 2010:
▪ Residential: after permits for 5,850 housing units have been issued. • Policy LU-P-29: Use regional and community parks and open space to enhance gateways to the City and as a buffer between adjacent communities.
• Policy LU-P-37: Adopt specific development standards for scenic entryways (gateways) and roadway corridors into the City, including special setback and landscape standards, open space and park development, and/or land use designations.
• Policy LU-P-41: Use Mill, Packwood and Cameron Creeks and other waterways as natural amenities and links between neighborhoods.
632
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-90
• Policy LU -P-43: Work with utilities and transportation companies to landscape power line and railroad right-of-ways throughout the community and to underground utilities where possible. • Policy LU-P-44: Develop land use and site design measures for areas adjacent to high voltage power facilities. Measures will include land scape buffers and mandatory setbacks from substations and transmission towers and lines.
• Policy LU -P-48: Establish criteria and standards of pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle circulation networks within new subdivisions and non-residential development. • Policy LU-P-51: Provide development standards to ensure residential development is not negatively affected by adjacent non-residential land uses.
• Objective OSC -O-7: Preserve and enhance Planning Area waterways and adjacent corridors as valuable community resources which serve as plant and wildlife habitats, as groundwater recharge facilities, as flood control and irrigation components, and as connections between open spaces. • Policy OSC-P-8: Protect, restore, and enhance a continuous corridor of native riparian vegetation along Planning Area waterways, including the St. John’s River; Mill, Packwood, and Cameron Creeks; and segments of other creeks and ditches where fea sible, in conformance with the Parks and Open Space diagram of this General Plan.

Waterway corridors provide irrigation water for agriculture, recreational opportunities, habitat, and storm drainage. They will provide new links between neighborhoods, parks , and Downtown, and provide a new way of experiencing the City and understanding its natural setting. • Policy OSC-P-14: Establish design and development standards for new development in waterway corridors to preserve and enhance irrigation capabilities, if provided, and the natural riparian environment along these corridors. In certain locations or where conditions require it, alternative designs such as terraced seating or a planted wall system may be appropriate.

As part of Plan implementation, examples o f waterway bank treatments should be developed to facilitate adoption of these standards.
• Policy OSC-P-17: Require that new development along waterways maintain a visual orientation and active interface with waterways. Develop design guidelines to be used for review and approval of subdivision and development proposals to illustrate how this can be accomplished for different land uses in various geographic settings.
• Policy OSC -P-23: Where no urban development exists, maintain a minimum riparian habitat development setback from the discernible top of the bank – 50 feet for both sides of the Mill, Packwood and Cameron Creek corridors and 25 feet for both sides of Modoc, Persian and Mill Creek Ditches – provided that where riparian trees are located within 100 feet of the discernible top of the banks of the Creek corridors and 50 from the banks of the ditches, the setback shall be wide enough to include five feet outside the drip line of such trees. Restore and enhance the area within the setback with native vegetation.
o Where existing development or land committed to development prohibits the 50 foot setback on Mill, Packwood and Cameron Creek corridors, provide the maximum amount of land available for a development setback.
633
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-91
o Where existing development or land co mmitted to development prohibits the 25 foot setback along Modoc, Persian, and Mill Creek Ditches, provide the maximum amount of land available for a development setback.

An exception to these setback requirements also may be allowed to permit piping of the ditch where necessary to meet City standards, and where no riparian trees will be lost.

City of Visalia Municipal Code
The intent of the QP zone is to allow for the location of institutional, academic, community service, governmental, and nonprofit uses. According to Municipal Code section 17.52.020, “Permitted uses in this zone include public uses of an administrative, recreational, public service or cultural type including city, county, state or federal administrative centers and courts, libraries, museums, art galleries, police and fire stations and other public building, structures and facilities; public playgrounds, parks and community centers.”32 The R-1-5 zone is to provide living area within the city where development is limited to low density concentrations of one-family dwellings where regulations are designed to accomplish the following:
to promote and encourage a suitable environment for family life; to provide space for community facilities needed to compliment urban residential areas and for institutions that require a residential environment; to minimize traffic congestion and to avoid an overload of utilities designed to service only low density residential use. Permitted uses in this zone district include single-family dwellings.

Waterways and Trails Master Plan
The Waterways and Trails Master Plan, outlines goals, policies, design standards, and implementation strategies for the development of a multi -purpose trail system along Visalia’s primary community waterways. The trail system s would link neighborhoods, parks, schools, Downtown, and other activity centers. The plan focuses on developing trails along three waterways: Packwood Creek, Mill Creek, and Cameron Creek. The Master Plan also identifies that the Class I trail that would run along Mill Creek and connect to the proposed Class I trail running north/south along the power line easement, west of the Project site.33 These trails are designed to link with the City’s existing trail system along the St. Johns River and the bike net work. Mill Creek is proposed to be fully daylighted through Downtown. Ultimately, the completed system would form a “ring recreational trail” around the City’s periphery, several cross -town routes along waterways and other primary corridors, and a major north/south route along Santa Fe Avenue.

Along each waterway, a preferred trail alignment is identified, and recommendations and policies are made for landscaping improvements and habitat restoration within the waterway setback.34 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? Less than Significant Impact. The Project involves the development of 273 single-family residential lots in southeast Visalia. The Project area is classified by the City’s General Plan as Low Density Re sidential and as AE-20 by the County of Tulare’s Zoning Ordinance. The Project site will be annexed into the City and zoned R-1-5 (Single family Residential, 5,000 square foot minimum) . The Project will create a new residential subdivision which is consistent with the city’s current General Plan land use designation. The site is currently an agricultural orchard located adjacent to an existing residential subdivision.

Development of the site will reduce vehicular obstructions by creating new roads and sidewalks.

32 (American Legal Publishing 2023)
33 (RRM Design Group 2010)
34 (CIty of Visalia, Dyett & Bhatia, Urban and Regional Planners, ICF International, Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group, Omni-Means, Transportation Planners and Engineers 2014)
634
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-92
Implementation of the Project would provide additional housing and an expansion of services. Therefore, the Project would not physically divide an established community and would have less than significant impact.
b) Would the project cause a significant environmental conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. The Project proposes to construct 273 single family low density units within the a 67.5-acre Project site. As illustrated in Figure 2-4 and Figure 2-5, the City of Visalia General Plan land use diagram designates the Project site as Low Density Residential, and the County of Tulare Zoning Ordinance designates the Project site as AE-20. The Project proposes to annex the site into the City and prezone the site into the R -1-5 (Single Family Low Density Residential) Zone District and QP for the public park and regional basin area. Therefore, the Project would not cause a significant environmental conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation since it would be consistent with land use designation standards.

Therefore, there would be no impact.
635
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-93

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Table 4-21: Mineral Resources Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?

b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?

Baseline Conditions
Visalia is part of the Central Valley region, one of several geomorphic provinces in California. The most economically significant mineral resources in Tulare County are sand, gravel, and crushed stone, used as sources for aggregate (road materials and other construction). The two major sources of aggregate are alluvial deposits (riverbeds, and floodplains), and hard rock quarries. Consequently, most Tulare County mines are located along rivers at the base of the Sierra foothills. Surface mining in California is regulated through the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), a State law adopted in 1975 to address the dual goals of protecting the state’s need for a continuing supply of mineral resources, while pr otecting public and environmental health. SMARA requires that all cities incorporate into their general plans mapped mineral resource designations approved by the State Mining and Geology Board. The Visalia Planning Area contains three former sand and gravel mines, but no currently operating mines and no designated Mineral Resource Zones.35
Applicable Regulations
Federal
There are no federal regulations, plans, programs, and guidelines associated with mineral resources that are applicable to the Project.

State
California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975
Enacted by the State Legislature in 1975, the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), Public Resources Code Section 2710, et seq., ensures a continuing supply of mineral resources for California. The Act creates surface mining and reclamation policy to ensure that:
• Production and conservation of minerals is encouraged; • Environmental effects are prevented or minimized;

35 (CIty of Visalia, Dyett & Bhatia, Urban and Regional Planners, ICF International, Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group, Omn i-Means, Transportation Planners and Engineers 2014)
636
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-94
• Consideration is given to recreational activities, watersheds, wildlife, range and forage, and aesthetic enjoyment;
• Mined lands are reclaimed to a useable condition once mining is completed; and • Hazards to public safety both now and in the future are eliminated.

Areas in the State (i.e., a city or county) that do not have their own regulations for mining and reclamation activities rely on the Department of Conservation Division of Mine Reclamation to enforce this law. SMARA contains provisions for the inventory of mineral lands in the State of California. The State Geologist, in accordance with the SWRCB Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands, must classify Mineral Resource Zones as designated below:
• MRZ-1. Areas where available geologic information indicates that there is minimal likelihood of significant resources.
• MRZ-2. Areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data indicate that significant mineral deposits are located or likely to be located.
o MRZ-2a. Areas containing mineral deposits that have geologic data to confirm that significant measured or indicated resources are present. o MRZ-2b. Areas containing mineral deposits where geologic information indicates that inferred resources are present.
• MRZ-3. Areas where mineral deposits are found but the significance of the deposits cannot be evaluated without further exploration.
o MRZ-3a. Areas considered having a moderate potential for mineral deposits of economic value.
o MRZ-3b. Areas that include inferred mineral deposits that could possibly qualify as mineral resources.
• MRZ-4. Areas where there is not enough information to assess the zone. These are areas that have unknown mineral resource significance.

SMARA only covers mining activities that impact or disturb the surface of the land. Deep mining (tunnel) or petroleum and gas production is not covered by SMARA.

