6. Exhibit D - Initial Study & Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2023-30 — Visalia City Council, July 17, 2023 (part 2 of 3)

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Sequestration - 578 new trees
Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating
EF_Residential_Exterior
150.00

50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating
EF_Residential_Interior
150.00

50.00 tblAreaCoating
Area_EF_Residential_Exterior
150
50 tblAreaCoating
Area_EF_Residential_Interior
150
50 tblConstDustMitigation
WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed
0 15
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
9/1/2028
5/26/2028
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
2/4/2028
10/29/2027
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
11/3/2023
7/28/2023
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
5/19/2028
2/11/2028
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
6/2/2023
2/24/2023
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
5/20/2028
2/12/2028
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
11/4/2023
7/29/2023
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
6/3/2023
2/25/2023
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
2/5/2028
10/30/2027
tblFleetMix
HHD

0.02 0.02
tblFleetMix
LDA

0.51 0.53
tblFleetMix
LDT1

0.05 0.21
tblFleetMix
LDT2

0.17 0.17
tblFleetMix
LHD1

0.03 9.0000e-004
tblFleetMix
LHD2

7.9960e-003

9.0000e-004
tblFleetMix
MCY

0.02 2.5000e-003
tblFleetMix
MDV

0.17 0.06
tblFleetMix
MH

3.5920e-003

2.0000e-003
tblFleetMix
MHD

0.01 8.0000e-003
tblFleetMix
OBUS

6.3600e-004

0.00 tblFleetMix
SBUS

1.4650e-003

2.0000e-004
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 2 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.0 Emissions Summary

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2023

0.3292

2.9580

2.9287

7.0000e-
003

0.6636

0.1190

0.7825

0.2436

0.1103

0.3539

0.0000
626.2135
626.2135

0.1312

0.0181
634.8955
2024

0.3162

2.3838

3.1400

8.2500e-
003

0.3539

0.0852

0.4392

0.0960

0.0802

0.1762

0.0000
750.9129
750.9129

0.0796

0.0415
765.2641
2025

0.2926

2.2369

3.0479

8.1000e-
003

0.3526

0.0736

0.4262

0.0956

0.0693

0.1649

0.0000
738.8488
738.8488

0.0781

0.0402
752.7744
2026

0.2849

2.2261

2.9926

7.9800e-
003

0.3526

0.0735

0.4261

0.0956

0.0692

0.1648

0.0000
729.3576
729.3576

0.0775

0.0391
742.9417
2027

0.2516

2.0277

2.7703

7.0500e-
003

0.2945

0.0702

0.3647

0.0798

0.0659

0.1457

0.0000
643.1376
643.1376

0.0783

0.0315
654.4886
2028

1.5627

0.1747

0.3279

5.8000e-
004

0.0173

8.2800e-
003

0.0256

4.6100e-
003

7.7700e-
003

0.0124

0.0000

51.9582

0.0105

3.1000e-
004

52.3144
Maximum

1.5627

2.9580

3.1400

8.2500e-
003

0.6636

0.1190

0.7825

0.2436

0.1103

0.3539

0.0000
750.9129
750.9129

0.1312

0.0415
765.2641
Unmitigated Construction
tblFleetMix
UBUS

4.7100e-004

4.3000e-003
tblLandUse
LotAcreage

88.64 53.67
tblSequestration
NumberOfNewTrees

0.00 578.00
tblWoodstoves
NumberCatalytic

53.67 0.00
tblWoodstoves
NumberNoncatalytic

53.67 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 3 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2023

0.3292

2.9580

2.9287

7.0000e-
003

0.3852

0.1190

0.5041

0.1331

0.1103

0.2433

0.0000
626.2130
626.2130

0.1312

0.0181
634.8950
2024

0.3162

2.3838

3.1400

8.2500e-
003

0.3539

0.0852

0.4392

0.0960

0.0802

0.1762

0.0000
750.9125
750.9125

0.0796

0.0415
765.2637
2025

0.2926

2.2369

3.0479

8.1000e-
003

0.3526

0.0736

0.4262

0.0956

0.0693

0.1649

0.0000
738.8484
738.8484

0.0781

0.0402
752.7740
2026

0.2849

2.2261

2.9926

7.9800e-
003

0.3526

0.0735

0.4261

0.0956

0.0692

0.1648

0.0000
729.3573
729.3573

0.0775

0.0391
742.9413
2027

0.2516

2.0277

2.7703

7.0500e-
003

0.2945

0.0702

0.3647

0.0798

0.0659

0.1457

0.0000
643.1372
643.1372

0.0783

0.0315
654.4883
2028

1.5627

0.1747

0.3279

5.8000e-
004

0.0173

8.2800e-
003

0.0256

4.6100e-
003

7.7700e-
003

0.0124

0.0000

51.9581

0.0105

3.1000e-
004

52.3143
Maximum

1.5627

2.9580

3.1400

8.2500e-
003

0.3852

0.1190

0.5041

0.1331

0.1103

0.2433

0.0000
750.9125
750.9125

0.1312

0.0415
765.2637
Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00

13.68 0.00

11.30 17.97

0.00 10.86

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Quarter
Start Date
End Date
Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 1-1-2023
3-31-2023

0.4745

0.4745
2 4-1-2023
6-30-2023

1.2339

1.2339
3 7-1-2023
9-30-2023

0.8765

0.8765
4 10-1-2023
12-31-2023

0.7226

0.7226
5 1-1-2024
3-31-2024

0.6754

0.6754
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 4 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6 4-1-2024
6-30-2024

0.6672

0.6672
7 7-1-2024
9-30-2024

0.6746

0.6746
8 10-1-2024
12-31-2024

0.6829

0.6829
9 1-1-2025
3-31-2025

0.6283

0.6283
10 4-1-2025
6-30-2025

0.6271

0.6271
11 7-1-2025
9-30-2025

0.6340

0.6340
12 10-1-2025
12-31-2025

0.6423

0.6423
13 1-1-2026
3-31-2026

0.6236

0.6236
14 4-1-2026
6-30-2026

0.6224

0.6224
15 7-1-2026
9-30-2026

0.6292

0.6292
16 10-1-2026
12-31-2026

0.6374

0.6374
17 1-1-2027
3-31-2027

0.6193

0.6193
18 4-1-2027
6-30-2027

0.6180

0.6180
19 7-1-2027
9-30-2027

0.6248

0.6248
20 10-1-2027
12-31-2027

0.4147

0.4147
21 1-1-2028
3-31-2028

0.8874

0.8874
22 4-1-2028
6-30-2028

0.8505

0.8505
Highest

1.2339

1.2339
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 5 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area

2.1495

0.1255

2.0697

7.6000e-
004

0.0195

0.0000
121.5769
121.5769

5.4400e-
003

2.1700e-
003
122.3592
Energy

0.0354

0.3024

0.1287

1.9300e-
003

0.0245

0.0000
736.2487
736.2487

0.0393

0.0104
740.3213
Mobile

0.8589

1.5455

9.4988

0.0252

2.6727

0.0191

2.6918

0.7127

0.0178

0.7305

0.0000
2,383.479
8 2,383.479
8 0.1363

0.1197
2,422.541
0 Waste

0.0000

57.2292

0.0000

57.2292

3.3822

0.0000
141.7830
Water

0.0000

5.6430

30.6556

36.2986

0.5822

0.0140

55.0248
Total

3.0437

1.9733

11.6972

0.0279

2.6727

0.0631

2.7357

0.7127

0.0618

0.7744

62.8723
3,271.961
0 3,334.833
3 4.1453

0.1462
3,482.029
3 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 6 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area

2.1495

0.1255

2.0697

7.6000e-
004

0.0195

0.0000
121.5769
121.5769

5.4400e-
003

2.1700e-
003
122.3592
Energy

0.0354

0.3024

0.1287

1.9300e-
003

0.0245

0.0000
736.2487
736.2487

0.0393

0.0104
740.3213
Mobile

0.8558

1.5232

9.3584

0.0247

2.6192

0.0188

2.6380

0.6984

0.0175

0.7159

0.0000
2,337.380
9 2,337.380
9 0.1346

0.1178
2,375.858
4 Waste

0.0000

57.2292

0.0000

57.2292

3.3822

0.0000
141.7830
Water

0.0000

5.6430

30.6556

36.2986

0.5822

0.0140

55.0248
Total

3.0406

1.9511

11.5568

0.0274

2.6192

0.0627

2.6819

0.6984

0.0615

0.7598

62.8723
3,225.862
1 3,288.734
4 4.1437

0.1444
3,435.346
7 Mitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.10 1.13

1.20 1.72

2.00 0.54

1.97 2.00

0.52 1.88

0.00 1.41

1.38 0.04

1.25 1.34
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 7 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.0 Construction Detail

2.3 Vegetation
CO2e
Category
MT
New Trees
409.2240
Vegetation Land
Change
-388.3060
Total

20.9180
Vegetation
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name
Phase Type
Start Date
End Date
Num Days
Week
Num Days
Phase Description
1 Site Preparation
Site Preparation
4/8/2023
2/24/2023
5 40
2 Grading
Grading
2/25/2023
7/28/2023
5 110
3 Building Construction
Building Construction
7/29/2023
10/29/2027
5 1110
4 Paving
Paving
10/30/2027
2/11/2028
5 75
5 Architectural Coating
Architectural Coating
2/12/2028
5/26/2028
5 75
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 60
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 330
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 8 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment Type
Amount
Usage Hours
Horse Power
Load Factor
Architectural Coating
Air Compressors
1 6.00
78 0.48
Building Construction
Cranes
1 7.00
231

0.29 Grading
Excavators
2 8.00
158

0.38 Building Construction
Forklifts
3 8.00
89 0.20
Building Construction
Generator Sets
1 8.00
84 0.74
Grading
Graders
1 8.00
187

0.41 Paving
Pavers
2 8.00
130

0.42 Paving
Paving Equipment
2 8.00
132

0.36 Paving
Rollers
2 8.00
80 0.38
Grading
Rubber Tired Dozers
1 8.00
247

0.40 Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers
3 8.00
247

0.40 Grading
Scrapers
2 8.00
367

0.48 Building Construction
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
3 7.00
97 0.37
Grading
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
2 8.00
97 0.37
Site Preparation
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
4 8.00
97 0.37
Building Construction
Welders
1 8.00
46 0.45
Trips and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation
7 18.00

0.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
Grading
8 20.00

0.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
Building Construction
9 262.00

93.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
Paving
6 15.00

0.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
Residential Indoor: 995,085; Residential Outdoor: 331,695; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating
–
sqft)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 9 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust

0.0000

0.0000
Off-Road

0.0000

0.0000
Total

0.0000

0.0000
Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Architectural Coating
1 52.00

0.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 10 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

0.0000

0.0000
Total

0.0000

0.0000
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust

0.0000

0.0000
Off-Road

0.0000

0.0000
Total

0.0000

0.0000
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 11 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

0.0000

0.0000
Total

0.0000

0.0000
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust

0.5062

0.0000

0.5062

0.2010

0.0000

0.2010

0.0000

0.0000
Off-Road

0.1827

1.8984

1.5428

3.4100e-
003

0.0784

0.0721

0.0000
299.9437
299.9437

0.0970

0.0000
302.3688
Total

0.1827

1.8984

1.5428

3.4100e-
003

0.5062

0.0784

0.5846

0.2010

0.0721

0.2730

0.0000
299.9437
299.9437

0.0970

0.0000
302.3688
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 12 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

3.8400e-
003

2.7000e-
003

0.0300

8.0000e-
005

8.7600e-
003

5.0000e-
005

8.8100e-
003

2.3300e-
003

4.0000e-
005

2.3700e-
003

0.0000

7.0461

2.4000e-
004

2.3000e-
004

7.1192
Total

3.8400e-
003

2.7000e-
003

0.0300

8.0000e-
005

8.7600e-
003

5.0000e-
005

8.8100e-
003

2.3300e-
003

4.0000e-
005

2.3700e-
003

0.0000

7.0461

2.4000e-
004

2.3000e-
004

7.1192
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust

0.2278

0.0000

0.2278

0.0904

0.0000

0.0904

0.0000

0.0000
Off-Road

0.1827

1.8984

1.5428

3.4100e-
003

0.0784

0.0721

0.0000
299.9433
299.9433

0.0970

0.0000
302.3685
Total

0.1827

1.8984

1.5428

3.4100e-
003

0.2278

0.0784

0.3061

0.0904

0.0721

0.1625

0.0000
299.9433
299.9433

0.0970

0.0000
302.3685
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 13 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Grading - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

3.8400e-
003

2.7000e-
003

0.0300

8.0000e-
005

8.7600e-
003

5.0000e-
005

8.8100e-
003

2.3300e-
003

4.0000e-
005

2.3700e-
003

0.0000

7.0461

2.4000e-
004

2.3000e-
004

7.1192
Total

3.8400e-
003

2.7000e-
003

0.0300

8.0000e-
005

8.7600e-
003

5.0000e-
005

8.8100e-
003

2.3300e-
003

4.0000e-
005

2.3700e-
003

0.0000

7.0461

2.4000e-
004

2.3000e-
004

7.1192
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.0865

0.7912

0.8934

1.4800e-
003

0.0385

0.0362

0.0000
127.4926
127.4926

0.0303

0.0000
128.2508
Total

0.0865

0.7912

0.8934

1.4800e-
003

0.0385

0.0362

0.0000
127.4926
127.4926

0.0303

0.0000
128.2508
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 14 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