Local
There are no local regulations, plans, programs, and guidelines associated with mineral resources that are applicable to the Project.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. According to the City of Visalia General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report, the City of Visalia Planning Area, including the Project site, does not contain land desig nated as mineral resource zone. Also, there are no active mining operations, therefore there would be no impact. 637
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-95
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. As discussed above, there are no active mining operations or lands designated as a mineral resource zone in the City of Visalia’s Planning Area, therefore the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. There would be no impact. 638
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-96

4.13 NOISE
Table 4-22: Noise Impacts
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?

b) Generation of excessive ground borne
vibration or ground borne noise levels?
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?

Baseline Conditions
The Project site is located in an area that has historically been used for agricultural purposes, substantially surrounded by agriculture uses almost all around with the exception of s ingle family residences north of the project site . In addition, there are no schools within one mile radius of the project site, the closest school is Annie R. Mitchell (1.03 miles northwest) located nearby. The nearest major intersection to the Project site is South McAuliff Street and East Walnut Avenue. East Walnut Avenue and South McAuliff Street are designated Arterial and Collector by the City of Visalia General Plan Circulation Element , respectively.

The San Joaquin Valley Railroad maintains a rail line immediately south of the Project site, which sees approximately two trains per day. The Project site is within proximity of two railroad crossings, and is not located in an FRA Quiet Zone.

Applicable Regulations
State
State of California General Plan Guidelines
The State of California General Plan Guidelines (OPR 2003) id entify guidelines for the noise elements of local GPs, including a sound level/land use compatibility chart that categorizes, by land use, outdoor Ldn ranges in up to four categories (normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable). For many land uses, the chart shows overlapping Ldn ranges for two or more compatibility categories. The noise element guideline chart identifies the normally acceptable range of Ldn values for low-density residential uses as less than 60 dB and the conditionally acceptable range as 55–70 dB. The normally acceptable range for high-density residential uses is identified as Ldn values below 65 dB, and the conditionally acceptable range is identified as 60–70 dB. For educational and medical facilities, Ldn 639
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-97
values below 70 dB are considered normally acceptable, and Ldn values of 60 –70 dB is considered conditionally acceptable. For office and commercial land uses, Ldn values below 70 dB are considered normally acceptable, and Ldn values of 67.5–77.5 are categorized as conditionally acceptable. When noise levels are in the conditionally acceptable range new construction should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulatio n requirements are included in the design. These overlapping Ldn ranges are intended to indicate that local conditions (existing sound levels and community attitudes toward dominant sound sources) should be considered in evaluating land use compatibility at specific locations.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan
The current Noise Element of the City’s GP establishes goals and policies intended to limit community exposure to excessive noise levels. Visalia’s current GP identifies noise sources such as roadways, rails, and airports within the city and includes land use compatibility guidelines.

Noise Ordinance
Chapter 8.36 of the City’s Municipal Code contains the City’s noise ordinance, which establishes exterior and interior noise level standards. Exterior and interior noise levels may not exceed any of the categorical noise level standards shown in Table 4-23:

Table 4-23: City of Visalia - Noise Level Standards
City of Visalia’s Noise Level Standards
Categories
Cumulative
number of minutes
in any one-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.)
Exterior Levels
1 30 50 45
2 15 55 50
3 5 60 55
4 1 65 60
5 0 70 65
Interior Levels
1 5 45 35
2 1 50 40
3 0 55 45

640
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-98
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient Would the project 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 applicable standards of other agencies?
Less than Significant Impact. The construction for the Project will create a temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of the standards established in the local general plan , noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies for approximately 21 months . The construction required for the completion of this Project would temporarily increase noise levels above what is allowed by the City’s Noise Ordinance (Table 4-23); however, construction related activities are allowed between 6 am – 7 pm during the week and between 9 am – 7 pm on the weekends. Construction related noise would be temporary and would cea se upon completion of the Project. The Project site is currently has varying levels of noise due to historical agricultural equipment use and daily train noise. In addition, according to the inverse square law, noise diminishes from its source by six dBA with each doubling of distance from origin. As a result, any noise generated from the Project site would have a diminished effect when heard from people in the surrounding area. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact . Construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source. Construction and agricultural activities can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures, and soil type. The generation of vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vib ration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels from construction would be temporary in nature . In addition, vibration levels s ubside with increased distance from the source, diminishing the effect the Project would have. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
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? No Impact. The Project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip or within an airport land use plan.

The nearest airport or airstrip to the Project site Visalia Municipal Airport approximately 9.8 miles southwest of the Project site. Therefore, there would be no impact. 641
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-99

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Table 4-24: Population and Housing Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
Sample, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?

Baseline Conditions
The Project site is located on approximately 67.7 acres of land to the southeast of the City of Visalia that would be annexed into the City as a part of the Project. Land being annexed into the City is currently zoned for agricultural use (AE -20). Accordin g to the United States Census Bureau, the City of Visalia had a population of 141,384 people in 2020. The Census Bureau estimated that in 2020 the City had a rate of

2.99 people per household. 36 The General Plan planned land use designation for the Projec t site is Low Density Residential, which permits residential land uses between two and ten dwelling units per acre. The area abutting Cameron Creek is designated as Conservation and is planned for a Class 1 trail.

Applicable Regulations
There are no federal, State, or local regulations, plans, programs, and guidelines associated with population or housing that are applicable to the Project.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for Sample, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not create a substantial increase in population in the area, either directly or indirectly. The Project would result in the construction of 273 houses within land that would be annexed into the City as a part of the Project. At 2.99 residents per household, the Project could potentially add 816 new people to the City’s population. The portion of the Project site that would contain the new 273 homes is designated for Low Density Residential use by the City of Visalia General Plan. Cameron Creek runs through the Project parcel to the southeast. East of the proposed subdivision and north of Cameron Creek a new ponding basin and park would be constructed as a part of the Project.

36 (United States Census Bureau 2022)
642
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-100
Land to the south and east of Cameron Creek would not be altered by the Project. While the Project will result in population growth through the construction of 273 homes, the new development is consistent with the City’s General Plan Land Use designation of low density residential as the proposed density is

4.04 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project displace su bstantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The Project would result in the construction of 273 homes on land that would be annexed into the City of Visalia. Land being annexed into the City as a part of the project has historically been used for agricultural and has not been previously developed. No existing housing exists or would be demolished to facilitate the Project. Therefore, there would be no impact.

643
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-101

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Table 4-25: Public Services
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Baseline Conditions
The Project site is located around the southwest corner of South McAuliff Street and East Cherry Avenue, in Visalia’s southeast quadrant. It is approximately 67.5 acres of vacant property. The Project site is served by City of Visalia, Fire Station 56, Visalia Unified School District, and the City of Visalia Police Department.

Fire Protection: The City of Visalia , Fire Station 56, located 0.7 miles north of the Project site provides fire suppression and prevention, emergency and non-emergency medical services.

Police Protection : The City of Visalia Police Department, located 3.1 miles northwest of the Project sit e, provides 24-hour policing services within the city limits.

Schools: The Visalia Unified School District (VUSD) serves the project site. Annie R . Mitchell Elementary School is located approximately one mile west of the Project.

Parks: The City has 23 neighborhood parks located throughout the city. Kiwanis Park is the closest park to the Project site located one mile north of the Project. The park includes picnic tables, a playground, a basketball court, a skate element, and an open play area.

Applicable Regulations
State
State Open Space Standards
State planning law (Government Code Section 65560) provides a structure for the preservation of open space by requiring every city and county in the state to prepare, adopt, and submit to th e Secretary of Resources Agency a “local open -space plan for the comprehensive and long -range preservation and 644
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-102
conservation of open -space land within its jurisdiction.” This is commonly achieved by incorporating an “Open Space” Element as part of the City and County long range GPs. The following open space categories are identified by the State for preservation:
• Open space for public health and safety, including, but not limited to, areas that require special management or regulation due to hazardous or special conditions. • Open space for the preservation of natural resources, including, but not limited to, natural vegetation, fish and wildlife, and water resources.
• Open space for resource management and production, including, but not limited to, agricultural and mineral resources, forests, rangeland, and areas required for the recharge of groundwater basins.
• Open space for outdoor recreation, including, but not limited to, parks and recreational facilities, areas that serve as links between major recreation and open space reservations (such as trails, easements, and scenic roadways), and areas of outstanding scenic and cultural value. • Open space for the protection of Native American sites, including, but not limited to, places, features, and objects of historical, cultural, or sacred significance such as Native American sanctified cemeteries, places of worship, religious or ceremonial sites, or sacred shrines located on public property (further defined in California Public Resources Code Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993).

Local
City of Visalia General Plan: Parks, Schools, Community Facilities, and Utilities The Parks, Schools, Community Facilities, and Utilities Element of the City’s GP was last comprehensively updated in 2014. Regarding parks and recreation, the element presents City’s policies and programs for the development and maintenance of parks, schools, and other fundamental building blocks for new neighborhoods to be built over the next two decades. The Element objectives and goals pertaining to public services are as follows:

Fire:
• Policy S-O-4: Protect Visalia’s residents and businesses from potential fire hazards. • Policy S-P-22: Manage vegetation in areas within and adjacent to public rights-of-way and in close proximity to critical facilities in order to reduce the risk of tree failure and property damage and avoid creation of wind acceleration corridors within vegetated areas. • Policy S-P-27: Implement a fuel modification program, which also includes residential maintenance requirements and enforcement, plan submittal and approval process, guidelines for planting, and a listing of undesirable plant species. Require builders and developers to submit th eir plans, complete with proposed fuel modification zones, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to beginning construction.
• Policy S-P-29: Ensure availability of adequate water supplies to meet public health and safety needs, and for resource protection, by maintaining the following order of priority for water use:
• Potable water supply, fire protection, and domestic use • Resource protection and preservation
• Industrial, irrigation and commercial uses
645
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-103
• Water-oriented or water-enhanced recreation
• Air conditioning.
• Policy S-P-32: Continue to make available fire alarm systems, as referred in to in this Element, to be tied directly and automatically to the Visalia City Fire Chief’s alarm-receiving center.

• Policy S-P-41: Periodically conduct joint training exercises with the County, State, and federal agencies and others to with the goal of developing the best possible coordinated action in fire suppression and crowd control.

Police:
• Objective S-O-5: Provide a comprehensive program of safety services including police, fire and medical response in all parts of the Visalia Planning Area. • Policy S-P-30: Integrate the Tulare County Hazard Mitigation Plan, in particular the hazard analysis and mitigation strategy sections, into the development review process, the emergency operations plan, and capital improvement program, as appropriate.
• Policy PSCU-P-28: Investigate opportunities to locate emergency services substations (po lice, fire, etc.) adjacent to park sites.

Schools:
• Objective PSCU-O-8 Place elementary schools at the core of neighborhoods and co -locate schools with parks and neighborhood commercial areas.
• Objective PSCU-O-9: Coordinate the location of school sites in the community with the school district in an effort to assist the School District in providing school facilities at the optimum location and in a timely manner.
• Policy PSCU-P-34: Coordinate land use and development with school location and site design, working with the Visalia Unified School District and other districts to ensure that adequate facilities are available and integrated with neighborhoods.

Parks:
• Objective PSCU-O-1: Design parks and recreation facilities that will enhance community identity and serve the recreation and social needs of Visalians of all ages, economic situations and physical abilities.
• Objective PSCU-O-2: Continue to develop and expand special recreation amenities and programs for teens, senior citizens, and ethnic populations.
• Objective PSCU-O-3: Ensure that a wide variety of quality sports and aquatics opportunities, including Sports Tourism, are available to the community. • Objective PSCU-O-4: Emphasize health and wellness programs in light of childhood obesity and Type II diabetes challenges in the City and County.
• Objective PSCU-O-5: Continue Visalia’s strong volunteer program by expanding meaningful opportunities for community service in Parks and Recreation Department programs. • Objective PSCU-O-6: Maximize opportunities for joint use of public land and facilities involving schools, stormwater ponding basins and other areas under public jurisdiction suit able for recreation.
646
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-104
• Policy PSCU-P-1: Prepare a Parks and Recreation Master Plan to implement Park policies in this General Plan. The Plan should include:
• An assessment of existing and future recreational needs, including the needs of specific user groups and the needs of older areas of the community as well as those in new neighborhoods; • An assessment of opportunities for joint -use of City -owned stormwater detention basins on a year-round or seasonal basis, including priorities, access, improvement needs, security and cost- sharing arrangements;
• Involvement of teens in design of teen programs and seniors in programs serving them; • A comprehensive program for providing facilities and recreational activities for identified needs, developed in consultation with VUSD and others involved in recreation programs, including joint- use opportunities with VUSD and other school districts and COS, and joint-use opportunities with City facilities, such as retention basins;
• Proposals for coordinating affordable child care with the City’s recreation programs; • Detailed design, construction and maintenance standards for parks and community centers and aquatic facilities emphasizing universal accessibility and barrier -free design, durability, low maintenance, and low water use;
• A program for retrofitting existing facilities to remove barriers to handicapped users over time; • An action plan to define priorities, responsibilities and scheduling; and • A comprehensive financing strategy for park and recreation facilities, including but not limited to the Park Acquisition and Development Fee, Recreation Program Fee policies, including provisions for fee reductions, scholarships and sponsorships, and marketing, including recreation as part of the City’s overall economic development plan.
• Policy PSCU -P-2: Strive to achieve and maintain a citywide standard of at least five acres of neighborhood and community parks per 1,000 residents.
• Policy PSCU-P-3: Reserve land and develop parks and public open spaces and recreation facilities consistent with designated Parks and Open Space land on the Land Use Diagram. • Policy SCU -P-5: Create new community parks in the Northwest, Southwest, and Southeast quadrants, consist ent with the Parks and Open Space diagram and the following planning guidelines:
• Size: 5-12 acres or more; and
• Facilities to be provided: large children’s play area, reserved picnic facilities, open play fields, community building, bicycle parking, and off-street parking. They also may include tennis courts, outdoor concert areas or other special facilities based on neighborhood needs and community input.
• Policy PSCU-P-11: Develop a system of natural corridors and greenways, consistent with the Parks and Open Space diagram (Figure 5 -1). These corridors will have biking and walking trails offering recreational opportunities and links between neighborhoods, parks, and Downtown. The system 647
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-105
of corridors will include waterway corridors as well as linear landscaped corridors to create natural gateways, parkways or buffer areas. More specifically, this system is envisioned to include:
• Greenway corridor along the St. Johns River, including broader areas to the northwest to accommodate open space areas, large group picnic facilities, a nature center, or other uses; • Greenway corridors along Mill, Packwood and Cameron Creeks, and segments of other waterways, with sufficient width to protect riparian habitat and accommodate a multi-use trail; • A landscaped corridor on both sides of Highway 198 providing a scenic gateway into Visalia from the west; and
• A landscaped buffer zone or parkway along Shirk Road separating industrial from residential areas, and a greenway along Road 148 marking the eastern edge of the City, both accommodating a multi-use trail.
• Policy PSCU-P-14: Design parks to enhance neighborhood character and minimize negative impacts. • Locate neighborhood parks with local or collector street frontages on at least three sides, and sidewalks and crossings designed for safe and easy pedestrian access. • Where a neighborhood park is part of a neighborhood node, it should be designed to promote visual connections and pedestrian movement between the park and adjacent uses such as schools and commercial uses.
• Policy PSCU-P-15: Provide lighted facilities for tennis, basketball or other recreational facilities and along pathways in order to extend usable hours. Lighting should be energy-efficient and designed to minimize light pollution.
• Policy PSCU-P-16: Provide at least one com munity center in each of the City’s four neighborhood quadrants. Use existing and new com -munity center facilities to provide multicultural programs and teen recreation activities and provide space for meetings and classes. Commun ity centers should be designed with community input, including guidance from a cross-section of user groups. • Policy PSCU -P-20: Promote private -sector and joint public -private development of commercial recreation facilities for league softball, indoor swimming, and golf, and other recreation uses that are available to the public for a fee or on a limited basis. Commercial recreation facilities will not be counted toward the City’s parkland acreage standard because they are not publicly accessible for all residents.
• Policy PSCU-P-24: Promote innovative park design that responds to neighborhood needs and user groups.
• Policy PSCU-P-25: Provide shade in parks by using arbors and other landscaping techniques. • Policy PSCU -P-26: Encourage cooperative agreements with the City and the Kaweah Water Conservation District, levee districts, irrigation companies, school district, College of the Sequoias, Southern California Edison Company and other public agencies and utilities to explo re innovative recreation open space facilities throughout the Visalia planning area. • Policy PSCU-P-27: Develop standards for recreation use on dual purpose park/pond sites to ensure that slopes and pumping equipment do not preclude recreation use and maintenance. • Policy PSCU-P-30: Incorporate barrier-free design in all new recreation and sports facilities, and renovate existing facilities to remove barriers to handicapped users. • Policy PSCU-P-47: Adopt and implement a Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance for new and/or refurbished development that exceeds mandated sizes, and ensure that all new City parks, 648
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-106
streetscapes, and landscaped areas conform to the Ordinance requirements. The Ordinance should include provisions to optimize outdoor water use by:
• Promoting appropriate use of plants and landscaping; • Establishing limitations on use of turf including size of turf areas and use of cool-season turf such as Fescue grasses, with exceptions for specified uses (e.g., recreation playing fields, golf courses, and parks);
• Establishing water budgets and penalties for exceeding them; • Requiring automatic irrigation systems and schedules, including controllers that incorporate weather-based or other self-adjusting technology;
• Promoting the use of recycled water; and
• Minimizing overspray and runoff.

Other Public Facilities:
• Objective PSCU-O-12: Provide high quality government facilities and services to the general public. • Objective PSCU -O-16: Ensure that adequate wastewater collection, treatment, recycling and disposal facilities are provided in a timely fashion to serve existing and future needs. • Policy PSCU-P-57: Update the Water Conservation Plant Master Plan, Sewer System Master Plan, and any other specific Master Plans related to infrastructure development to ensur e that existing levels of service can be maintained for proposed land uses and development densities. • Policy PSCU-P-60: Require new developments to incorporate flood water detention basins into project designs where consistent with the Stormwater Master Plan and the Groundwater Recharge Plan.
• Policy PSCU-P-61: Control urban and stormwater runoff, and point and non -point discharge of pollutants. As part of the City’s Stormwater Management Program, adopt and implement a Stormwater Management Ordinance to min imize stormwater runoff rates and volumes, control water pollution, and maximize groundwater recharge. New development will be required to include Low Impact Development features that reduce impermeable surface areas and increase infiltration. Such features may include, but are not limited to:
• Canopy trees or shrubs to absorb rainwater;
• Grading that lengthens flow paths over permeable surfaces and increases runoff travel time to reduce the peak hour flow rate;
• Partially removing curbs and gutters from parking areas where appropriate to allow stormwater sheet flow into vegetated areas;
• Use of permeable paving in parking lots and other areas characterized by significant impervious surfaces;
• On-site stormwater detention, use of bioswales and bioretention basins to facilitate infiltration; and
• Integrated or subsurface water retention facilities to capture rainwater for use in landscape irrigation and other non-potable uses.
649
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-107
Waterways and Trails Master Plan
The Waterways and Trails Master Plan outlines goals, policies, design standards, and implementation strategies for the development of a multi -purpose trail system, often times along Visalia’s primary community waterways. The trail system would link neighbo rhoods, parks, schools, Downtown, and other activity centers. The plan focuses on developing trails along three waterways: Packwood Creek, Mill Creek, and Cameron Creek. The Master Plan also identifies a Class I trail that runs along Cameron Creek.37 These trails are designed to link with the City’s existing bicycle network and the trail system along the St. John’s River along the north edge of the City. Ultimately, the completed system would form a “ring recreational trail” around the City’s periphery, several cross-town routes along waterways and other primary corridors, and a major north/south route along Santa Fe Avenue.