5.7800e-
003

0.2304

0.0695

1.0400e-
003

0.0338

1.4700e-
003

0.0353

9.7700e-
003

1.4100e-
003

0.0112

0.0000

99.4268

4.6000e-
004

0.0150
103.8945
Worker

0.0504

0.0354

0.3929

9.9000e-
004

0.1148

6.0000e-
004

0.1154

0.0305

5.5000e-
004

0.0311

0.0000

92.3043

3.1300e-
003

2.9500e-
003

93.2621
Total

0.0561

0.2658

0.4624

2.0300e-
003

0.1486

2.0700e-
003

0.1507

0.0403

1.9600e-
003

0.0423

0.0000
191.7311
191.7311

3.5900e-
003

0.0179
197.1566
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.0865

0.7912

0.8934

1.4800e-
003

0.0385

0.0362

0.0000
127.4925
127.4925

0.0303

0.0000
128.2507
Total

0.0865

0.7912

0.8934

1.4800e-
003

0.0385

0.0362

0.0000
127.4925
127.4925

0.0303

0.0000
128.2507
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 15 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2023
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

5.7800e-
003

0.2304

0.0695

1.0400e-
003

0.0338

1.4700e-
003

0.0353

9.7700e-
003

1.4100e-
003

0.0112

0.0000

99.4268

4.6000e-
004

0.0150
103.8945
Worker

0.0504

0.0354

0.3929

9.9000e-
004

0.1148

6.0000e-
004

0.1154

0.0305

5.5000e-
004

0.0311

0.0000

92.3043

3.1300e-
003

2.9500e-
003

93.2621
Total

0.0561

0.2658

0.4624

2.0300e-
003

0.1486

2.0700e-
003

0.1507

0.0403

1.9600e-
003

0.0423

0.0000
191.7311
191.7311

3.5900e-
003

0.0179
197.1566
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.1928

1.7611

2.1179

3.5300e-
003

0.0803

0.0756

0.0000
303.7223
303.7223

0.0718

0.0000
305.5179
Total

0.1928

1.7611

2.1179

3.5300e-
003

0.0803

0.0756

0.0000
303.7223
303.7223

0.0718

0.0000
305.5179
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 16 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0134

0.5488

0.1617

2.4300e-
003

0.0806

3.5300e-
003

0.0841

0.0233

3.3800e-
003

0.0267

0.0000
233.1643
233.1643

1.0500e-
003

0.0350
243.6290
Worker

0.1101

0.0739

0.8605

2.2900e-
003

0.2734

1.3400e-
003

0.2747

0.0727

1.2300e-
003

0.0739

0.0000
214.0263
214.0263

6.6800e-
003

6.4600e-
003
216.1173
Total

0.1234

0.6227

1.0221

4.7200e-
003

0.3539

4.8700e-
003

0.3588

0.0960

4.6100e-
003

0.1006

0.0000
447.1906
447.1906

7.7300e-
003

0.0415
459.7462
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.1928

1.7611

2.1179

3.5300e-
003

0.0803

0.0756

0.0000
303.7220
303.7220

0.0718

0.0000
305.5175
Total

0.1928

1.7611

2.1179

3.5300e-
003

0.0803

0.0756

0.0000
303.7220
303.7220

0.0718

0.0000
305.5175
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 17 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2024
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0134

0.5488

0.1617

2.4300e-
003

0.0806

3.5300e-
003

0.0841

0.0233

3.3800e-
003

0.0267

0.0000
233.1643
233.1643

1.0500e-
003

0.0350
243.6290
Worker

0.1101

0.0739

0.8605

2.2900e-
003

0.2734

1.3400e-
003

0.2747

0.0727

1.2300e-
003

0.0739

0.0000
214.0263
214.0263

6.6800e-
003

6.4600e-
003
216.1173
Total

0.1234

0.6227

1.0221

4.7200e-
003

0.3539

4.8700e-
003

0.3588

0.0960

4.6100e-
003

0.1006

0.0000
447.1906
447.1906

7.7300e-
003

0.0415
459.7462
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.1785

1.6273

2.0991

3.5200e-
003

0.0689

0.0648

0.0000
302.6549
302.6549

0.0711

0.0000
304.4335
Total

0.1785

1.6273

2.0991

3.5200e-
003

0.0689

0.0648

0.0000
302.6549
302.6549

0.0711

0.0000
304.4335
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 18 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0130

0.5444

0.1582

2.3800e-
003

0.0802

3.5200e-
003

0.0838

0.0232

3.3600e-
003

0.0266

0.0000
228.1702
228.1702

1.0100e-
003

0.0342
238.3953
Worker

0.1011

0.0652

0.7907

2.2000e-
003

0.2723

1.2700e-
003

0.2736

0.0724

1.1700e-
003

0.0736

0.0000
208.0237
208.0237

5.9800e-
003

5.9500e-
003
209.9456
Total

0.1142

0.6096

0.9489

4.5800e-
003

0.3526

4.7900e-
003

0.3574

0.0956

4.5300e-
003

0.1001

0.0000
436.1939
436.1939

6.9900e-
003

0.0402
448.3409
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.1784

1.6273

2.0991

3.5200e-
003

0.0689

0.0648

0.0000
302.6545
302.6545

0.0711

0.0000
304.4331
Total

0.1784

1.6273

2.0991

3.5200e-
003

0.0689

0.0648

0.0000
302.6545
302.6545

0.0711

0.0000
304.4331
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 19 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0130

0.5444

0.1582

2.3800e-
003

0.0802

3.5200e-
003

0.0838

0.0232

3.3600e-
003

0.0266

0.0000
228.1702
228.1702

1.0100e-
003

0.0342
238.3953
Worker

0.1011

0.0652

0.7907

2.2000e-
003

0.2723

1.2700e-
003

0.2736

0.0724

1.1700e-
003

0.0736

0.0000
208.0237
208.0237

5.9800e-
003

5.9500e-
003
209.9456
Total

0.1142

0.6096

0.9489

4.5800e-
003

0.3526

4.7900e-
003

0.3574

0.0956

4.5300e-
003

0.1001

0.0000
436.1939
436.1939

6.9900e-
003

0.0402
448.3409
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.1785

1.6273

2.0991

3.5200e-
003

0.0689

0.0648

0.0000
302.6549
302.6549

0.0711

0.0000
304.4335
Total

0.1785

1.6273

2.0991

3.5200e-
003

0.0689

0.0648

0.0000
302.6549
302.6549

0.0711

0.0000
304.4335
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 20 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0127

0.5408

0.1556

2.3300e-
003

0.0802

3.5000e-
003

0.0837

0.0232

3.3400e-
003

0.0265

0.0000
223.9639
223.9639

9.8000e-
004

0.0336
233.9850
Worker

0.0938

0.0581

0.7380

2.1300e-
003

0.2723

1.2000e-
003

0.2735

0.0724

1.1000e-
003

0.0735

0.0000
202.7388
202.7388

5.3900e-
003

5.5400e-
003
204.5232
Total

0.1065

0.5988

0.8935

4.4600e-
003

0.3526

4.7000e-
003

0.3573

0.0956

4.4400e-
003

0.1001

0.0000
426.7027
426.7027

6.3700e-
003

0.0391
438.5082
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.1784

1.6273

2.0991

3.5200e-
003

0.0689

0.0648

0.0000
302.6545
302.6545

0.0711

0.0000
304.4331
Total

0.1784

1.6273

2.0991

3.5200e-
003

0.0689

0.0648

0.0000
302.6545
302.6545

0.0711

0.0000
304.4331
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 21 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0127

0.5408

0.1556

2.3300e-
003

0.0802

3.5000e-
003

0.0837

0.0232

3.3400e-
003

0.0265

0.0000
223.9639
223.9639

9.8000e-
004

0.0336
233.9850
Worker

0.0938

0.0581

0.7380

2.1300e-
003

0.2723

1.2000e-
003

0.2735

0.0724

1.1000e-
003

0.0735

0.0000
202.7388
202.7388

5.3900e-
003

5.5400e-
003
204.5232
Total

0.1065

0.5988

0.8935

4.4600e-
003

0.3526

4.7000e-
003

0.3573

0.0956

4.4400e-
003

0.1001

0.0000
426.7027
426.7027

6.3700e-
003

0.0391
438.5082
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2027
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.1477

1.3467

1.7371

2.9100e-
003

0.0570

0.0536

0.0000
250.4730
250.4730

0.0589

0.0000
251.9450
Total

0.1477

1.3467

1.7371

2.9100e-
003

0.0570

0.0536

0.0000
250.4730
250.4730

0.0589

0.0000
251.9450
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 22 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2027
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0103

0.4441

0.1270

1.8900e-
003

0.0664

2.8700e-
003

0.0693

0.0192

2.7500e-
003

0.0219

0.0000
181.6121
181.6121

7.9000e-
004

0.0272
189.7271
Worker

0.0721

0.0432

0.5713

1.7100e-
003

0.2254

9.3000e-
004

0.2263

0.0599

8.6000e-
004

0.0608

0.0000
164.0524
164.0524

4.0500e-
003

4.3000e-
003
165.4357
Total

0.0825

0.4873

0.6983

3.6000e-
003

0.2918

3.8000e-
003

0.2956

0.0791

3.6100e-
003

0.0827

0.0000
345.6645
345.6645

4.8400e-
003

0.0315
355.1629
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.1477

1.3467

1.7371

2.9100e-
003

0.0570

0.0536

0.0000
250.4727
250.4727

0.0589

0.0000
251.9447
Total

0.1477

1.3467

1.7371

2.9100e-
003

0.0570

0.0536

0.0000
250.4727
250.4727

0.0589

0.0000
251.9447
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 23 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2027
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0103

0.4441

0.1270

1.8900e-
003

0.0664

2.8700e-
003

0.0693

0.0192

2.7500e-
003

0.0219

0.0000
181.6121
181.6121

7.9000e-
004

0.0272
189.7271
Worker

0.0721

0.0432

0.5713

1.7100e-
003

0.2254

9.3000e-
004

0.2263

0.0599

8.6000e-
004

0.0608

0.0000
164.0524
164.0524

4.0500e-
003

4.3000e-
003
165.4357
Total

0.0825

0.4873

0.6983

3.6000e-
003

0.2918

3.8000e-
003

0.2956

0.0791

3.6100e-
003

0.0827

0.0000
345.6645
345.6645

4.8400e-
003

0.0315
355.1629
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Paving - 2027
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.0206

0.1931

0.3280

5.1000e-
004

9.4200e-
003

8.6600e-
003

0.0000

45.0433

0.0146

0.0000

45.4075
Paving

0.0000

0.0000
Total

0.0206

0.1931

0.3280

5.1000e-
004

9.4200e-
003

8.6600e-
003

0.0000

45.0433

0.0146

0.0000

45.4075
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 24 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2027
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

8.6000e-
004

5.2000e-
004

6.8100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.6900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

2.7000e-
003

7.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

7.2000e-
004

0.0000

1.9567

5.0000e-
005

1.9732
Total

8.6000e-
004

5.2000e-
004

6.8100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.6900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

2.7000e-
003

7.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

7.2000e-
004

0.0000

1.9567

5.0000e-
005

1.9732
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.0206

0.1931

0.3280

5.1000e-
004

9.4200e-
003

8.6600e-
003

0.0000

45.0433

0.0146

0.0000

45.4075
Paving

0.0000

0.0000
Total

0.0206

0.1931

0.3280

5.1000e-
004

9.4200e-
003

8.6600e-
003

0.0000

45.0433

0.0146

0.0000

45.4075
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 25 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2027
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

8.6000e-
004

5.2000e-
004

6.8100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.6900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

2.7000e-
003

7.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

7.2000e-
004

0.0000

1.9567

5.0000e-
005

1.9732
Total

8.6000e-
004

5.2000e-
004

6.8100e-
003

2.0000e-
005

2.6900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

2.7000e-
003

7.1000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

7.2000e-
004

0.0000

1.9567

5.0000e-
005

1.9732
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Paving - 2028
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.0137

0.1287

0.2187

3.4000e-
004

6.2800e-
003

5.7800e-
003

0.0000

30.0289

9.7100e-
003

0.0000

30.2717
Paving

0.0000

0.0000
Total

0.0137

0.1287

0.2187

3.4000e-
004

6.2800e-
003

5.7800e-
003

0.0000

30.0289

9.7100e-
003

0.0000

30.2717
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 26 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2028
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

5.3000e-
004

3.1000e-
004

4.2800e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.7900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.8000e-
003

4.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.8000e-
004

0.0000

1.2781

3.0000e-
005

1.2884
Total

5.3000e-
004

3.1000e-
004

4.2800e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.7900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.8000e-
003