Along each waterway, a preferred trail alignment is identified, and recommendations and policies are made for landscaping improvements and habitat restoration within the waterway setback.

Tulare County Fire Department
Tulare County Fire Department provides fire and emergency medical services within the unincorporated areas of County. City and County have a mutual aid agreement that encompasses 59 square miles surrounding the City38.

City of Visalia Fire Department Plan Check and Hydrant Ordinance Visalia’s requirements for new construction include provisions for the fire department to review building and site plans prior to the issu ance of any permit. The fire department ensures that the Project would be adequately served by water and accessible to emergency vehicles. The Visalia Fire Department also enforces the City’s Hydrant Ordinance, which states that subdividers are responsible for the installation of water mains and hydrants, and determines the minimum spacing for fire hydrants. Street dimensions are scrutinized to ensure that space would be preserved for ladder trucks to be stabilized and for emergency vehicles to turn around.

Master Mutual Aid Plan
The City actively participates in the California Master Mutual Aid Plan. Formal mutual aid agreements have been written between the City and surrounding jurisdictions. A broad automatic aid agreement encompassing 59 square miles surrounding Visalia exists between County and the City.

Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazards Mitigation Plan
The MJ-LHMP is a formal document designed to significantly reduce loss of life and injuries resulting from a disaster; minimize damage to structures and property, as well as destruction of essential services and activities; protect the environment; and promote hazard mitigation as an integrated public policy. The most recent version of the MJ-LHMP was adopted in 2011 and updated in March, 2018.

37 (RRM Design Group 2010)
38 (Dyett & Bhatia Urban and Regional Planners 2014)
650
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-108
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental faci lities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire Protection:

Less than Significant Impact. New construction is required to submit building and site plans for fire department review prior to the issuance of any permit. Fire Department review would also include requirements for new fire hydrants and provide specifications for required fire flows. The closest service station is 0.7 miles north of the Project. The Project will be required to pay development impact fees towards the construction and acquisition of equipment for fire suppression services. Subject to Fire Department review and with incorporation of the fire related conditions, the Project will have a less than significant impact on fire service facilities and will not warrant the need for new or physically altered fire facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios and meet performance objectives. ii. Police Protection:

Less than Significant Impact. The closest service station is the City of Visalia Police Department, located at 204 N.W. Third Avenue, approximately 3. 1 miles northwest of the Project site. The Visalia Police Department does not establish service standards either in terms of officers per thousand residents or in incident response time. While the Project may result in the need for additional police staff, the police facility is adequate in size to support additional officers , and within a distance that would allow the department to maintain acceptable response times. Furthermore, the Project will be required to pay development impact fees towards the construction and acquisition of equipment for police protection services. Therefore, the Project will have a less than significant impact on police facilities and will not warrant the need for new or physically altered police facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios and meet performance objectives.
iii. Schools:

Less than Significant Impact. The Project would be served by the Visalia Unified School District (VUSD).

The Nearest Schools are:

School Grades Address Distance from Project
Annie R Mitchell Elementary
School
K-6 2121 E Laura Ave 1 mi NW
Divisadero Middle School 7-8 1200 S Divisadero St 3.3 mi NW Mt. Whitney High School 9-12 900 S Conyer St 2.8 mi NW The Project would generate approximately 160 students, distributed as follows:

Grades Students per Dwelling Unit39 Students
K-6 0.31 85
7-8 0.09 25
9-12 0.18 50

39 (Schoolworks, Inc. 2022)
651
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-109
Payment of fees to a school district is considered full mitigation for project impacts on school facilities (Government Code Section 65996(a)). Therefore, the project applicant would be required to pay the statutory fees to accommodate the impact of project-generated students, reducing impacts to a less than significant level. SB 50 deems payment of the fees “to provide full and complete school facilities mitigation.” As payment of these fees is required prior to issuance of building permits, impacts will be less than significant.
iv. Parks:

Less than Significant Impact. The Project site would be served by the City of Visalia Parks which offers 23 neighborhood parks located throughout the city. Kiwanis Park is the closest park to the Project site located approximately 0.87 miles north of the Project, and Cherry Meadow Park is one mile west of the Project site. Additionally, the Proj ect proposes an 8.96-acre Neighborhood Park and Ponding Basin combination, with the park space approximately 7.8 acres in size. The city’s General Plan contains a policy to strive for a service ratio of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. The construction of the Project would maintain the current ratio. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant . Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
v. Other public facilities:

Less than Significant Impact. Other public facilities includ e the Tulare County Superior Court -Visalia Courthouse, libraries, and hospitals. Though the Project may necessitate some increased maintenance for these public facilities, this potential increase can be paid for by property taxes generated by this development. Therefore, the Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other public facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

652
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-110

4.16 RECREATION
Table 4-26: Recreation Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?

b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?

Baseline Conditions
Visalia classifies parks and public open space into five general categories. Facilities at each park type vary according to size. Most neighborhood parks have picnic tables, play equipment, and drinking fountains.

Community and regional parks have these am enities as well as a combination of sports fields/courts, barbecue areas, parking, restrooms and facilities for other types of recreation. Parks are classified as follows:
• Pocket Park: A park typically between one -half acre and two acres in size intended to serve the needs of a specific neighborhood within a half-mile radius. • Neighborhood Park: A park typically two to five acres in size that provides basic recreation activities for one or more neighborhoods. The service area ranges from a half -mile to a o ne-mile radius.

These parks may include facilities such as children’s playgrounds, picnic tables, benches, and walkways. Many neighborhood parks are planned adjacent to new schools, and actual neighborhood park sizes may be as large as 10 acres depending on neighborhood size and need. • Community Park: A park typically ranging from 5 to 12 acres in size or larger, depending on the needs of the quadrant. Community parks are intended to serve the recreational needs of a larger area of the city, and particularly those residents living or working within a two -mile radius. These parks may include facilities such as sport fields, exercise courses, recreation buildings, and restrooms. Other facilities may include community centers, swimming pools, tennis courts, and concession stands.
• Large City Park: A park generally larger than 40 acres in size intended to serve the recreational needs of all city residents and to create opportunities for contact with the natural environment.

These parks may include a concentration of sports fields, golf courses, and areas for picnicking and passive enjoyment of open space. The proposed Project would fall into this category. • Natural Corridors and Greenways: A network of greenways of varying size intended to serve the recreational needs of city residents. These parks may include facilities such as bikeways, walkways, and riding trails, and are primarily developed along the city’s waterways. Mill Creek and Packwood passing through the Project site fall into this category. 653
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-111
Currently, Visalia has 37 parks dispersed throughout the City. Four community parks (Fairview Village Park, Recreation Park, Seven Oaks Park, and Whitendale Park) provide a fuller range of community amenities or are co-located with community centers and range from approximately 9 to 14 acres. Three larger facilities, Mooney’s Grove Park (County), Plaza Park and Riverway Sports Park, are located at the periphery. The St.

John’s Trail (St. John’s Riverway) forms much of the northern edge of the City. Altogether, there are 678 acres of parkland within the City. Tulare County’s Cutler Park provides another 50 acres just outside of the City; this acreage is not counted as park acreage for the City of Visalia.

The closest parks to the Project site are Kiwanis Park, Cherry Meadow Park, and Pinkham Park located approximately 0.87 miles, one mile, and 1.40 miles away, respectively.

Applicable Regulations
State
State Open Space Standards
State planning law (GC Section 65560) provides a structure for the preservation of open space by requiring every city and county in the state to prepare, adopt, and submit to the Secretary of the Resources Agency a “local open -space plan for the comprehensive and long -range preservation and conservation of open - space land within its jurisdiction.” The following open space categories are identified for preservation:
• Open space for public health and safety, including, but not limited to, areas that require special management or regulation due to hazardous or special conditions. • Open space for the preservation of natural resources, including, but not limited to, natural vegetation, fish and wildlife, and water resources.
• Open space for resource management and production, including, but not limited to, agricultural and mineral resources , forests, rangeland, and areas required for the recharge of groundwater basins.
• Open space for outdoor recreation, including, but not limited to, parks and recreational facilities, areas that serve as links between major recreation and open space reservat ions (such as trails, easements, and scenic roadways), and areas of outstanding scenic and cultural value. • Open space for the protection of Native American sites, including, but not limited to, places, features, and objects of historical, cultural, or sacr ed significance such as Native American sanctified cemeteries, places of worship, religious or ceremonial sites, or sacred shrines located on public property (further defined in PRC Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993).