4.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.8000e-
004

0.0000

1.2781

3.0000e-
005

1.2884
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

0.0137

0.1287

0.2187

3.4000e-
004

6.2800e-
003

5.7800e-
003

0.0000

30.0289

9.7100e-
003

0.0000

30.2717
Paving

0.0000

0.0000
Total

0.0137

0.1287

0.2187

3.4000e-
004

6.2800e-
003

5.7800e-
003

0.0000

30.0289

9.7100e-
003

0.0000

30.2717
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 27 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2028
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

5.3000e-
004

3.1000e-
004

4.2800e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.7900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.8000e-
003

4.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.8000e-
004

0.0000

1.2781

3.0000e-
005

1.2884
Total

5.3000e-
004

3.1000e-
004

4.2800e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.7900e-
003

1.0000e-
005

1.8000e-
003

4.8000e-
004

1.0000e-
005

4.8000e-
004

0.0000

1.2781

3.0000e-
005

1.2884
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Archit. Coating

1.5374

0.0000

0.0000
Off-Road

6.4100e-
003

0.0430

0.0678

1.1000e-
004

1.9300e-
003

0.0000

9.5747

5.2000e-
004

0.0000

9.5878
Total

1.5438

0.0430

0.0678

1.1000e-
004

1.9300e-
003

0.0000

9.5747

5.2000e-
004

0.0000

9.5878
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 28 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

4.6300e-
003

2.7000e-
003

0.0371

1.1000e-
004

0.0155

6.0000e-
005

0.0156

4.1300e-
003

6.0000e-
005

4.1800e-
003

0.0000

11.0765

2.5000e-
004

2.8000e-
004

11.1665
Total

4.6300e-
003

2.7000e-
003

0.0371

1.1000e-
004

0.0155

6.0000e-
005

0.0156

4.1300e-
003

6.0000e-
005

4.1800e-
003

0.0000

11.0765

2.5000e-
004

2.8000e-
004

11.1665
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Archit. Coating

1.5374

0.0000

0.0000
Off-Road

6.4100e-
003

0.0430

0.0678

1.1000e-
004

1.9300e-
003

0.0000

9.5747

5.2000e-
004

0.0000

9.5878
Total

1.5438

0.0430

0.0678

1.1000e-
004

1.9300e-
003

0.0000

9.5747

5.2000e-
004

0.0000

9.5878
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 29 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2028
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000

0.0000
Worker

4.6300e-
003

2.7000e-
003

0.0371

1.1000e-
004

0.0155

6.0000e-
005

0.0156

4.1300e-
003

6.0000e-
005

4.1800e-
003

0.0000

11.0765

2.5000e-
004

2.8000e-
004

11.1665
Total

4.6300e-
003

2.7000e-
003

0.0371

1.1000e-
004

0.0155

6.0000e-
005

0.0156

4.1300e-
003

6.0000e-
005

4.1800e-
003

0.0000

11.0765

2.5000e-
004

2.8000e-
004

11.1665
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
Improve Pedestrian Network
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 30 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Mitigated

0.8558

1.5232

9.3584

0.0247

2.6192

0.0188

2.6380

0.6984

0.0175

0.7159

0.0000
2,337.380
9 2,337.380
9 0.1346

0.1178
2,375.858
4 Unmitigated

0.8589

1.5455

9.4988

0.0252

2.6727

0.0191

2.6918

0.7127

0.0178

0.7305

0.0000
2,383.479
8 2,383.479
8 0.1363

0.1197
2,422.541
0 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use
Weekday
Saturday
Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual VMT
City Park

6.99 17.56

19.62 21,998
21,558
Single Family Housing
2,577.12
2,604.42
2334.15
7,177,371
7,033,823
Total
2,584.11
2,621.98
2,353.77
7,199,368
7,055,381
Miles
Trip %
Trip Purpose %
Land Use
H-W or C-W
H-S or C-C
H-O or C-NW
H-W or C-W
H-S or C-C
H-O or C-NW
Primary
Diverted
Pass-by
City Park

9.50 7.30

7.30 33.00

48.00 19.00
66 28
6 Single Family Housing

10.80 7.30

7.50 38.40

22.60 39.00
86 11
3 4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use
LDA
LDT1
LDT2
MDV
LHD1
LHD2
MHD
HHD
OBUS
UBUS
MCY
SBUS
MH
City Park

0.509869

0.051139

0.167106

0.174849

0.031609

0.007996

0.012006

0.015707

0.000636

0.000471

0.023554

0.001465

0.003592
Single Family Housing

0.527700

0.209000

0.167500

0.055600

0.000900

0.008000

0.021400

0.000000

0.004300

0.002500

0.000200

0.002000

5.0 Energy Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 31 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000

0.0000
386.0619
386.0619

0.0326

3.9500e-
003
388.0536
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000

0.0000
386.0619
386.0619

0.0326

3.9500e-
003
388.0536
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0354

0.3024

0.1287

1.9300e-
003

0.0245

0.0000
350.1867
350.1867

6.7100e-
003

6.4200e-
003
352.2677
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0354

0.3024

0.1287

1.9300e-
003

0.0245

0.0000
350.1867
350.1867

6.7100e-
003

6.4200e-
003
352.2677

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 32 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr
tons/yr
MT/yr
City Park
0 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
Single Family
Housing

6.56225e
+006

0.0354

0.3024

0.1287

1.9300e-
003

0.0245

0.0000
350.1867
350.1867

6.7100e-
003

6.4200e-
003
352.2677
Total

0.0354

0.3024

0.1287

1.9300e-
003

0.0245

0.0000
350.1867
350.1867

6.7100e-
003

6.4200e-
003
352.2677
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr
tons/yr
MT/yr
City Park
0 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
Single Family
Housing

6.56225e
+006

0.0354

0.3024

0.1287

1.9300e-
003

0.0245

0.0000
350.1867
350.1867

6.7100e-
003

6.4200e-
003
352.2677
Total

0.0354

0.3024

0.1287

1.9300e-
003

0.0245

0.0000
350.1867
350.1867

6.7100e-
003

6.4200e-
003
352.2677
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 33 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kWh/yr
MT/yr
City Park
0 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
Single Family
Housing

2.17689e
+006
386.0619

0.0326

3.9500e-
003
388.0536
Total
386.0619

0.0326

3.9500e-
003
388.0536
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kWh/yr
MT/yr
City Park
0 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
Single Family
Housing

2.17689e
+006
386.0619

0.0326

3.9500e-
003
388.0536
Total
386.0619

0.0326

3.9500e-
003
388.0536
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 34 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Exterior

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Mitigated

2.1495

0.1255

2.0697

7.6000e-
004

0.0195

0.0000
121.5769
121.5769

5.4400e-
003

2.1700e-
003
122.3592
Unmitigated

2.1495

0.1255

2.0697

7.6000e-
004

0.0195

0.0000
121.5769
121.5769

5.4400e-
003

2.1700e-
003
122.3592
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 35 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
SubCategory
tons/yr
MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

0.1537

0.0000

0.0000
Consumer
Products

1.9228

0.0000

0.0000
Hearth

0.0120

0.1021

0.0435

6.5000e-
004

8.2600e-
003

0.0000
118.2656
118.2656

2.2700e-
003

2.1700e-
003
118.9684
Landscaping

0.0609

0.0234

2.0263

1.1000e-
004

0.0112

0.0000

3.3113

3.1800e-
003

0.0000

3.3908
Total

2.1495

0.1255

2.0698

7.6000e-
004

0.0195

0.0000
121.5769
121.5769

5.4500e-
003

2.1700e-
003
122.3592
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 36 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.1537

0.0000

0.0000
Consumer
Products

1.9228

0.0000

0.0000
Hearth

0.0120

0.1021

0.0435

6.5000e-
004

8.2600e-
003

0.0000
118.2656
118.2656

2.2700e-
003

2.1700e-
003
118.9684
Landscaping

0.0609

0.0234

2.0263

1.1000e-
004

0.0112

0.0000

3.3113

3.1800e-
003

0.0000

3.3908
Total

2.1495

0.1255

2.0698

7.6000e-
004

0.0195

0.0000
121.5769
121.5769

5.4500e-
003

2.1700e-
003
122.3592
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 37 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
MT/yr
Mitigated

36.2986

0.5822

0.0140

55.0248
Unmitigated

36.2986

0.5822

0.0140

55.0248

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
City Park
0 /

10.6757

6.6265

5.6000e-
004

7.0000e-
005

6.6607
Single Family
Housing

17.787 /

11.2136

29.6721

0.5816

0.0139

48.3641
Total

36.2986

0.5822

0.0140

55.0248
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 38 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
City Park
0 /

10.6757

6.6265

5.6000e-
004

7.0000e-
005

6.6607
Single Family
Housing

17.787 /

11.2136

29.6721

0.5816

0.0139

48.3641
Total

36.2986

0.5822

0.0140

55.0248
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated

57.2292

3.3822

0.0000
141.7830
Unmitigated

57.2292

3.3822

0.0000
141.7830
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 39 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
tons
MT/yr
City Park

0.77 0.1563

9.2400e-
003

0.0000

0.3872
Single Family
Housing
281.16

57.0729

3.3729

0.0000
141.3958
Total

57.2292

3.3822

0.0000
141.7830
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
tons
MT/yr
City Park

0.77 0.1563

9.2400e-
003

0.0000

0.3872
Single Family
Housing
281.16

57.0729

3.3729

0.0000
141.3958
Total

57.2292

3.3822

0.0000
141.7830
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 40 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
MT
Unmitigated

20.9180

0.0000

20.9180
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Days/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Hours/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type
Number
Heat Input/Day
Heat Input/Year
Boiler Rating
Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type
Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 41 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.1 Vegetation Land Change
Initial/Fina
l
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Acres
MT
Cropland

62.63 / 0
-388.3060

0.0000

0.0000
-388.3060
Total
-388.3060

0.0000

0.0000
-388.3060
Vegetation Type

11.2 Net New Trees
Number of
Trees
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
MT
Miscellaneous
578
409.2240

0.0000

0.0000
409.2240
Total
409.2240

0.0000

0.0000
409.2240
Species Class
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 5/6/2022 5:02 PM

Page 42 of 42 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Pearl Woods
Tulare County, Annual
Project Characteristics - 2005 Emission Factors
Land Use - Lot acreage to actual
Construction Phase -
Grading - Grading to be balanced
Architectural Coating - Rule 4601
Area Coating - Rule 4601
Land Use Change -
Sequestration - 578 new trees
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Dust Control Plan Required Mobile Land Use Mitigation -
Area Mitigation - Rule 4601

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
City Park

8.96 Acre

8.96 390,297.60
0 Single Family Housing
273.00
Dwelling Unit

53.67 491,400.00
781

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3 Wind Speed (m/s)
Precipitation Freq (Days)

2.2 51

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company
Southern California Edison
2005
Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
641.35

0.029
CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.006
N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 1 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Fleet Mix - Assumed 2024 SJVAPCD Residential Fleet Mix
Woodstoves - Assumes 2020 Rule 4901 did not take effect in 2005.

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating
EF_Nonresidential_Exterior
250.00
150.00
tblArchitecturalCoating
EF_Nonresidential_Interior
250.00
150.00
tblArchitecturalCoating
EF_Residential_Exterior
250.00

50.00 tblArchitecturalCoating
EF_Residential_Interior
250.00

50.00 tblConstDustMitigation
WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed
0 15
tblFireplaces
NumberWood

0.00 150.15
tblLandUse
LotAcreage

88.64 53.67
tblProjectCharacteristics
CH4IntensityFactor

0.033

0.029
tblProjectCharacteristics
CO2IntensityFactor
390.98
641.35
tblProjectCharacteristics
N2OIntensityFactor

0.004

0.006
tblSequestration
NumberOfNewTrees

0.00 578.00
tblWoodstoves
NumberCatalytic

53.67 0.00
tblWoodstoves
NumberNoncatalytic

53.67 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 2 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2005
864.5329
2006
967.6207
2007
971.3423
2008
975.0639
2009
863.9249
2010

63.7228
Maximum
975.0639
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 3 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2005
864.5322
2006
967.6203
2007
971.3419
2008
975.0635
2009
863.9245
2010

63.7227
Maximum
975.0635
Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Quarter
Start Date
End Date
Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
Highest
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 4 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area
488.2066
Energy
988.0317
Mobile
3,704.123
2 Waste
141.7830
Water

74.6945
Total
5,396.839
0 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 5 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

74.6945
Total
5,325.128
5 Mitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00

0.00 1.33
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 6 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.0 Construction Detail

2.3 Vegetation
CO2e
Category
MT
New Trees
409.2240
Vegetation Land
Change
-388.3060
Total

20.9180
Vegetation
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name
Phase Type
Start Date
End Date
Num Days
Week
Num Days
Phase Description
1 Grading
Grading
2/26/2005
7/29/2005
5 110
2 Site Preparation
Site Preparation
1/1/2005
2/25/2005
5 40
3 Building Construction
Building Construction
7/30/2005
10/30/2009
5 1110
4 Paving
Paving
10/31/2009
2/12/2010
5 75
5 Architectural Coating
Architectural Coating
2/13/2010
5/28/2010
5 75
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 60
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 330
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 7 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment Type
Amount
Usage Hours
Horse Power
Load Factor
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers
3 8.00
247

0.40 Site Preparation
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
4 8.00
97 0.37
Grading
Excavators
2 8.00
158

0.38 Grading
Graders
1 8.00
187

0.41 Grading
Rubber Tired Dozers
1 8.00
247

0.40 Grading
Scrapers
2 8.00
367

0.48 Grading
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
2 8.00
97 0.37
Building Construction
Cranes
1 7.00
231

0.29 Building Construction
Forklifts
3 8.00
89 0.20
Building Construction
Generator Sets
1 8.00
84 0.74
Building Construction
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
3 7.00
97 0.37
Building Construction
Welders
1 8.00
46 0.45
Paving
Pavers
2 8.00
130

0.42 Paving
Paving Equipment
2 8.00
132

0.36 Paving
Rollers
2 8.00
80 0.38
Architectural Coating
Air Compressors
1 6.00
78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Site Preparation
7 18.00

0.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
Grading
8 20.00

0.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
Building Construction
9 262.00

93.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
Paving
6 15.00

0.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

Page 8 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust

0.0000
Off-Road
361.2488
Total
361.2488
Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Architectural Coating
1 52.00

0.00 0.00

10.80 7.30

20.00 LD_Mix
HDT_Mix
HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 9 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

10.1837
Total

10.1837
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust

0.0000
Off-Road
361.2484
Total
361.2484
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 10 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

10.1837
Total

10.1837
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.3 Site Preparation - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust

0.0000
Off-Road

80.3895
Total

80.3895
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 11 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Site Preparation - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

3.3329
Total

3.3329
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust

0.0000
Off-Road

80.3894
Total

80.3894
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 12 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Site Preparation - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

3.3329
Total

3.3329
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
145.4170
Total
145.4170
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 13 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
130.5542
Worker
133.4069
Total
263.9610
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
145.4168
Total
145.4168
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 14 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2005
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
130.5542
Worker
133.4069
Total
263.9610
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2006
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
343.7129
Total
343.7129
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 15 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2006
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
308.5825
Worker
315.3253
Total
623.9078
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
343.7124
Total
343.7124
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 16 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2006
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
308.5825
Worker
315.3253
Total
623.9078
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2007
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
345.0348
Total
345.0348
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 17 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2007
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
309.7694
Worker
316.5381
Total
626.3075
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
345.0344
Total
345.0344
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 18 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2007
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
309.7694
Worker
316.5381
Total
626.3075
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2008
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
346.3568
Total
346.3568
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 19 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2008
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
310.9563
Worker
317.7509
Total
628.7071
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
346.3564
Total
346.3564
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 20 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2008
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
310.9563
Worker
317.7509
Total
628.7071
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.4 Building Construction - 2009
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
286.8680
Total
286.8680
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 21 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2009
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
257.5477
Worker
263.1753
Total
520.7231
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road
286.8677
Total
286.8677
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 22 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Building Construction - 2009
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor
257.5477
Worker
263.1753
Total
520.7231
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Paving - 2009
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

53.2787
Paving

0.0000
Total

53.2787
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 23 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2009
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

3.0551
Total

3.0551
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

53.2786
Paving

0.0000
Total

53.2786
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 24 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2009
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

3.0551
Total

3.0551
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.5 Paving - 2010
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

34.7704
Paving

0.0000
Total

34.7704
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 25 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2010
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

2.0594
Total

2.0594
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off-Road

34.7703
Paving

0.0000
Total

34.7703
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 26 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Paving - 2010
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

2.0594
Total

2.0594
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2010
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Archit. Coating

0.0000
Off-Road

9.6206
Total

9.6206
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 27 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2010
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

17.2724
Total

17.2724
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Archit. Coating

0.0000
Off-Road

9.6206
Total

9.6206
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 28 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.6 Architectural Coating - 2010
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling

0.0000
Vendor

0.0000
Worker

17.2724
Total

17.2724
Mitigated Construction Off-Site

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
Improve Pedestrian Network
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 29 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Mitigated
3,632.412
7 Unmitigated
3,704.123
2 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use
Weekday
Saturday
Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual VMT
City Park

6.99 17.56

9.50 7.30

7.30 33.00

48.00 19.00
66 28
6 Single Family Housing

10.80 7.30

7.50 38.40

22.60 39.00
86 11
3 4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use
LDA
LDT1
LDT2
MDV
LHD1
LHD2
MHD
HHD
OBUS
UBUS
MCY
SBUS
MH
City Park

0.445143

0.090887

0.165130

0.187970

0.045320

0.007055

0.014780

0.012618

0.000711

0.000220

0.019746

0.001150

0.009270
Single Family Housing

0.445143

0.090887

0.165130

0.187970

0.045320

0.007055

0.014780

0.012618

0.000711

0.000220

0.019746

0.001150

0.009270

5.0 Energy Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 30 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated
635.7640
Electricity
Unmitigated
635.7640
NaturalGas
Mitigated
352.2677
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
352.2677

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 31 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.56225e
+006
352.2677
Total
352.2677
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr
tons/yr
MT/yr
City Park
0 0.0000
Single Family
Housing

6.56225e
+006
352.2677
Total
352.2677
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 32 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kWh/yr
MT/yr
City Park
0 0.0000
Single Family
Housing

2.17689e
+006
635.7640
Total
635.7640
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
kWh/yr
MT/yr
City Park
0 0.0000
Single Family
Housing

2.17689e
+006
635.7640
Total
635.7640
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 33 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Residential Exterior

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Mitigated
488.2066
Unmitigated
488.2066
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 34 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0000
Hearth
484.7627
Landscaping

3.4439
Total
488.2066
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 35 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0000
Hearth
484.7627
Landscaping

3.4439
Total
488.2066
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 36 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
MT/yr
Mitigated

74.6945
Unmitigated

74.6945

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
City Park
0 /

10.6757

10.9125
Single Family
Housing

17.787 /

11.2136

63.7820
Total

74.6945
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 37 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
City Park
0 /

10.6757

10.9125
Single Family
Housing

17.787 /

11.2136

63.7820
Total

74.6945
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated
141.7830
Unmitigated
141.7830
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 38 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
tons
MT/yr
City Park

0.77 0.3872
Single Family
Housing
281.16
141.3958
Total
141.7830
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Land Use
tons
MT/yr
City Park

0.77 0.3872
Single Family
Housing
281.16
141.3958
Total
141.7830
Mitigated

9.0 Operational Offroad
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 39 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.0 Vegetation
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
MT
Unmitigated

20.9180
Equipment Type
Number
Hours/Day
Days/Year
Horse Power
Load Factor
Fuel Type

Page 40 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

11.1 Vegetation Land Change
Initial/Fina
l
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Acres
MT
Cropland

62.63 / 0
-388.3060
Total
-388.3060
Vegetation Type

11.2 Net New Trees
Number of
Trees
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
MT
Miscellaneous
578
409.2240
Total
409.2240
Species Class
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 6/20/2022 9:32 AM

Page 41 of 41 ends

Pearl Woods - Tulare County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

Appendices
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 B-1
Appendix B: Biological Evaluation

Rene De La Fuente, Biologist
Shaylea Stark, Biologist
PROVOST & PRITCHARD CONSULTING GROUP | 455 W. FIR AVE, CLOVIS CA 93611 Biological Evaluation

DR HORTON

PEARL WOODS SUBDIVISION PROJECT
JUNE 2022

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 1
Table of Contents
I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Project Description ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Report Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 3 Study Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................ 7 II. Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................................... 8 Regional Setting .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 Topography................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Climate ......................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Soils ................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Protected Trees ............................................................................................................................................................... 9 Biotic Habitats .............................................................................................................................................................. 10 Ruderal/Agricultural ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Cameron Creek/TID Canal ................................................................................................................................... 10 Natural Communities of Special Concern ................................................................................................................ 10 Designated Critical Habitat of the APE ................................................................................................................... 10 Wildlife Movement Corridors .................................................................................................................................... 10 Special Status Plants and Animals ............................................................................................................................. 11 Impacts and Mitigation ................................................................................................................................................ 19 Significance Criteria ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 CEQA ........................................................................................................................................................................ 19 Relevant Goals, Policies, and Laws ........................................................................................................................... 20 Visalia City General Plan ........................................................................................................................................ 20 Visalia City Oak Tree Ordinance .......................................................................................................................... 20 Threatened and Endangered Species .................................................................................................................... 22 Designated Critical Habitat .................................................................................................................................... 22 Migratory Birds ........................................................................................................................................................ 22 Birds of Prey ............................................................................................................................................................. 22 Nesting Birds ............................................................................................................................................................ 22 Wetlands and other “Jurisdictional Waters” ........................................................................................................ 22 Potentially Significant Project-Related Impacts and Mitigation ........................................................................... 24 DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 2
Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance of Nesting Raptors, Migratory Birds, and Special Status Birds ........................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance of Bats ..................................................................................... 24 Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance of Northern California legless lizard .................................. 25 Less Than Significant Project-Related Impacts ....................................................................................................... 26 Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Animal Species Absent From, or Unlikely to Occur on, the Project Site ................................................................................................................................................................ 26 Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Plant Species Absent From, or Unlikely to Occur on, the Project Site ................................................................................................................................................................ 26 Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Fishes Absent From, or Unlikely to Occur on, the Project Site .................................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Project-Related Impacts to Riparian Habitat and Natural Communities of Special Concern .................... 26 Project-Related Impacts to Regulated Waters, Wetlands, and Water Quality ............................................... 27 Project-Related Impacts to Wildlife Movement Corridors and Native Wildlife Nursery Sites .................. 27 Project-Related Impacts to Critical Habitat ......................................................................................................... 27 Local Policies or Habitat Conservation Plans ..................................................................................................... 27 III. References ................................................................................................................................................................. 28 List of Figures
Figure 1. Regional Location .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2. Topographic Quadrangle Map ......................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3. Area of Potential Effect .................................................................................................................................... 6 List of Tables
Table 1. List of Soils Located Onsite and Their Basic Properties .............................................................................. 9 Table 2. Results from the Valley Oak Tree Survey ....................................................................................................... 9 Table 3. List of Special Status Animals with Potential to Occur Onsite and/or in the Vicinity ......................... 11 Table 4. List of Special Status Plants with Potential to Occur Onsite and/or in the Vicinity ............................. 15 List of Appendices
Appendix A: Photos of the Project Area
Appendix B: CNDDB 12-Quad Search
Appendix C: IPaC Search
Appendix D: NRCS Soils Report
Appendix E: Oak Tree Ordinance Map

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 3
I. Introduction
The following technical report, prepared by Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) includes a description of the bio logical resources present or with potential to occur within the proposed Pearl Woods Project (Project) and surrounding areas, and evaluates potential Project-related impacts to those resources.

Project Description
The Project proposes to subdivide and develop the property into 273 single family residences on 67.70 acres of land located near the southwest corner of South McAuliff Street and East Cherry Avenue, Visalia, California.

Additionally, a bridge would be constructed across the Tulare Irrigation District (TID) Canal and would connect the Project 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. P ursuant to the General Plan and the Waterways and Trails Mast er Plan, the Project proposes to dedicate 8.96 acres as a park, trail, and basin. The Project would provide 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 diameter storm mains at further -increasing depths, in addition to avoiding crossing under a railroad. The Project would require to be pre-zoned to R15 and annexed into the City of Visalia boundary. The Area of Potential Effect (APE) includes the 67.70 acres of land containing a walnut orchard and oak trees, and a 50-foot additional survey buffer (see Figure 3).

Report Objectives
Construction activities such as that proposed by the Project could potentially damage biological resources or modify habitats that are crucial for sensitive plant and wildlife species. In cases such as these, development may be regulated by State or federal agencies, and/or addressed by local regulatory agencies.

This report addresses issues related to the following:

1. The presence of sensitive biological resources onsite, or with the potential to occur onsite.

2. The federal, State, and local regulations regarding these resources.

3. Mitigation measures that may be required to reduce the magnitude of anticipated impacts and/or comply with permit requirements of state and federal resource agencies.

Therefore, the objectives of this report are:

1. Summarize all site-specific information related to existing biological resources.

2. Make reasonable inferences about the biological resources that could occur onsite based on habitat suitability and the proximity of the site to a species’ known range.

3. Summarize all State and federal natural resource protection laws that may be relevant to the APE.

4. Identify and discuss Project impacts to biological resources likely to occur onsite within the context of CEQA and/or State or federal laws.

5. Identify and publish a set of avoidance and mitigation measures that would reduce impacts to a less - than-significant level (as identified by CEQA) and are generally consistent with recommendations of the resource agencies for affected biological resources.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 4

Figure 1. Regional Location

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 5

Figure 2. Topographic Quadrangle Map

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 6

Figure 3. Area of Potential Effect

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 7
Study Methodology
A reconnaissance -level field survey of the APE was conducted on April 7, 2022 by Provost & Pritchard biologists, Rene De La Fuente, Shaylea Stark, and Roman Endicott. The survey consisted of walking and driving thoroughly through the APE while identifying and noting land uses, biological habitats and communities, plant and animal species encountered and assessed for suitable habitats of various wildlife species. Additionally, a tree survey was conducted for the valley oak trees ( Quercus lobata) found within the APE (see Table 2 and Appendix E).