Quimby Act
The 1975 Quimby Act (GC Section 66477) authorizes cities and counties to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. The Act states that the dedication requirement of parkland can be a minimum of three acres per thousand residents or more and up to five acres per thousand residents if the existing ratio is greater than the minimum standard. Revenues generated through in -lieu fees collected and the Quimby Act cannot be used for the operation and maintenance of park facilities. In 1982, the Act was substantially amended. The amendments further defined acceptable uses of , or restrictions on Quimby funds, provided acreage/ population standards and formulas for determining the exaction, and indicated that the exactions must be closely tied (i.e. via nexus) to project impacts as identified through studies required by CEQA. 654
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-112
Local
City of Visalia General Plan
The Parks, Schools, Community Facilities, and Utilities Element of Visalia’s GP was last comprehensively updated in 2014. Regarding parks and recreation, the element presents Visalia’s policies and programs for the development and maintenance of parks, schools, and other fundamental building blocks for new neighborhoods to be built over the next two decades. The Element objectives and goals pertaining to recreation are as follows:
• Objective PSCU-O-1: Design parks and recreation facilities that will enhance community identify and serve the recreation and social needs of Visalians of all ages, economic situations and p hysical abilities.
• Objective PSCU -O-6: Maximize opportunities for joint use of public land and facilities involving schools, stormwater ponding basins and other areas under public jurisdiction suitable for recreation.
• Policy PSCU-O-2: Continue to develop and expand special recreation amenities and programs for teens, senior citizens, and ethnic populations.
• Policy PSCU-O-3: Ensure that a wide variety of quality sports and aquatics opportunities, including Sports Tourism, are available to the community.
• Policy PSCU-O-4: Emphasize health and wellness programs in light of childhood obesity and Type II diabetes challenges in the City and County.
• Policy PSCU-O-5: Continue Visalia’s strong volunteer program by expanding meaningful opportunities for community service in Parks and Recreation Department programs. • Policy PSCU-P-25: Encourage cooperative agreements with the City and the Kaweah Water Conservation District, levee districts, irrigation companies, school district, College of the Sequoias, Southern California Edison Company and other public agencies an d utilities to explore innovative recreation open space facilities throughout the Visalia planning area. • Policy PSCU-P-1: Prepare a Parks and Recreation Master Plan to implement Park policies in this GP.

The Plan should include:
• An assessment of existing and future recreational needs, including the needs of specific user groups and the needs of older areas of the community as well as those in new neighborhoods; • An assessment of opportuni ties for joint -use of City -owned stormwater detention basins on a year-round or seasonal basis, including priorities, access, improvement needs, security and cost- sharing arrangements;
• Involvement of teens in design of teen programs and seniors in programs serving them; • A comprehensive program for providing facilities and recreational activities for identified needs, developed in consultation with VUSD and others involved in recreation programs, including joint- use opportunities with VUSD and other school districts and COS, and joint-use opportunities with City facilities, such as retention basins;
• Proposals for coordinating affordable childcare with the City’s recreation programs; • Detailed design, construction and maintenance standards for parks and community centers and aquatic facilities emphasizing universal accessibility and barrier -free design, durability, low maintenance, and low water use;
655
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-113
• A program for retrofitting existing facilities to remove barriers to handicapped users over time; • An action plan to define priorities, responsibilities and scheduling; and • A comprehensive financing strategy for park and recreation facilities, including but not limited to the Park Acquisition and Development Fee, Recreation Program Fee policies, including provisions for fee reductions, scholarships and sponsorships, and marketing, including recreation as part of the City’s overall economic development plan.
• Policy PSCU-P-2: Strive to achieve and maintain a citywide standard of at least five acre s of neighborhood and community parks per 1,000 residents.
• Policy PSCU-P-3: Reserve land and develop parks and public open spaces and recreation facilities consistent with designated Parks and Open Space land on the Land Use Diagram. • Policy PSCU-P-4: Create one large new park at the City’s eastern edge to enhance the City’s eastern gateway along Highway 198, ensure separation between communities, and pr ovide ample recreation space for the larger area.
• Policy SCU-P-5: Create new community parks in the Northw est, Southwest, and Southeast quadrants, consistent with the Parks and Open Space diagram and the following planning guidelines:
• Size: 5-12 acres or more; and
• Facilities to be provided: large children’s play area, reserved picnic facilities, open play fields, community building, bicycle parking, and off-street parking. They also may include tennis courts, outdoor concert areas or other special facilities based on neighborhood needs and community input.
• Policy PSCU-P-11 Develop a system of natural corridors and greenways, consistent with the Parks and Open Space diagram (Figure 5-1). These corridors will have biking and walking trails offering recreational opportunities and links between neighborhoods, parks, and Downto wn. The system of corridors will include waterway corridors as well as linear landscaped corridors to create natural gateways, parkways or buffer areas. More specifically, this system is envisioned to include:
• Greenway corridor along the St. Johns River , including broader areas to the northwest to accommodate open space areas, large group picnic facilities, a nature center, or other uses; • Greenway corridors along Mill, Packwood and Cameron Creeks, and segments of other waterways, with sufficient width to protect riparian habitat and accommodate a multi-use trail; • A landscaped corridor on both sides of Highway 198 providing a scenic gateway into Visalia from the west; and
• A landscaped buffer zone or parkway along Shirk Road separating industrial from residential areas, and a greenway along Road 148 marking the eastern edge of the City, both accommodating a multi-use trail.
• Policy PSCU-P-13: Design parks to enhance neighborhood character and minimize negative impacts. • Locate neighborhood parks with l ocal or collector street frontages on at least three sides, and sidewalks and crossings designed for safe and easy pedestrian access. 656
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-114
• Where a neighborhood park is part of a neighborhood node, it should be designed to promote visual connections and pedes trian movement between the park and adjacent uses such as schools and commercial uses.
• Policy PSCU-P-14: Provide lighted facilities for tennis, basketball or other recreational facilities and along pathways in order to extend usable hours. Lighting should be energy-efficient and designed to minimize light pollution.
• Policy PSCU-P-15: Provide at least one community center in each of the City’s four neighborhood quadrants. Use existing and new com -munity center facilities to provide multicultural programs and teen recreation activities and provide space for meetings and classes. Community centers should be designed with community input, including guidance from a cross-section of user groups. • Policy PSCU-P-19: Promote private -sector and joint public-private development of commercial recreation facilities for league softball, indoor swimming, and golf, and other recreation uses that are available to the public for a fee or on a limi ted basis. Commercial recreation facilities will not be counted toward the City’s parkland acreage standard because they are not publicly accessible for all residents.
• Policy PSCU-P-23: Promote innovative park design that responds to neighborhood needs and user groups.
• Policy PSCU-P-24: Provide shade in parks by using arbors and other landscaping techniques. • Policy PSCU-P-25: Encourage cooperative agreements with the City and the Kaweah Water Conservation District, levee districts, irrigation companies, school district, College of the Sequoias, Southern California Edison Company and other public agencies and utilities to explo re innovative recreation open space facilities throughout the Visalia planning area. • Policy PSCU-P-26: Develop standards for recreation use on dual purpose park/pond sites to ensure that slopes and pumping equipment do not preclude recreation use and maintenance. • Policy PSCU-P-28: Offer nature study programs to increase community awareness of open space opportunities and habitat enhancement in City parks and along community waterways. • Policy PSCU-P-27: Develop standards for recreation use on dual purpose park/pond sites to ensure that slopes and pumping equipment do not preclude recreation use and maintenance. • Policy PSCU-P-29: Incorporate barrier-free design in all new recreation and sports faciliti es and renovate existing facilities to remove barriers to handicapped users. • Policy PSCU-P-46: Adopt and implement a Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance for new and/or refurbished development that exceeds mandated sizes, and ensure that all new City par ks, streetscapes, and landscaped areas conform to the Ordinance requirements. The Ordinance should include provisions to optimize outdoor water use by:
• Promoting appropriate use of plants and landscaping;
• Establishing limitations on use of turf including size of turf areas and use of cool-season turf such as Fescue grasses, with exceptions for specified uses (e.g., recreation playing fields, golf courses, and parks);
• Establishing water budgets and penalties for exceeding them; • Requiring automatic irrigation systems and schedules, including controllers that incorporate weather-based or other self-adjusting technology;
• Promoting the use of recycled water; and
657
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-115
• Minimizing overspray and runoff.
• Policy PSCU-P-47: Implement a program of irrigation water use analyses, irrigation surveys, irrigation audits or similar techniques using available technology to evaluate water use in existing City parks and landscape areas and undertake improvements to reduce water use t o a level that does not exceed the Maximum Applied Water Allowance as calculated under the Water E fficient Landscaping Ordinance under Policy CO-P-3.
• Policy PSCU-P-48: Establish a program to reduce water use in municipal buildings and allow use of recycled water (treated wastewater) in buildings and irrigation, as feasible and appropriate.

Waterways and Trails Master Plan
As previously discussed in Section 4.15.2, the Waterways and Trails Master Plan, outlines goals, policies, design standards, and implementation strategies for the development of a multi-purpose trail system along Visalia’s primary community waterways.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project increase the use of exist ing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less than Significant Impact. The potential population growth associated with the Project’s proposed 273 new single -family residential homes is not considered significant when compared to the City’s population, and it should not increase the demand for recreational facilities, nor would it impose a strain on the existing recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of existing recreational facilities would occur or be accelerated. Additionally, the Project proposes the construction of an 8.96- acre neighborhood park. Existing nearby residents, in addition to future residents within the proposed subdivision, could utilize the proposed park space. In addition, the Project would pay park impact development fees in effect at the time of the building permits to off -set potential impacts to park and recreation facilities. Therefore, impact would be less than significant. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site currently consists of irrigated farmland. The Project would include the development and dedication of public open spaces in the form of a neighborhood park, which is proposed to be constructed as part of the development. As the Project includes the construction of a neighborhood park, the Project would comply with mitigation measures included in Sections 4.4.5, 4.5.4,

4.7.4, and 4.18.4. No off-site park space is required to be constructed. Impacts related to the construction of the Neighborhood Park is included in the physical impacts evaluated as part of the Project as a whole.

In addition to construction of park facilities, the Project may also be responsible for the payment of in - lieu fees for park land dedication/reservation. Therefore, impacts related to the construction or expansion of recreational facilities would be less than significant.

658
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-116

4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4-27: Transportation Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?

b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)??

c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Baseline Conditions
The Project site would be located on an approximately 67.7-acre orchard along North McAuliff Street, intersected by Cherry Street . North McAuliff Street is an existing collector as designated by the City of Visalia General Plan Circulation Element. Arteria l streets in Visalia are designed to transition traffic from freeways and expressways to smaller collector streets, and vice versa. State Routes (SR) in and within the immediate vicinity of the City of Visalia include SR 63, 99, 198, and 216. The Project’s McAuliff Street frontage contains a bicycle route.

Applicable Regulations
Local
City of Visalia VMT Thresholds and Implementation Guidelines Senate Bill (SB) 743, signed in 2013, changes the way transportation studies are conducted in California CEQA documents. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) replaces motorist delay and level of service (LOS) as the metric for impact determination. As a result of the final rulemaking surrounding SB 743 and the implementation deadline of July 1, 2020, the City of Visalia has a dopted VMT thresholds and guidelines (City of Visalia VMT Thresholds and Implementation Guidelines, LSA, Adopted March 15, 2021) to address the shift from delay‐based LOS CEQA traffic analyses to VMT CEQA traffic analyses.

Thresholds
The City of Visalia guidelines provide details on appropriate “screening thresholds” that can be used to identify when a proposed land use project is anticipated to result in a less-than-significant impact without conducting a more detailed VMT analysis. Screening thresholds include:

1. Residential and office projects within a Transit Priority Area

2. Locally serving retail projects up to 50,000 square feet 659
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-117

3. Residential, office, or mixed‐use projects within low‐VMT generating areas

4. 100 percent affordable housing projects

5. Projects that are consistent with the City’s General Plan and generating fewer than 1,000 daily trips

A land use project need only meet one of the above screening thresholds to result in a less than significant impact.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with a plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes a maximum of 257 new peak hour vehicle trips. In accordance with the policies of the City of Visalia, a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) was prepared to evaluate Project impacts, as well as cumulative impacts, and to make recommendations for mitigation where appropriate. Thus, through compliance with the applicable policies , the Project is consistent with the plans, ordinances, and policies that address the complete circulation system.

For land use projects, such as the Project, the criteria for consistency with adopted plans, policies and ordinances, would be to determine if a project would exceed an established threshold of significance.

The threshold of significance established for projects located within the area is LOS “D”. The TIS prepared for the Project considered the following traffic scenarios: 1) Existing Conditions; 2) Opening Year (Extrapolated Existing + Project); 3) Future Year Obtained from Tulare County Association of Governments (Five-year + Project). The intersections studied included the following:
• McAuliff Street at Cherry Avenue
• McAuliff Street at Walnut Avenue
• Lovers Lane at Cherry Avenue
• Lovers Lane at Walnut Avenue
• Lovers Lane at K Avenue
• Cherry Avenue at 2nd Street (Proposed)
• McAuliff Street at A Street (Proposed)
• McAuliff Street at B Street (Proposed)
• McAuliff Street at C Street (Proposed)
The TIS concluded that all studied intersections comply with the Level of Service (LOS) standards for all three scenarios, with the exception of Walnut Avenue and Lovers Lane. The in tersection of Walnut Avenue and Lovers Lane is currently below the established LOS standard. The City has committed to completing the intersection improvements and the Transportation Impact Fee s required by City standards in association with the Project covers the necessary improvements to bring this intersection LOS to a sufficient level.40
In general, the City’s requirements for all development projects include: 1) the provision of a minimum two points of vehicular access for any phase of development; 2) major and local street dedications; 3) street improvements, including but not limited to construction of concrete curbs, gutters, pavement, underground street lighting systems; 4) payment of applicable impact fees. The required payment of Transportation Impact Fees will ensure that the Project’s contribution to this cumulative impact would

40 (City of Visalia 2015)
660
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-118
be less than significant. The Project would therefore not conflict with plans, ordinances, or policies addressing the circulation system.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 subdivision (b)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project would result in the addition of 273 new homes to the City of Visalia, resulting in an increase of population for the City. A rise in population for the area would result in an increased amount of VMT being produced from a rise in population. The City of Visalia has identified the area as being located within a Low VMT -generating area as illustrated in Appendix D: Traffic Impact Study. As a result, the Project meets one of the five screening thresholds identified in Section 4.17.3 above. These screening thresholds limit the Project’s impacts relating to VMT generation to a less than significant level. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project substantially increas e hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. The Project would result in one point of access along Cherry Street, Rio Vista Street, and three access points off McAuliff Street. Future connection points would be afforded to the properties to the west and northeast. Roadway design and width would be required to be approved by the City Engineer before construction could commence. Compliance with all applicable safety standards would be required and confirmed du ring the review of improvement plans. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not result in inadequate emergency access as it proposes several points of access and provides for future connectivity to the property to the west and northeast.

While the construction for the Project would result in truck deliveries, hauling of materials, and construction crews, improvement plans, and any work completed in existing roadways would be required to be approved by the City Engineer before they could occur. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
661
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-119

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Table 4-28: Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:

i. Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in the local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or

ii. A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported
by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe.

Baseline Conditions
Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, et seq. (codification of AB 52, 2013-14) Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, et seq. (codification of AB 52, 2013 -14) requires that a lead agency, within 14 days of determining that it would undertake a project, must notify in writing any California Native American Tribe traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project if that Tribe has previously requested notification about projects in that geographic area. The notice must briefly describe the project and inquire wh ether the Tribe wishes to initiate request formal consultation. Tribes have 30 days from receipt of notification to request formal consultation. The lead agency then has 30 days to initiate the consultation, which then continues until the parties come to a n agreement regarding necessary mitigation or agree that no mitigation is needed, or one or both parties determine that negotiation occurred in good faith, but no agreement would be made. 662
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-120
The City of Visalia, as the public lead agency, received a letter from the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe pursuant to PRC § 21080.3.1 (AB 52) officially requesting notification of Projects within the Santa Rosa Rancheria’s geographic area of traditional and cultural affiliation.

Records Search
A records search fro m the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), located at California State University, Bakersfield was conducted in May 2022. The SSJVIC records search includes a review of all recorded archaeological and built-environment resources as well as a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the California Points of Historical Interest, the California Historical Landmarks, the C alifornia Register of Historical Resources, the National Register of Historic Places, and the California State Built Environment Resources Directory listings were reviewed for the above referenced APE and an additional ½ mile radius.

Due to the sensitive nature of cultural resources, archaeological site locations are not released. (Appendix C: Cultural Resources Study).

Additional sources included the State Office of Historic Preservation Historic Properties Directory, Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, and the California Inventory of Historic Resources.

Native American Outreach
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) in Sacramento was also contacted in May 2022. They were provided with a brief description of the Project and a map showing its location and requested that the NAHC perform a search of the Sacred Lands File to determine if any Native American resources have been recorded in the immediate APE. The NAHC identifies, catalogs, and protects Native American cultural resources -- ancient places of special religious or social significance to Native Americans and known ancient graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private and public lands in California. The NAHC is also charged with ensuring California Native American tribes’ accessibility to ancient Native American cultural resources on public lands, overseeing th e treatment and disposition of inadvertently discovered Native American human remains and burial items, and administering the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, among many other powers and duties.

Applicable Regulations
Federal
National Register of Historic Places
The NHPA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to establish a NRHP, an inventory of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant on a national, state, or local level in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. The National Register is maintained by the National Park Service, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, SHPO, and grants-in-aid programs.

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) strives to ensure that all Indian human remains, and cultural items are treated with dignity and respect. It encourages voluntary disclosure and return of remains and cultural items by publicly funded agencies and museums. It also states the intent for states to provide mechanisms for aiding Indian tribes, including non-federally recognized tribes, in filing repatriation claims and getting responses to those claims. 663
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-121
State
Office of Historic Preservation
The mission of the OHP and the State Historical Resources Commission is to preserve and enhance California's irreplaceable historic heritage as a matter of public interest so that its vital legacy of cultural, educational, recreational, aesthetic, economic, social, and environmental benefits will be maintained and enriched for present and future generations. Public Resources Code ( PRC) Section 5024 requires consultation with the SHPO when a project may impact historical resources located on State-owned land.

For a historic resource to be eligible for listing on the California Register, it must be significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following four criteria:
• It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local and regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; • It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; • It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or metho d of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or • It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation (California Public Resources Code).

California Environmental Quality Act
PRC Section 21083.2 Archaeological Resources: CEQA directs the lead agency to include in its environmental assessment for the project a determination of the project effec ts on unique archeological resources; defines unique archeological resource; enables a lead agency to require an applicant to make a reasonable effort to preserve or mitigate impacts to any affected unique archeological resource; sets requirements for the applicant to provide payment to cover costs of mitigation; and restricts excavation as a mitigation measure.