The biologists conducted an analysis of potential Project-related impacts to biological resources based on the resources known to exist or with potential to exist within the APE. Sources of information used in preparation of this analysis included: the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB); the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California; CalFlora’s online database of California native plants; the Jepson Herbarium online database (Jepson eFlora); United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS); Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system; iNaturalist, the NatureServe Explorer online database; the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Plants Database; CDFW California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWH R) database; the California Herps online database; and various manuals, reports, and references related to plants and animals of the Central Valley region.

The field survey conducted included the appropriate level of detail to assess the significance of potential impacts to sensitive biological resources resulting from the Project. Furthermore, the field survey was sufficient to generally describe those features of the Project that could be subject to the jurisdiction of federal and/or State agencies, such as the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), CDFW, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and used to support CEQA documents.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 8
II. Existing Conditions
Regional Setting
Topography
The APE is located in Tulare County southeast of the City of Visalia, California (see Figure 1 and Figure 2).

The APE would be annexed into the City of Visalia before construction of the Project begins. 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 336 to 348 feet.

Climate
Like most of California, the APE experiences a Mediterranean climate. Warm, dry summers are followed by cool, moist winters. Summer temperatures range between 70- and 80-degrees Fahrenheit (°F), but often exceeds 90°F in most parts of the county . Winter minimum temperatures are near 40 °F. The average annual precipitation is approximately 13 inches, falling mainly from October to May (WeatherWX, 2022).

Hydrology
The Middle Branch Cross Creek watershed 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. Farther downstream the Middle Fork Kaweah River combines with the Marble Fork Kaweah River and forms the start of the Kaweah River which then goes into Kaweah Lake which exits again as the Kaweah River. This river then receives inputs from Dry Creek, and Lane Slough before flow ing 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 furthe r downstream and connects to a canal that empties into the Tule River which terminates in a canal within the former Tulare Lake.

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 and the TID Canal that runs along the western portion of the APE.

Cameron Creek and the TID Canal did not have any visible water present during the survey.

Soils
Two soil mapping units representing two soil types were identified within the APE and are listed in Table 1.

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.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 9
Table 1. 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 Grangeville Sandy loam was the only soil map unit that was identified as hydric. Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions such that under sufficiently wet conditions, hydrophytic vegetation can be supported.

The complete Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey report is available in Appendix D at the end of this document.

Protected Trees
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. Results from the tree survey can be found in Table

2. 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 E.

Table 2. 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
Valley Oak
Tree #10 55.1 52.75 Yes

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 10
Biotic Habitats
Ruderal/Agricultural
The APE is located on private property used for walnut groves. The APE is dominated by English walnuts (Juglans regia) and valley oak (Quercus lobata). Herbaceous vegetation was dominated by common Stork’s bill (Erodium cicutarium), black mustard (Brassica nigra), wall barley (Hordeum murinum), and cheeseweed (Malva neglecta).

The survey of the APE resulted in the identification of numerus bird species including Killdeer (Melanerpes formicivorus), Canada Goose (Corvus corax), Mallard Duck (Sturnus vulgaris), Mourning Dove ( Zenaida macroura), Northern Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), Scrub Jay (Salpinctes obsoletus), Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), White-Crowned Sparrow (Sayornis saya), Tree Swallow (Tachycineta biolor), Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura), and Western Meadowlark ( Sturnella neglecta). The field survey was conducted during nesting bird season and one recently active Western Scrub Jay nest with eggshell debris was located in a large Valley Oak tree within the APE. The nest was observed for over 20 minutes with no signs of continued use after the young fledged and was then considered inactive.

Cameron Creek/TID Canal
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. Th ere were canine tracks near both the creek and canal that were consistent with that of a domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris).

Representative photographs of the APE and vicinity are available in

Appendix A at the end of this document.

Natural Communities of Special Concern
Natural communities of special concern are those that are of limited dist ribution, distinguished by significant biological diversity, or home to special status species. CDFW is responsible for the classification and mapping of all -natural communities in California. Just as the special status plant and animal species, these natu ral communities of special concern can be found within the CNDDB.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 11
According to CNDDB, there are no recorded observations of natural communities of special concern with potential to occur within the APE or vicinity. Additionally, no natural communities of special concern were observed during the biological survey.

Designated Critical Habitat of the APE
The 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 that may require special management and protection. According to CNDDB and IPaC, designated critical habitat is absent from the APE and vicinity.

Wildlife Movement Corridors
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 southeastern portion of the APE is adjacent to Cameron Creek which may serve as a wildlife movement corridor. There were canine tracks near the creek that were consistent with that of a domestic or stray dog.

Other species such as San Joaquin Kit Fox (SJKF) could also use this creek but would be considered transient.

There are no potential impacts based on Project activities that would limit wildlife movement. Cameron Creek runs along the eastern section to the southern section of the APE and continues past the APE.

Special Status Plants and Animals
California contains several “rare” plant and animal species. In this context, rare is defined as species known to have low populations or limited distributions. As the human population grows, urban expansion encroaches on the already-limited suitable habitat. This results in sensitive species becoming increasingly more vulnerable to extirpation. State and federal regulations have provided the CDFW and the USFWS with a mechanism for conserving and protecting the diversity of plant and animal species native to California. Numerous native plants and animals have been formally designated as “threatened” or “endangered” under State and federal endangered species legislation. Other formal designations include “candidate” for listing or “species of special concern” by CDFW. The CNPS has its list of native plants considered rare, threatened, or endange red. Collectively these plants and animals are referred to as “special status species.” This survey was conducted outside of the blooming season for most plants. Further investigation of special status plants is recommended to occur inside the plants’ blooming seasons.

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. Figure 2 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 3 and Table 4. Raw data obtained from CNDDB and IPaC is available in Appendix B and Appendix C 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.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 12
Table 3. 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 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
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
DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 13
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
through Contra Costa, Sacramento,
San Joaquin, and Solano Counties.
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, and occasionally takes
insects in flight. Prefers to roost in
rock crevices, but may also use tree
Possible. Multiple tree cavities were
present in an orchard within the APE.

The biological survey was conducted
during the day so nighttime surveys
would be needed to determine presence
or absence of this species. The only
DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 14
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
cavities, caves, bridges, and other
man-made structures.
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
DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 15
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
pools were not observed during the field
survey.

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.

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. 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
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.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 16
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
below 656 feet. Blooms February -
April.

There are no vernal pools or saline flat
areas that would be suitable habitat for
this species.

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.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 17
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
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.

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.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 18
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
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 below 2600 feet. Blooms
April – September.

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 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.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 19
Species Status Habitat Occurrence on Project Site
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)
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.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 20
Impacts and Mitigation
Significance Criteria
CEQA
General plans, area plans, and specific projects are subject to the provisions of CEQA. The purpose of CEQA is to assess the impacts of proposed projects on the environment prior to project implementation. Impacts to biological resources are just one type of environmental impact assessed under CEQA and vary from project to project in terms of scope and magnitude. Projects requiring removal of vegetation may result in the mortality or displacement of animals associated with this vegetation. Animals adapted to humans, roads, buildings, and pets may replace those species formerly occurring on a site. Plants and animals that are State and/or federally listed as threatened or endangered may be destroyed or displaced. Sensitive habitats such as wetlands and riparian woodlands may be altered or destroyed. Such impacts may be considered either “significant” or “less than significant” under CEQA. According to CEQA, Statute and Guidelines (Association of Environmental Professionals, 2022), “significant effect on the environment” means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project includin g land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic interest. Specific project impacts to biological resources may be considered “significant” if they would:
• Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS;
• 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 CDFW or USFWS; • 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;
• 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.
• Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or
• Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.

Furthermore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) states that a project may trigg er the requirement to make a “mandatory finding of significance” if the project has the potential to:

“Substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self -sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.”

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 21
Relevant Goals, Policies, and Laws
The APE falls within Tulare County but will be annexed into the City of Visalia before the start of the Project.

The City of Visalia is the only jurisdiction with current applicable goals, policies, and laws.

Visalia City General Plan

6.2 Water Resources
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 Op en Space diagram of this General Plan.

6.4 Biological Resources
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 Table 2 and Appendix E. If oak trees are to be removed, it must comply with the ordinance identified below.

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 DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 22
(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 habita t 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 requ ested 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 ins pect 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 based 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 ci ty 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 warranted. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.037 Mitigation requirements.

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)

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 23
Threatened and Endangered Species
Permits may be required from the USFWS and/or CDFW if activities associated with a project have the potential to result in the “take” of a species listed as threatened or endangered under the federal and/or state Endangered Species Acts. Take is defined by the State of California as “to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill” (California Fish and Game Code, Section 86). Take is more broadly defined by the federal Endangered Species Act to include “harm” (16 USC, Section 1532(19), 50 CFR, Section 17.3). CDFW and USFWS are responsible agencies under CEQA and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Both agencies review CEQA and NEPA documents in order to determine the adequacy of their treatment of endangered species issues and to make project-specific recommendations for their conservation.

Designated Critical Habitat
When species are listed as threatened or endangered, the USFWS often designates areas of “Critical Habitat” as defined by section 3(5)(A) of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Critical Habitat is a term defined in the ESA as a specific geographic area that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management and protection. Critical Habitat is a tool that supports the continued conservation of imperiled species by guiding cooperation with the federal government.

Designations only affect federal agency actions or federally funded or permitted activities. Critical Habitat does not prevent activities that occur within the designated area. Only activities that involve a federal permit, license, or funding and are likely to destroy or adversely modify Critical Habitat will be affected.

Migratory Birds
The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA: 16 USC 703 -712) prohibits killing, possessing, or trading in any bird species covered in one of four international conventions to which the U.S. is a party, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. The name of the act is misleading, as it actually covers almost all bird’s native to the U.S., even those that are non-migratory. The MBTA encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, and bird nests and eggs. Additionally, California Fish and Game Code makes it unlawful to take or possess any non-game bird covered by the MBTA (Section 3513), as well as any other native non-game bird (Section 3800).

Birds of Prey
Birds of prey are protected in Califor nia under provisions of Fish and Game Code (Section 3503.5), which states that it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes (hawks and eagles) or Strigiformes (owls), as well as their nests and eggs. The bald eagle and g olden eagle are afforded additional protection under the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC 668), which makes it unlawful to kill birds or their eggs.

Nesting Birds
In California, protection is afforded to the nests and eggs of all birds. California Fish and Game Code (Section 3503) states that it is “unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Breeding-season disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered a form of “take” by the CDFW.

Wetlands and other “Jurisdictional Waters”
Natural drainage channels and adjacent wetlands may be considered “waters of the U.S.” or “jurisdicti onal waters” subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE. The extent of jurisdiction has been defined in the Code of Federal Regulations but has also been subject to interpretation of the federal courts. Jurisdictional waters generally include:

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 24
• All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; • All interstate waters including interstate wetlands;
• All other waters s uch as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce; • All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the U.S. under the definition; • Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a)(1)-(4) (i.e., the bulleted items above).

As determined by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 2001 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC) decision, channels and wetlands isolated from other jurisdictional waters cannot be considered jurisdictional on the basis of their use, hypothetical or observed, by migratory birds.

Similarly, in its 2006 consolidated Carabell/Rapanos decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a significant nexus between a wetland and other navigable waters must exist for the wetland itself to be considered a navigable and therefore jurisdictional water. Furthermore, the Supreme Court clarified that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the USACE will not assert jurisdiction over ditches excavated wholly in and draining only uplands and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water.

The USACE regulates the filling or grading of Waters of the United States. under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The extent of jurisdiction within drainage channels is defined by “ordinary high-water marks” on opposing channel banks. All activities that involve the discharge of dredge or fill material into Waters of the United States are subject to the permit requirements of the USACE. Such permits are typically issued on the condition that the applicant agrees to provide mitigation that results in no net loss of wetland functions or values. No permit can be issued until the RWQCB issues a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (or waiver of such certification) verifying that the proposed activity will meet State water quality standards.

Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969, the SWRCB has regulatory authority to protect the water quality of all surface water and groundwater in the State of California (“Waters of the State”). Nine RWQCBs oversee water quality at the local and regional level. The RWQCB for a given region regulates discharges of fill or pollutants into Waters of the State through the issuance of various permits and orders.

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 Section 404 Clean Water Act permit. Discharges into all Waters of the State, even those that are not also Waters of the United States., require Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs), or waivers of WDRs, from the RWQCB. The RWQCB also administers the Construction Storm Water Program and the federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Projects that dist urb one acre or more of soil must obtain a Construction General Permit under the Construction Storm Water Program. A prerequisite for this permit is the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer. Projects that discharge wastewater, storm water, or other pollutants into a Water of the United States. may require a NPDES permit.

CDFW has jurisdiction over the bed and bank of natural drainages and lakes according to provisions of Section 1601 and 16 02 of the California Fish and Game Code. Activities that may substantially modify such waters through the diversion or obstruction of their natural flow, change or use of any material from their bed or bank, or the deposition of debris require a notification of a Lake or Streambed Alteration. If CDFW determines that the activity may adversely affect fish and wildlife resources, a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement will be prepared. Such an agreement typically stipulates those certain measures will be im plemented to protect the habitat values of the lake or drainage in question.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 25
Potentially Significant Project-Related Impacts and Mitigation Species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by CDFW or USFWS that have the potential to be impacted by the Project are identified below with corresponding mitigation measures.

Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance of Nesting Raptors, Migratory Birds, and Special Status Birds
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. Birds nesting within the APE during construction have the potential to be in jured or killed by Project -related activities. In addition to the direct “take” of nesting birds, nesting birds within the APE or adjacent areas could be disturbed by Project -related activities resulting in nest abandonment. Projects that adversely affect the nesting success of raptors and migratory birds or result in the mortality of individual birds is considered a violation of State and federal laws and are considered a potentially significant impact under CEQA.

Implementation of the following measures 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.

Mitigation. The following measures will be implemented prior to the start of construction:

Mitigation Measure BIO-1a (Avoidance): The Project’s construction activities will occur, if feasible, between September 16 and January 31 (outside of nesting bird season) in an effort to avoid impacts to nesting birds.

Mitigation Measure BIO -1b (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.

Mitigation Measure BIO -1c (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.

Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance of Bats
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 DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 26
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 the following measures 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.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2a (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.

Mitigation Measure BIO -2b (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 construction and be conducted by a qualified biologist within (7) seven days prior to tree removal.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2c (Establish Buffers): On discovery of any bat roosts near work areas, a qualified biologist should determine appropriate construction setback distances (buffer zones) based 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 impacted by construction.

Mitigation Measure BIO –2d ( Operational Hours ): Construction activities will be limited to daylight hours to reduce potential impacts to special status bats that could be foraging onsite.

Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance of Northern California legless lizard The APE contains suitable habitat for the species, Northern California legless lizard. The biological survey was conducted during the daytime and no individuals were observed. This species is known to forage in loose soil and leaf litter during the day and is occasionally observed on the surface at dusk and at night. There are multiple areas within the APE with leaf litter that would be suitable habitat for the species. Projects that adversely affect the success or result in the mortality of individual special status herpetofauna is considered a violation of State and federal laws and are considered a potentially significant impact under CEQA.

Implementation of the following measures will reduce potential impacts to special status herpetofauna, including Northern California legless lizard, to a less than significant level under CEQA will ensure compliance with State and federal laws protecting these herpetofauna species.

Mitigation. The following measures would be implemented prior to the start of construction:

Mitigation Measure BIO-3a (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.

Mitigation Measure BIO -3b ( Pre-construction Surveys): If activities must o ccur 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.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 27
Mitigation Measure BIO-3c (Consulting Agencies): On discovery of any lizards, the biologist will consult CDFW and/or USFWS to determine adequate buffers and mitigation since no guidelines currently exist for this species.

Less Than Significant Project-Related Impacts
Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Animal Species Absent From, or Unlikely to Occur on, the Project Site
Of the 23 regionally occurring special status animal species, 21 are considered absent from or unlikely to occur within the APE due to past or ongoing disturbance and/or the abs ence of suitable habitat. These species include: American badger, blunt-nosed leopard lizard, Burring Owl, California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, Delta smelt, foothill yellow-legged frog, hardhead, giant gartersnake, Loggerhead Shrike, northern leopard frog , pallid bat , San Joaquin kit fox, Tipton kangaroo rat, Tricolored Blackbird, Valley elderberry longhorn beetle, vernal pool fairy shrimp, vernal pool tadpole shrimp, western mastiff bat, western pond turtle, western spadefoot, and Western Yellow-Billed Cuckoo.

Since it is unlikely that these species would occur onsite, implementation of the Project would have no impact on these 21 special status species through construction mortality, disturbance, or loss of habitat. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Plant Species Absent From, or Unl ikely to Occur on, the Project Site
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, calico 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 sunburst, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, Sanford’s Arrowhead, spiny-sepaled button -celery, stiped adobe -lily, subtle orache, vernal pool, and Winter’s sunflower.

Since it is unlikely that these species would occur onsite, implementation of the Project would have no impact on these 22 special status species through construction mortality, disturbance, or loss of habitat. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Fishes Absent From, or Unlikely to Occur on, the Project Site
There are no records of observations of Delta smelt in CNDDB within the quad search of the Project.

However, Delta smelt was listed in the IPaC report as Federally Threatened. There is final critical habitat for this species, but the location of the critical habitat is not available.

At the time of the survey, special status fishes are not considered present or likely to occur within the APE.

Mitigation measures are not warranted.

Project-Related Impacts to Riparian Habitat and Natural Communities of Special Concern
There are no CNDDB -designated “natural communities of special concern” recorded within the APE or surrounding lands. Mitigation is not warranted.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 28
Project-Related Impacts to Regulated Waters, Wetlands, and Water Quality 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 th e 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.

Project-Related Impacts to Wildlife Movement Corridors and Native Wildlif e Nursery Sites
The APE does contain features that would be likely to function as wildlife movement corridors. However, the APE and surrounding lands are very open and expansive, and it is unlikely construction would affect animal dispersion. Therefore, th e Project will have no impact on wildlife movement corridors, and no additional mitigation measures are warranted.

Project-Related Impacts to Critical Habitat
Designated critical habitat is absent from the APE and surrounding lands. Therefore, there will be no impact to critical habitat, and mitigation is not warranted.

Local Policies or Habitat Conservation Plans
The Project appears to be consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Visalia General Plan. The Project does intend to remove or disturb oak trees. If trees were to be removed appropriate tree removal permits and mitigation would be required based on the City of Visalia Oak Tree Ordinance. There are no known habitat conservation plans or a Natural Community Conservation Plans in the APE.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 29
III. References
Association of Environmental Professionals. (2022). 2022 California Environmnetal Quality Act Statute & Guidelines. Retrieved April 2022
Baldwin, B., Goldman, D. H., Keil, D., Patterson, R., Rosatti, T., & Wilken, D. (2012). The Jepson Manual; Vascular Plants of California, second edition. Berkeley: University of California Press. Retrieved April 2022 Calflora. (2022). Retrieved April 2022, from Calflora Information on California Plants for Education, Research and Conservation: http://www.calflora.org/
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. (2012). Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. Retrieved April 2022
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. (2022). California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Retrieved April 2022
California Native Plant Society. (2022). Retrieved April 2022, from Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/ Department of Water resources (DWR). (2016). Bulletin 118: California's Groundwater, Interim Update. Retrieved May 2022
DWR. (2022). Retrieved April 2022, from Groundwater Basin Boundary Assessment Tool (BBAT):
http://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bbat/
eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology. (2022). Retrieved April 2022, from eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance: https://ebird.org/
Jepson Flora Project (eds.). (2022). Retrieved April 2022, from Jepson eFlora:
http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/
Nafis, G. (2022). Retrieved April 2022, from CaliforniaHerps: A Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of California: http://www.californiaherps.com/
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map. (2022). Retrieved April 2022, from http://fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html
NatureServe Explorer. (2022). An Online Encyclopedia of Life. Retrieved April 2022, from http://explorer.natureserve.org/
Shuford, W., & Gardali, T. (2008). California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1.

Camarillo and Sacramento, CA: Western Field Ornithologists and California Department of Fish and Game. Retrieved May 2022
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). (2019, April). State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. Retrieved April 2022 DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 30
Swainson's Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. (2000, May). Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley. CA: CDFW. Retrieved April 2022 The California Burrowing Owl Consortium. (1993). Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines.

Retrieved May 2022
The City of Visalia. (2022). General Plan. Retrieved May 2022, from The City of Visalia:
https://www.visalia.city/depts/community_development/planning/gp.asp The City of Visalia. (2022). Valley Oak Tree Ordinance. Retrieved May 2022, from The City of Visalia:
https://www.visalia.city/depts/public_works/urban_forestry/valley_oak_ordinance_.asp United States Army Corps of Engineers. (1987). Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Department of the Army. Retrieved May 2022
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Recources Conservation Service. (2019). The Plants Database. Retrieved April 2022, from http://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/ United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). (2022). Custom Soil Resources Report, California. Retrieved April 2022, from http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2022). Retrieved April 2022, from Waters GeoViewer:
https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-geoviewer
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. (1998). Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, California. Retrieved April 2022
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. (2022). Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). Retrieved April 2022, from https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. (2022). Information on Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Retrieved April 2022, from https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
WeatherWX. (2022). Tulare County, California Climate Averages. Retrieved May 2022, from Tulare County, California Climate Averages: https://www.weatherwx.com/hazardoutlook/ca/tulare+county.html Wilkerson, R., & Siegel, R. (2010). Assessing changes in the distribution and abundance of burrowing owls in California, 1993-2007. Bird Populations, 10:1-36. Retrieved May 2022

DR HORTON

PEARL WOODS SUBDIVISION PROJECT

Appendix A: Photos of the
Project Area

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Attachment A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-1

Photograph 1
The northwestern section of
the APE was being disced at
the time of the survey. An
indication that this area is
subject to frequent disturb-
ance.

Photograph 2
Overview of the APE.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Attachment A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-2

Photograph 3
Another overview of the
APE.

Photograph 4
The Tulare Irrigation Dis-
trict Canal that runs along
the western portion of the
APE. A bridge will be built
across this section of the ca-
nal.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Attachment A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-3

Photograph 5
The northern boundary of
the APE. Photo taken facing
west.

Photograph 6
The western boundary of the
APE. Photo taken facing
north.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Attachment A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-4

Photograph 7
The southern boundary of
the APE. Photo taken facing
east.

Photograph 8
The eastern boundary of the
APE. Photo taken facing
south.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Attachment A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-5

Photograph 9
Overview of an orchard
found within the APE.

Photograph 10
Example of a tree within the
orchard that has cavities.

Trees with cavities could
potentially be used by roost-
ing bats or nesting birds.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Attachment A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-6

Photograph 11
Overview of Cameron Creek
that was dry at the time of
the biological survey. The
creek runs along the eastern
and southern boundaries of
the APE.

Photograph 12
Overview of a small mam-
mal burrow consistent with
California ground squirrel
present within the Action
APE.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Attachment A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-7

Photograph 13
A valley oak tree (Quercus
lobata) within the APE lo-
cated along the southern
boundary next to Cameron
Creek. All oak trees within
the APE were measured for
diameter at breast height
(DBH).

Photograph 14
Another example of valley
oak trees found within the
APE.

DR Horton
Pearl Woods Subdivision Attachment A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-8

Photograph 15
Surrounding agricultural
orchards outside of the APE.

Photograph 16
Surrounding residential de-
velopment adjacent to the
northern boundary of the
APE.

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 1

DR HORTON

PEARL WOODS SUBDIVISION PROJECT

Appendix B: CNDDB 12-
Quad Search

Species
Element Code
Federal Status
State Status
Global Rank
State Rank
Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
alkali-sink goldfields
Lasthenia chrysantha
PDAST5L030
None
None
G2
S2
1B.1
American badger
Taxidea taxus
AMAJF04010
None
None
G5
S3
SSC
An andrenid bee
Andrena macswaini
IIHYM35130
None
None
G2
S2
brittlescale
Atriplex depressa
PDCHE042L0
None
None
G2
S2
1B.2
burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
ABNSB10010
None
None
G4
S3
SSC
calico monkeyflower
Diplacus pictus
PDSCR1B240
None
None
G2
S2
1B.2
California alkali grass
Puccinellia simplex
PMPOA53110
None
None
G3
S2
1B.2
California jewelflower
Caulanthus californicus
PDBRA31010
Endangered
Endangered
G1
S1
1B.1
California linderiella
Linderiella occidentalis
ICBRA06010
None
None
G2G3
S2S3
California satintail
Imperata brevifolia
PMPOA3D020
None
None
G4
S3
2B.1
California tiger salamander - central California DPS
Ambystoma californiense pop. 1
AAAAA01181
Threatened
Threatened
G2G3T3
S3
WL
Coulter's goldfields
Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri
PDAST5L0A1
None
None
G4T2
S2
1B.1
Crotch bumble bee
Bombus crotchii
IIHYM24480
None
None
G2
S1S2
Earlimart orache
Atriplex cordulata var. erecticaulis
PDCHE042V0
None
None
G3T1
S1
1B.2
foothill yellow-legged frog
Rana boylii
AAABH01050
None
Endangered
G3
S3
SSC
great blue heron
Ardea herodias
ABNGA04010
None
None
G5
S4
Great Valley Valley Oak Riparian Forest
Great Valley Valley Oak Riparian Forest
CTT61430CA
None
None
G1
S1.1
Greene's tuctoria
Tuctoria greenei
PMPOA6N010
Endangered
Rare
G1
S1
1B.1
Query Criteria:

Quad IS (Visalia (3611933) OR Exeter (3611932) OR Traver (3611944) OR Monson (3611943) OR Ivanhoe (3611942) OR Woodlake (3611941) OR Rocky Hill (3611931) OR Lindsay (3611921) OR Cairns Corner (3611922) OR Tulare (3611923) OR Paige (3611924) OR Goshen (3611934))
Report Printed on Tuesday, April 05, 2022

Page 1 of 3 ends

Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Common Name
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database