PRC Section 21084.1 Historic Resources: CEQA establishes that adverse effects on a historic resource qualifies as a significant effect on the environment; and defines historical resource.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5: This section defines three ways that a property can qualify as a significant historical resource for the purposes of CEQA review:
• If the resource is listed in or determined eligible for listing in the California Re gister of Historical Resources;
• If the resource is included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC S ection 5020.1(k), or is identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g) unless a preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant; or
• If the lead agency determines the resource to be significant as supported by substantial evidence (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5)
664
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-122
In addition to determining the significance under CEQA and eligibility of any identified historical resource for the California Register, historic properties must be evaluated under the criteria for the National Register should federal funding or permitting become involved in any undertaking subject to this document.

CEQA Guidelines on Mitigation of Cultural Resources Impacts CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 states that “public agencies should, whenever feasible, seek to avoid damaging effects on any historical resources of an archeological nature.” The Guidelines further state that preservation-in-place is the preferred approach to mitigate impacts on archaeological resources. However, according to Section 15126.4, if data recovery through excavation is “the only feasible mitigation,” then a “data recovery plan, which makes provision for adequately recovering the scienti fically consequential information from and about the historical resources, shall be prepared and adopted prior to any excavation being undertaken.” Data recovery is not required for a resource of an archaeological nature if “the lead agency determines that testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the scientifically consequential information from and about the archaeological or historical resource.” The section further states that its provisions apply to those archaeological resources that also qualify as historic resources.

Native American Heritage Act
Also relevant to the evaluation and mitigation of impacts to cultural resources is the Native American Heritage Act of 1976 which established the NAHC and protects Native American religio us values on state property (see PRC Section 5097.9).

Disposition of Human Remains (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5) When an initial study identifies the existence, or the probable likelihood, of Native American human remains within the project, a lead agency shall work with the appropriate Native American groups or individuals as identified by the NAHC as provided in PRC Section 5097.98. The applicant may develop an agreement for treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the h uman remains, and any items associated with Native American burials. Furthermore, HSC Section 7050.5 requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the county coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner must contact the NAHC.

California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 2001 HSC Sections 8010-8011 establish a State repatriation policy i ntent that is consistent with and facilitates implementation of NAGPRA. The Act strives to ensure that all California Indian human remains, and cultural items are treated with dignity and respect. It encourages voluntary disclosure and return of remains an d cultural items by publicly funded agencies and museums in California. It also states the intent for the state to provide mechanisms for aiding California Indian tribes, including non-federally recognized tribes, in filing repatriation claims and getting responses to those claims.

Local
City of Visalia General Plan Update
• Policy OSC -P-39: Establish requirements to avoid potential impacts to sites suspected of being archaeologically, paleontologically, or historically significant or of concern, by:
665
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-123
o Requiring a records review for development proposed in areas that are considered archaeologically or paleontologically sensitive;
o Determining the potential effects of development and construction on archaeological or paleontological resources (as required by CEQA);
o Requiring pre -construction surveys and monitoring during any ground disturbance for all development in areas of historical and archaeological sensitivity; and o Implementing appropriate measures to avoid the identified impacts, as conditions of pro ject approval.

Impact Assessment
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in the local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or Less than Significant Impact. The City of Visalia, as the public lead agency, received a letter from the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe pursuant to PRC § 21080.3.1 (AB 52) officially requesting notification of Projects within the Santa Rosa Rancheria’s geographic area of traditional and cultural affiliation. A record search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File was completed for the Project area and the results were negative for the presence of Native American tribal cultural resources. In addition, a records search from CHRIS at SSJVIC also confirmed that t here are no recorded cultural or historical resources within the Project area. Despite no recorded r esources were found, accidental discovery could occur.

Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2, described above in Section 4.5.4 as well as TCR-1, TCR-2 and TCR- 3 are recommended in the event tribal cultural materials or human remains are unearthed during excavation or construction.
ii. A resource determined by the lead ag ency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less than Significant Impact . The City of Visalia, as the public lead agency, received a letter from the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tr ibe pursuant to PRC § 21080.3.1 (AB 52) officially requesting notification of Projects within the Santa Rosa Rancheria’s geographic area of traditional and cultural affiliation. In May 2022, the City sent the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tribe a formal letter including a Project description and a map of the Project APE. In accordance with the law, the letter provided 30 days from receipt of the letter to request consultation in writing. No response was received.

Although there is little chance the Project would cause a substantial adverse change to the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 and CUL-2, described in Section 4.5.4 is recommended in the event cultural materials or human remains are unearthed during excavation or construction.
666
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-124
Mitigation
See CUL-1 identified in Section 4.5
See CUL-2 identified in Section 4.5
TCR-1 (Tribal Cultural Resource Presentation): Due to Tribal history and knowledge of the project area, the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe has concerns and is requesting to be retained for a cultural sensitivity awareness presentation to all construction staff of the Project, prior to start of construction activities.

TCR-2 (Tribal Cultural Monitoring): An approved Tribal Monitor shall be retained to be on site to monitor during all project-related ground-disturbing construction activities within the Cultural APE (i.e., grading, excavation, etc.).

TCR-3 (Curation of Archaeological Collections): A curation agreement shall be entered into with the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, materials and documents would be professionally curated as outlined in agreement and made available to other archaeologists or researchers for further study. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, to an appropriate curation facility as outlined in agreement with Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe, to be accompanied by payment.

667
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-125

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Table 4-29: Utilities and Service Systems Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?

b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?

c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?

d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals?

e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?

Baseline Conditions
The Project site is located on the southwest corner of McAuliff Street and Cherry Avenue in the City of Visalia.

Wastewater
The City of Visalia’s existing sanitary sewer system consists of over 468 miles of gravity-flow sanitary sewer pipe ranging in size from four to 48 inches, with 12 SCADA -connected lift stations. The system currently serves most developed areas of the city limits. The Visalia Department of Public Works develops and maintains the sewer systems. The City of Visalia typically utilizes a wastewater generation factor of 100 to 125 gallons per day per capita. The nearest sewer main is located in Cherry Avenue and McAuliff Street frontages.

Solid Waste
Solid waste disposal is provided to the City by the Tula re County Resource Management Agency, which operates the Visalia Landfill approximately 5.4 miles northwest of the Project. The facility is located at 8614 Avenue 328 in Visalia and serves the cities of Visalia, Farmersville, Dinuba, Exeter, Tulare, Woodl ake, 668
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-126
Fresno, and unincorporated areas of northern Tulare and southern Fresno Counties. The approximate amount of waste disposed at Visalia in 2003 was estimated to be 120,000 tons. 41 This landfill has a maximum permitted throughput of 2,000 tons per day, a maximum permitted capacity of 18,630,666 cubic yards, and a remaining capacity of 16,145,591 cubic yards. The Visalia Landfill is expected to cease operation in January of 2024. 42 Solid waste collection is provided by the City and recyclable material processing is provided to the City by Sunset Waste Systems.

Electricity
Power is provided to the City by Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE is a subsidiary of Edison International and provides electricity to over 15 million Californians. It is one of the largest electric utilities in the nation, and the nation’s single largest purchaser of renewable power. The electrical facilities network includes both overhead and underground lines, with new development required to install underground service lines.

Natural Gas
Natural gas service in the City is provided by the SoCalGas.

Communications
There are three major companies that provide communications services in Visalia: AT &T, Sprint, and Verizon. Comcast is the primary cable television and internet provider.

Water Service Company
The California Water Service Company Visalia district (Cal Water) is the primary water purveyor in the City of Visalia. The nearest water main is located adjacent to Cherry Avenue and McAuliff Street frontages.

Applicable Regulations
Federal
Clean Water Act
The CWA was enacted by Congress in 1972 and has been amended several times since its adoption. It is the primary federal law regulating water quality in the U.S. and forms the basis for several state and local laws throughout the country. Its objective is to reduce or eliminate water pollution in the nation’s rivers, streams, lakes, and coastal waters. The CWA prescribes the basic federal laws for regulating discharges of pollutants and sets minimum water quality standards for all surface waters in the United States. At the federal level, the CWA is administered by the USEPA. The USEPA published final regulations regarding stormwater discharges on November 16, 1990. The regulations require that MS4 discharges to surface waters to be regulated by a NPDES permit. At the State and regional levels, the CWA is administered and enforced by the SWRCB and the RWQCBs.

41 (ESA 2010)
42 (Dyett & Bhatia Urban and Regional Planners 2014)
669
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-127
Municipal Urban (Area-wide) Storm-Water Discharges
A MS4 systems defined by the USEPA must obtain an NPDES permit by a certain date according to the population served by the system. Operators the stormwater system must submit an NPDES permit application and supporting information to the respective RWQCB. The CWA provides for delegating certain responsibilities for water-quality control and planning to the states. California has been authorized by the USEPA to administer and enforce portions of the CWA, including the NPDES program. Section 208 of the CWA is designated to provide a comprehensive planning framework for both point- and non-point-source water pollution. Specific planning requirements include, but are not limited, to the following:
• Identification of needed treatment works to meet anticipated requirements over a 20-year period; • Identification of construction priorities for the region.

Procedures and methods to control non -point-source pollution emanating from agriculture, mining, and other sources. Most owners or operators of facilities that discharge waste into a municipal sanitary sewer system need to obtain an NPDES permit. The USEPA, the SWRCB, and the respective RWQCB or the local wastewater management agency might require some industries to treat industrial hazardous wastes before such wastes are discharged to a municipal sanitary sewer system. The local wastewater management agency advises industries of those requirements.