Species
Element Code
Federal Status
State Status
Global Rank
State Rank
Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
heartscale
Atriplex cordulata var. cordulata
PDCHE040B0
None
None
G3T2
S2
1B.2
Hoover's spurge
Euphorbia hooveri
PDEUP0D150
Threatened
None
G1
S1
1B.2
Hopping's blister beetle
Lytta hoppingi
IICOL4C010
None
None
G1G2
S1S2
Kaweah brodiaea
Brodiaea insignis
PMLIL0C060
None
Endangered
G1
S1
1B.2
lesser saltscale
Atriplex minuscula
PDCHE042M0
None
None
G2
S2
1B.1
loggerhead shrike
Lanius ludovicianus
ABPBR01030
None
None
G4
S4
SSC
molestan blister beetle
Lytta molesta
IICOL4C030
None
None
G2
S2
Moody's gnaphosid spider
Talanites moodyae
ILARA98020
None
None
G1G2
S1S2
Northern California legless lizard
Anniella pulchra
ARACC01020
None
None
G3
S3
SSC
Northern Claypan Vernal Pool
Northern Claypan Vernal Pool
CTT44120CA
None
None
G1
S1.1
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
CTT44110CA
None
None
G3
S3.1
northern leopard frog
Lithobates pipiens
AAABH01170
None
None
G5
S2
SSC
pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus
AMACC10010
None
None
G4
S3
SSC
recurved larkspur
Delphinium recurvatum
PDRAN0B1J0
None
None
G2?
S2?
1B.2
San Joaquin adobe sunburst
Pseudobahia peirsonii
PDAST7P030
Threatened
Endangered
G1
S1
1B.1
San Joaquin kit fox
Vulpes macrotis mutica
AMAJA03041
Endangered
Threatened
G4T2
S2
San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass
Orcuttia inaequalis
PMPOA4G060
Threatened
Endangered
G1
S1
1B.1
Sanford's arrowhead
Sagittaria sanfordii
PMALI040Q0
None
None
G3
S3
1B.2
spiny-sepaled button-celery
Eryngium spinosepalum
PDAPI0Z0Y0
None
None
G2
S2
1B.2
striped adobe-lily
Fritillaria striata
PMLIL0V0K0
None
Threatened
G1
S1
1B.1
subtle orache
Atriplex subtilis
PDCHE042T0
None
None
G1
S1
1B.2
Report Printed on Tuesday, April 05, 2022

Page 2 of 3 ends

Species
Element Code
Federal Status
State Status
Global Rank
State Rank
Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Swainson's hawk
Buteo swainsoni
ABNKC19070
None
Threatened
G5
S3
Sycamore Alluvial Woodland
Sycamore Alluvial Woodland
CTT62100CA
None
None
G1
S1.1
Tipton kangaroo rat
Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides
AMAFD03152
Endangered
Endangered
G3T1T2
S1S2
tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
ABPBXB0020
None
Threatened
G1G2
S1S2
SSC
Tulare cuckoo wasp
Chrysis tularensis
IIHYM72010
None
None
G1G2
S1S2
valley elderberry longhorn beetle
Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
IICOL48011
Threatened
None
G3T2T3
S3
Valley Sacaton Grassland
Valley Sacaton Grassland
CTT42120CA
None
None
G1
S1.1
vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
ICBRA03030
Threatened
None
G3
S3
vernal pool smallscale
Atriplex persistens
PDCHE042P0
None
None
G2
S2
1B.2
vernal pool tadpole shrimp
Lepidurus packardi
ICBRA10010
Endangered
None
G4
S3S4
western mastiff bat
Eumops perotis californicus
AMACD02011
None
None
G4G5T4
S3S4
SSC
western pond turtle
Emys marmorata
ARAAD02030
None
None
G3G4
S3
SSC
western spadefoot
Spea hammondii
AAABF02020
None
None
G2G3
S3
SSC
western yellow-billed cuckoo
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
ABNRB02022
Threatened
Endangered
G5T2T3
S1
Winter's sunflower
Helianthus winteri
PDAST4N260
None
None
G2?
S2?
1B.2
Record Count: 54
Report Printed on Tuesday, April 05, 2022

Page 3 of 3 ends

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 2

DR HORTON

PEARL WOODS SUBDIVISION PROJECT

Appendix C: IPaC Search

April 26, 2022
United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
Phone: (916) 414-6600 Fax: (916) 414-6713
In Reply Refer To:

Project Code: 2022-0035894
Project Name: Pearl Woods Subdivision

Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:

The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.

The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat.

A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) 04/26/2022 2

(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.

If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project-related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.

The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan (when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to- birds.php.

In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/ executive-orders/e0-13186.php.

We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.
04/26/2022 3

▪
Attachment(s):

Official Species List
04/26/2022 1

Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".

This species list is provided by:

Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
(916) 414-6600
04/26/2022 2

Project Summary
Project Code: 2022-0035894
Event Code: None
Project Name: Pearl Woods Subdivision
Project Type: New Constr - Above Ground
Project Description: New subdivision will be constructed within the project area.

Project Location:

Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@36.307298,-119.25014188158121,14z
Counties: Tulare County, California
04/26/2022 3

1. Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 8 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.

Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.

IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.

See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

Mammals

NAME STATUS
San Joaquin Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis mutica
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2873
Endangered
Tipton Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7247
Endangered
Reptiles

NAME STATUS
Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard Gambelia silus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/625
Endangered
Giant Garter Snake Thamnophis gigas
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4482
Threatened
1 04/26/2022 4

Amphibians

NAME STATUS
California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense
Population: U.S.A. (Central CA DPS)
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2076
Threatened
Fishes

NAME STATUS
Delta Smelt Hypomesus transpacificus
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/321
Threatened
Insects

NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate
Crustaceans

NAME STATUS
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.

Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened
Critical habitats

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION.
04/26/2022 5

IPaC User Contact Information
Agency: Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Name: Rene De La Fuente
Address: 400 E Main St
Address Line 2: 3rd Floor
City: Visalia
State: CA
Zip: 93291
Email [email protected]
Phone: 5623602972

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 3

DR HORTON

PEARL WOODS SUBDIVISION PROJECT

Appendix D: NRCS Soils
Report

United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Tulare County,
Western Part,
California
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
April 26, 2022
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.

They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.

Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.

The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 Contents
Preface.................................................................................................................... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Tulare County, Western Part, California..........................................................13 122—Grangeville sandy loam, drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes....................13 130—Nord fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes..................................... 14 References............................................................................................................17 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).

Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.

The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.

These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.

Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report
7 Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4020000 4020100 4020200 4020300 4020400 4020500 4020600 4020700 4020800 4020000 4020100 4020200 4020300 4020400 4020500 4020600 4020700 4020800 297400 297500 297600 297700 297800 297900 298000 298100 298200 298300 298400 298500 298600 297300 297400 297500 297600 297700 297800 297900 298000 298100 298200 298300 298400 298500 298600 36° 18' 40'' N
119° 15' 27'' W
36° 18' 40'' N
119° 14' 33'' W
36° 18' 12'' N
119° 15' 27'' W
36° 18' 12'' N
119° 14' 33'' W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0 250 500 1000 1500
Feet
0 50 100 200 300
Meters
Map Scale: 1:6,170 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Tulare County, Western Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 3, 2021
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jan 30, 2021—Feb 6, 2021
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report
10 Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 122 Grangeville sandy loam,
drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes

45.0 59.8%
130 Nord fine sandy loam, 0 to 2
percent slopes

30.2 40.2%
Totals for Area of Interest 75.2 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.

Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, Custom Soil Resource Report
11 onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.

Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.

These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.

The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report
12 Tulare County, Western Part, California
122—Grangeville sandy loam, drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hp4s
Elevation: 190 to 400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 to 275 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex, linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granitic rock sources Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 16 inches: sandy loam
Bg - 16 to 27 inches: sandy loam
2C - 27 to 67 inches: stratified loamy sand to silt loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Negligible
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Gypsum, maximum content: 1 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 4.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY906CA - Non-Alkali San Joaquin Valley Desert Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
13 Minor Components
Yettem
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Grangeville, saline-sodic
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: Yes
Nord
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
130—Nord fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hp51
Elevation: 190 to 520 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 250 to 275 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season
Map Unit Composition
Nord and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report
14 Description of Nord
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex, linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 11 inches: fine sandy loam
C1 - 11 to 38 inches: stratified sandy loam to loam
C2 - 38 to 50 inches: stratified loamy coarse sand to coarse sandy loam 2Btb - 50 to 72 inches: stratified sandy loam to silt loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches; More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Negligible
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Very rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 4 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R017XY906CA - Non-Alkali San Joaquin Valley Desert Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Grangeville, saline-sodic
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: Yes
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
15 Tagus
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Fan remnants
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Akers
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Fan remnants
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Colpien
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Fan remnants
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
16 References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 17 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
18 Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 4

DR HORTON

PEARL WOODS SUBDIVISION PROJECT

Appendix E: Oak Tree
Ordinance Map

Appendices
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 C-1
Appendix C: Cultural Resources Study

PHASE I SURVEY,

PEARL WOODS SUBDIVISION PROJECT,

TULARE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Prepared for:

Jarred Olsen
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
130 N. Garden Street
Visalia, CA 93291-6362

Prepared by:

Peter A. Carey, M.A., RPA

David S. Whitley, Ph.D., RPA
and

Robert Azpitarte, B.A.

ASM Affiliates, Inc.
20424 West Valley Blvd., Suite A
Tehachapi, California 93561

July 2022

PN 36510.20

Table of Contents
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ......................................................................................... iii

1. INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY CONTEXT ...................................... 1

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION ................................. 1

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................... 2

1.3 REGULATORY CONTEXT ........................................................................................ 2

1.3.1 California Environmental Quality Act .................................................................. 2

2. ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL BACKGROUND .............................. 5

2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND AND GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL
SENSITIVITY .............................................................................................................. 5

2.2 ETHNOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND .......................................................................... 5

2.3 PRE-CONTACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ........................................ 7

2.4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND................................................................................ 10

3. ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH AND TRIBAL CORRESPONDENCE .. 13

3.1 ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH ............................................................................ 13

3.2 TRIBAL CORRESPONDENCE ................................................................................ 14

4. METHODS AND RESULTS ................................................................................ 15

4.1 FIELD METHODS ..................................................................................................... 15

4.2 SURVEY RESULTS .................................................................................................. 15

5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................... 17

5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ 17 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 19 CONFIDENTIAL APPENDICES .................................................................................. 23 Confidential Appendix A: Records Search and Tribal Correspondence

Table of Contents
ii Pearl Woods Subdivision Project

LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure 1. Location of the Pearl Woods Subdivision Project, Tulare County, California. ............................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2. Overview of Project study area from the approximate center , looking southwest............................................................................................................... 16 Figure 3. Overview of Project study area from the southwest corner, looking east - northeast ................................................................................................................ 16

LIST OF TABLES

Page
Table 1. Survey Reports within 0.5-mi of the Study Area. ................................................. 13 Table 2. Resources within 0.5-mi of the Study Area. ......................................................... 14

Management Summary
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project iii

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
A Phase I cultural resources survey was conducted for the Pearl Woods Subdivision Project (Project). The Project area totals approximately 68-acres (ac) and consists of active almond and walnut orchards and fallow agricultural fields at the southeast end of, and just outside , the city limits of Visalia, Tulare County, California. Specifically, the proposed Project is located in Section 3, Township 18 South, Range 25 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDBM). The Phase I survey included background research and an intensive pedestrian survey of the entire Project area.

ASM Affiliates, Inc. (ASM) conducted this study, with David S. Whitley, Ph.D., RPA, serving as Principal Investigator. The study was undertaken to assist with compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

A records search of site files and maps related to the Project area and a 0.5 -mile (mi) radius surrounding it was obtained by ASM on May 16, 2022, from the Southern San Joaquin Valley Archaeological Information Center (IC), California S tate University, Bakersfield. The search results indicated the Project area had not been previously surveyed. The results indicated that one linear resource (P-54-004877, Cameron Creek) intersected the study area; however, this was due to inaccuracies in the plotted location, and it is actually entirely outside of the study area. An additional five previous studies had been completed within 0.5-mi of the study area, resulting in the recordation of six cultural resources within that outer radius.

A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was requested on May 2, 2022 and received on June 29, 2022. The search was negative for sacred sites and tribal cultural resources. ASM sent outreach letters prior to the receipt of the contact list from the NAHC based on a previous contact list from the area. The letters were sent on June 13, 2022.

One additional tribe was listed on the contact list received on June 29, 2022, North Fork Mono Tribe, and a letter was sent out that same day to the tribe. As of the writing of this report no responses of been received from any of the contacted tribes.

The Phase I survey fieldwork was conducted on June 15, 2022. The entire 68-ac Project area was surveyed in parallel transects spaced at 15-meter (m) intervals. ASM did not identify any cultural or built environment resources within the Project study area. Cameron Creek (P -54-004877), which was identified by the IC as bisecting the study area, does not exist within the Project area limits.

Based on these findings, the development o f the Pearl Woods Subdivision Project will not result in adverse impacts to known significant or unique cultural resources as defined by CEQA . It is recommended, however, that an archaeologist be contacted in the unlikely event that cultural resources are uncovered during the development or use of the property to evaluate the discovery.

1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 1

1. INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY CONTEXT
ASM Affiliates, Inc. (ASM) was retained by Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group to conduct a Phase I cultural resources s tudy for the Pearl Woods Subdivision Project (Project), located in Tulare County, California (Figure 1). The study was undertaken to assist with compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The investigation was conducted, specifically, to ensure that significant impacts or adverse effects to historical resources do not occur as a result of Project construction.