State
State Water Resources Control Board – Waste Discharge Requirements Program State regulations pertaining to the treatment, storage, processing, or disposal of solid waste are found in Title 27, CCR, Section 20005 et seq. (hereafter Title 27). In general, the WDR Program (sometimes also referred to as the “Non Chapter 15 (Non 15) Program”) regulates point di scharges that are exempt pursuant to Subsection 20090 of Title 27 and not subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

Exemptions from Title 27 may be granted for nine categories of discharges (e.g., sewage, wastewater, etc.) that meet, and continue to meet, the preconditions listed for each specific exemption. The scope of the WDR Program also includes the discharge of wastes classified as inert, pursuant to Section 20230 of Title 2743. Several programs are administered under the WDR Program, including the Sanitary Sewer Order and recycled water programs.

Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) is the State agency desi gnated to oversee, manage, and track wastes generated in California. In 2015, statewide disposal was 33.2 million tons of solid waste . CalRecycle develops laws and regulations to control and manage waste, for which enforcement authority is typically delega ted to the local government. The board works jointly with local government to implement regulations and fund programs.

The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (PRC 40000, et seq.) or AB 939, administered by CalRecycle, requires all local and county governments to adopt a Source Reduction and Recycling Element to identify means of reducing the amount of solid waste sent to landfills. This law set reduction targets at 25 percent by the year 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. To assist local jurisdictions in achieving these targets, the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991 requires all new developments to include adequate, accessible, and convenient areas for collecting and loading recyclable and green waste materials.

43 (California Water Boards 2023)
670
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-128
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit
As authorized by the CWA, the NPDES Permit Program controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into water of the United States. In California, it is the responsibility of SWRCB and RWQCBs to preserve and enhance the quality of the States waters through the development of water quality control plans and the issuance of WDR. WDRs for discharges to surface waters also serve as NPDES permits.44 NPDES permits also regulate the requirements of the MS4 discharges to surface waters.

Construction Stormwater NPDES Permit
A CGP for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (CGP, Water Quality Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ) is required for dischargers or projects who disturb one acre or more of soil or whose project disturbs less than one acre, but which is part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one acre or more. The SWRCB established the CGP program to reduce surface water impacts from construction activities. This CGP was adopted in September 2009 and went into effect July 2010.

The CGP requires the development of PRDs which include the development and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP must contain a site map(s) which shows the construction site perimeter, existing and proposed buildings, lots, roadways, stormwater collection and discharge points, general topography both before and after construction, and drainage patterns across the project. The SWPPP must list /describe BMPs the discharger would use to prevent polluted stormwater runoff and show the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program, a chemical monitoring program for “non-visible” pollutants, and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment. Attachment B of the CGP describes the elements that must be contained in a SWPPP. Additional PRD requirements are described in Attachments C-E in the CGP.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
The primary responsibility for the protection of water quality in California rests with the SWRCB and nine RWQCB. The SWRCB sets state wide policy for the implementation of state and federal laws and regulations. The RWQCBs adopt and implement Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans) which recognize regional differences in natural water quality, actual and potential beneficial uses, and water quality problems associated with human activities.

The City is located within the jurisdiction of the Central Valley RWQCB in an area identified as the Tulare Lake Basin, which comprises the drainage area of the San Joaquin Valley south of the San Jo aquin River.

According to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin, the basin consists of approximately

10.5 million acres, and includes the metropolitan areas of Bakersfield, Fresno, Porterville, Hanford, Tulare, and Visalia.45 The Regional Board has set water quality objectives for both surface and ground water, which it achieves through an implementation plan. The RWQCB efforts emphasize the importance of controlling toxic discharges and address ground water salinity, which is identified as the greatest long-term problem facing the basin.46
The Regional Board identifies the elimination of groundwater overdraft as an important tool to use to combat the increasing salinity of the basin, as continued overdraft would deplete good quality water supplies and introduce salts from poorer quality aquifers. Groundwater recharge is recommended as a major mechanism to prevent further groundwater overdraft.47

44 (California Water Boards 2023)
45 (California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region 2018) 46 Ibid.
47 Ibid.
671
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-129
Local
City of Visalia General Plan
• Objective PSCU -O-14: Provide for long -range community water needs by adopting best management practices for water use, conservation, groundwater recharge and wastewater and stormwater management.
• Objective PSCU-O-15: Preserve groundwater resources.
• Policy PSCU-P-47: Adopt and implement a Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance for new and/or refurbished development that exceeds mandated sizes, and ensure that all new City parks streetscapes, and landscaped areas conform to the Ordinance’s requirements. The Ordinance should include provisions to optimize outdoor water use by:
o Promoting appropriate use of plants and landscaping;
o Establishing limitations on use of turf including size of turf areas and use of cool -season turf such as Fescue grasses, with exceptions for specified uses (e.g., recreation playing fields, golf courses, and parks);
o Establishing water budgets and penalties for exceeding them; o Requiring automatic irrigation systems and schedules, including controllers that incorporate weather-based or other self-adjusting technology;
o Promoting the use of recycled water; and
o Minimizing overspray and runoff.

City of Visalia Municipal Code
• City of Visalia Water Conservation Ordinance
The City’s Water Conservation Ordinance was adopted in 1989 and can be found in Chapter 13.20 of the Municipal Code. The Ordinance sets regulations to minimize outdoor water use and reduce unnecessary consumption of potable water. It defines and places restriction on wasteful uses of water and establishes water conservation alert stages to be enacted during periods of water shortage.
• The Visalia Municipal Code contains regulations related to solid waste and recycling in Chapter 8.28. The City, in order to promote and protect the public and refuse worker health and safety and to reduce the danger and hazards of fires and conflagrations, reserves unto itself the exclusive right and power to collect, transport, and dispose of, or to authorize, regulate, permit and control said collections, transportation and disposition of all refuse and rubble produced or found within the corporate limits of said city.
• The Visalia Municipal Code contains regulations related to solid waste and recycling in Chapter 8.29. The purpose of this chapter is to increase the recycling and reuse of construction and demolition debris, consistent with the goals of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989.

672
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-130
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact. The Project is surrounded by urban and developed areas of the City.

Therefore, the Project would connec t to existing water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure within the City, located in the Project’s Cherry Avenue and McAuliff Street frontages. CalWater has provided a Will Serve letter stating they would have adequate water supplies to serve the Pro ject.

Therefore, the Project would not require the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities. Additionally, the Project would be served by the existing wastewater treatment provider and would not require the construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities. The Project would connect to existing natural gas, and existing power lines in the project vicinity. Natural gas and electricity connections would be coordinated with SoCalGas. Therefore, the Project would not require the relocation or construction of new water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to se rve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less than Significant Impact. The Project area is not located in an adjudicated subbasin, and the 2020 UWMP indicates that CalWater has no issue meeti ng demands of this project or future projects during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less than Significant Impact. The Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) provides municipal sewerage services to 96,000 residents in the city of Visalia. The WWTF has a design capacity of 22 million gallons per day (mgd) and currently treats a daily average flow of about 1 3 mgd48. On average, wastewater in Visalia generated at a rate of approximately 92 gallons per capita per day.49 Therefore the Project would generate approximately 0.075 MGD.50 The WWTF has adequate capacity to serve the Project in addition to its existing commitments, therefore the Project will have a less than significant impact on wastewater capacity.
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less than Significant Impact. The Visalia Landfill located approximately 12.5 miles northwest of the Project, is the primary landfill serving the area. The facility is located at 8614 Avenue 328 in Visalia and serves the cities of Visalia, Farmersville, Dinuba, Exeter, Tulare, Woodlake, Fresno, and unincorporated areas of northern Tulare and southern Fresno Counties. The approximate amount of wa ste disposed at Visalia in 2003 was estimated to be 120,000 tons. This landfill has a maximum permitted throughput of

48 (CIty of Visalia, Dyett & Bhatia, Urban and Regional Planners, ICF International, Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group, Omn i-Means, Transportation Planners and Engineers 2014); (City of Visalia 2023) 49 (California Water Service 2021)
50 92 gallons per capita per day x 273 dwellings x 2.99 persons per dwelling. 673
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-131
2,000 tons per day, a maximum permitted capacity of 18,630,666 cubic yards, and a remaining capacity of 16,145,591 cubic yards. The Visalia Landfill is expected to cease operation in January of 2024. A typical residence disposes of approximately 10 pounds of solid waste each day. The 273 residences proposed by the Project would generate approximately 1,619 cubic yard of waste per year. Assuming the current maximum daily throughput of solid waste were committed to the landfill each day through its closure date, the Project’s incremental contribution of solid waste would not result in the need for new or physically altered landfill facilities to meet service objectives, and thus there would be a less than significant impact.
e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project will be required to comply with all regulations applicable to solid waste generation for residential projects. In order for the Project to comply with local regulations, the residential subdivision Project would be provided with basic container service. Each property owner will receive a container for solid waste, green waste, and recyclable materials. Impacts will be less than significant.

674
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 4-132

4.20 WILDFIRE
Table 4-30: Wildfire Impacts
If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified
as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?

b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrollable spread of wildfire?

c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?

d) Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?

Baseline Conditions
The Project site would be located in an area that is not designated as being a very high fire hazard severity zone.51 The Project site is also not located in an area that has been designated as a State Responsibility Area (SRA) by the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection’s State Responsibility Area Viewer. 52 The nearest Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone is located in Three Rivers, approximately 19 miles away. The nearest SRA is approximately 8 miles away. The site is considered a local responsibility area and is served by City of Visalia Fire Stations. The nearest fire stations to the Project site are the City of Visalia Fire Station 56, approximately 0.33 miles to the southeast. The Project site is relatively flat and is surrounded by residential development to the north and agricultural land to the south.

Visalia City CouncilJuly 17, 2023

Visalia City Council
July 17, 2023