This current study included:
• A background records search and literature review to determine i f any known cultural resources were present in the study area and/or whether the area had been previously and systematically studied by archaeologists; and,
• An intensive pedestrian inventory of the Project area to identify and record previously undiscovered cultural resources.

David S. Whitley, Ph.D., RPA, served as principal i nvestigator. ASM Associate Archaeologist Robert Azpitarte, B.A., led the fieldwork effort, with assistance in the field from ASM Assistant Archaeologist Margarita Lemus, B.A.

This document constitutes a report on the Phase I survey. Subsequent chapters provide background to the investigation including historic context studies , the findings of the archival records search, Native American correspondence, field methodology, and the fieldwork results. We conclude with management recommendations for the Project area. The records search results and Native American correspondence are included as Confidential Appendix A

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
The Project is located immediately southeast of the city limits of Visalia, Tulare County, California. Specifically, the proposed Project is located in Section 3, Township 18 South, Range 25 East, MDBM, as illustrated on the USGS Visalia and Exeter, California 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. This places the proposed Project on the open flats of the San Joaquin Valley.

Elevation within the Project parcel, which is flat, ranges from 340-feet (ft) above mean sea level (amsl).

The study area is located around the southwest corner of South McAuliff Street and East Cherry Avenue. To the north are both existing and currently in construction residential subdivisions and to the east, west, and south are orchards and undeveloped land. The Southern Pacific Railroad parallels the south side of the southern boundary of the study area, and the Tulare Irrigation Canal is located just outside of the study area on the west. The study area contours along the north bank of Cameron Creek at the southeast corner and the creek parallels the east end of the southern boundary to approximately the midway point before continuing southwest. Currently, the parcel consists of active almond and walnut orchards and agricultural roads.

1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
2 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project involves the subdivision and development of the property into 273 single-family residences. The Project would require to be pre-zoned to R 1 5 and annexed into the City of Visalia.

Additionally, pursuant to the General Plan and the Waterways and Trails Master Plan, the Project proposes to dedicate the subject property’s portion of the Segment 4 Preferred Trail Alignment.

The project proposes a regional -serving stormwater drainage basin with its watershed being the quarter-section in which this p roject is located. This location reduces the necessity of further - increasing diameter storm mains at further -increasing depths, in addition to avoiding crossing under a railroad. Adjacent to the above-mentioned basin and trail, the Project proposes a Gener al Plan-designated Neighborhood Park. The park and basin would be approximately 8.96-ac in size.

1.3 REGULATORY CONTEXT

1.3.1 California Environmental Quality Act

CEQA is applicable to discretionary actions by state or local lead agencies. Under CEQA, lead agencies must analyze impacts to cultural resources. Significant impacts under CEQA occur when “historically significant” or “unique” cultural resources are adversely affected, which occurs when such resources could be altered or destroyed through project implementation. Historically significant cultural resources are defined by eligibility for or by listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). In practice, the federal National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) criteria (below) for significance applied under Section 106 are generally (although not entirely) consistent with CRHR criteria (see PRC § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852 and § 15064.5(a)(3)).

Significant cultural resources are those archaeological resources and historical properties that:
(A) Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; (B) Are associated with the lives of persons important in our past; (C) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of an important creative individual, or possess high artistic values; or
(D) Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Unique resources under CEQA, in slight contrast, are those that represent:

An archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly d emonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
(1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information. (2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.

1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 3
(3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or histor ic event or person (PRC § 21083.2(g)).

Preservation in place is the preferred approach under CEQA to mitigating adverse impacts to significant or unique cultural resources.

1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
4 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project

Figure 1. Location of the Pearl Woods Subdivision Project study area, Tulare County, California.

2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 5

2. ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL

BACKGROUND

2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND AND

GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY
The elevation of the Project area, which is flat, is approximately 340-ft amsl on the open flats of the San Joaquin Valley just southeast of Visalia, Tulare County, California. Currently, this region can be characterized as a dry open valley bottom now utilized for agriculture. Prior to reclamation and channelization, the region would have been a low -lying, water-rich area characterized by streams, sloughs, marshes, and swamps. Occasionally inundated by floodwaters, in many years portions of this region would have been swampy during the winter rainy season and marsh land during other parts of the year. Historical and recent land use has changed the vegetation that was once present within and near the Project area. The immediate Project location historically most likely fell within the Valley Grassland community, however, with Riparian Wo odlands present along streams and freshwater marshes common in the area (see Schoenherr 1992).

A Caltrans geoarchaeological study that included the Project area classified this location as having Moderately High to Very High sensitivity for subsurface si tes (Meyer et al. 2010). This study involved first determining the location and ages of late Pleistocene (>25,000 years old) landforms in the southern San Joaquin Valley. These were identified by combining a synthesis of 2,400 published paleontological, soils , and archaeological chronometric dates with geoarchaeological field testing. The ages of surface landforms were then mapped to provide an assessment for the potential for buried archaeological deposits. These ages were derived primarily from the Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) and the State Soils Geographic (STATSGO) database.

A series of maps were created from this information that ranked locations in seven ordinal classes for sensitivity for buried soils, from Very Low to Very High. Based on the maps, the Project study area is located in a region with Moderately High sensitivity for buried sites.

2.2 ETHNOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND
Penutian-speaking Yokuts tribal groups occupied the southern San Joaquin Valley region and much of the nearby Sierra Nevada. Ethnographic information about the Yokuts was collected primarily by Powers (1971, 1976 [originally 1877]), Kroeber (1925), Gayton (1930, 1948), Driver (1937), Latta (1977), and Harrington (n.d.). For a variety of historical reasons, existing research information emphasizes the central Yokuts tribes who occupied both the valley and particularly the foothills of the Sierra. The northernmost tribes suffered from the influx of Euro-Americans during the Gold Rush and their populations were in sub stantial decline by the time ethnographic studies began in the early twentieth century. In contrast, the southernmost tribes were partially removed by the Spanish to missions and eventually absorbed into multi-tribal communities on the Sebastian Indian Res ervation (on Tejon Ranch), and later the Tule River Reservation and Santa Rosa Rancheria to the north. The result is an unfortunate scarcity of ethnographic detail on southern Valley tribes, especially in relation to the rich information collected from the central foothills tribes where native speakers of the Yokuts dialects are still found. Regardless, the general

2. Environmental and Cultural Background
6 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project
details of indigenous lifeways were similar across the broad expanse of Yokuts territory, particularly in terms of environmentally influenced subsistence and adaptation and with regard to religion and belief, which were similar everywhere.

This scarcity of specific detail is particularly apparent in terms of southern valley tribal group distribution. Kroeber (1925), Gayton (1948) and Latta (1977) place the Project area in Telamni territory, and none of them locate historical villages in the general area, however, with village locations instead concentrated to the east, in the foothills, or west, closer to the Tulare Lake shore.

The Yokuts settlement pattern was largely consistent, regardless of specific tribe involved. Winter villages were typically located along lakeshores and major stream courses (as these existed circa AD 1800), with dispersal phase family camps located at elevated spots on the valley floor and near gathering areas in the foothills.

Most Yokuts groups, again regardless of specific tribal affiliation, were organized as a recognized and distinct tribelet; a circumstance that almost certainly pertained to the tribal groups noted above.

Tribelets were land -owning groups organized around a central village and linked by shared territory and descent from a common ancestor. The population of most tribelets ranged from about 150 to 500 peoples (Kroeber 1925).

Each tribelet was headed by a chief who was assisted by a variety of assistants, the most important of whom was the winatum , a herald or messenger and assistant chief. A shaman also served as religious officer. While shamans did not have any direct political authority, as Gayton (1930) has illustrated, they maintained substantial influence within their tribelet.

Shamanism is a religious system common to most Native American tribes. It involves a direct and personal relationship between the individual and the supernatural w orld enacted by entering a trance or hallucinatory state (usually based on the ingestion of psychotropic plants, such as jimsonweed or more typically native tobacco). Shamans were considered individuals with an unusual degree of supernatural power, serving as healers or curers, diviners, and controllers of natural phenomena (such as rain or thunder). Shamans also produced the rock art of this region, depicting the visions they experienced in vision quests believed to represent their spirit helpers and events in the supernatural realm (Whitley 1992, 2000).

The centrality of shamanism to the religious and spiritual life of the Yokuts was demonstrated by the role of shamans in the yearly ceremonial round. The ritual round, performed the same each year, started in the spring with the jimsonweed ceremony, followed by rattlesnake dance and (where appropriate) first salmon ceremony. After returning from seed camps, fall rituals began in the late summer with the mourning ceremony, followed by first seed and acorn rites and then bear dance (Gayton 1930:379). In each case, shamans served as ceremonial officials responsible for specific dances involving a display of their supernatural powers (Kroeber 1925).

Subsistence practices varied from tribelet to tribelet based o n the environment of residence.

Throughout Native California, and Yokuts territory in general, the acorn was a primary dietary component, along with a variety of gathered seeds. Valley tribes augmented this resource with lacustrine and riverine foods, especially fish and wildfowl. As with many Native California tribes, the settlement and subsistence rounds included the winter aggregation into a few large villages,

2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 7
where stored resources (like acorns) served as staples, followed by dispersal into smaller cam ps, often occupied by extended families, where seasonally available resources would be gathered and consumed.

Although population estimates vary and population size was greatly affected by the introduction of Euro-American diseases and social disruption, the Yokuts were one of the largest, most successful groups in Native California. Cook (1978) estimates that the Yokuts region contained 27 percent of the aboriginal population in the state at the time of contact; other estimates are even higher. Many Yokuts people continue to reside in the southern San Joaquin Valley today, including at the nearby Santa Rosa Rancheria.

2.3 PRE-CONTACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
The southern San Joaquin Valley region has received minimal archaeological attention compared to other areas of the state. In part, this is because the majority of California archaeological work has concentrated in the Sacramento Delta, Santa Barbara Channel, and central Mojave Desert areas (see Moratto 1984). Although knowledge of the region’s prehistory is limited, enough is known to determine that the archaeological record is broadly similar to south -central California as a whole (see Gifford and Schenk 1926; Hewes 1941; Wedel 1941; Fenenga 1952; Elsasser 1962; Fredrickson and Grossman 1977; Schiffma n and Garfinkel 1981). Based on these sources, the general prehistory of the region can be outlined as follows.

Initial occupation of the region occurred at least as early as the Paleoindian Period, or prior to about 10,000 years before present (YBP). Evi dence of early use of the region is indicated by characteristic fluted and stemmed points found around the margin of Tulare Lake, in the foothills of the Sierra, and in the Mojave Desert proper.

Both fluted and stemmed points are particularly common around lake margins, suggesting a terminal Pleistocene/early Holocene lakeshore adaptation similar to that found throughout the far west at the same time; little else is known about these earliest peoples. Over 250 fluted points have been recovered from the Wit t Site (CA -KIN-32), located along the western shorel ine of ancient Tulare Lake west of the Project area, demonstrating the importance of this early occupation in the San Joaquin Valley specifically (see Fenenga 1993). Additional finds consist of a Clovis -like projectile point discovered in a flashflood cut-bank near White Oak Lodge in 1953 on Tejon Ranch (Glennan 1987a, 1987b). More recently, a similar fluted point was found near Bakersfield (Zimmerman et al. 1989), and a number are known from the Edwards A ir Force Base and Boron area of the western Mojave Desert. Although human occupation of the state is well -established during the Late Pleistocene, relatively little can be inferred about the nature and distribution of this occupation with a few exceptions. First, little evidence exists to support the idea that people at that time were big -game hunters, similar to those found on the Great Plains. Second, the western Mojave Desert evidence suggests small, very mobile populations that left a minimal archaeological signature. The evidence from the ancient Tulare Lake shore, in contrast, suggests much more substantial population and settlements which, instead of relying on big game hunting, were tied to the lacustrine lake edge. Variability in subsistence and set tlement patterns is thus apparent in California, in contrast to the Great Plains.

2. Environmental and Cultural Background
8 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project
Substantial evidence for human occupation across California, however, first occurs during the middle Holocene, roughly 7500 to 4000 YBP. This period is known as the Early Horizon, or alternatively as the Early Millingstone along the Santa Barbara Channel. In the south, populations concentrated along the coast with minimal visible use of inland areas. Adaptation emphasized hard seeds and nuts with tool -kits dominated by mullers and grindstones (manos and metates).

Additionally, little evidence for Early Horizon occupation exists in most inland portions of the state, partly due to a severe cold and dry paleoclimatic period occurring at this time, although a site deposit dating to this age has been identified along the ancient Buena Vista shoreline in Kern County to the south (Rosenthal et al. 2007). Regardless of specifics, Early Horizon population density was low with a subsistence adaptation more likely tied to plant food gathering than hunting.

Environmental conditions improved dramatically after about 4000 YBP during the Middle Horizon (or Intermediate Period). This period is known climatically as the Holocene Maximum (circa 3,800 YBP) and was characterized by significantly w armer and wetter conditions than previously experienced. It was marked archaeologically by large population increase and radiation into new environments along coastal and interior south-central California and the Mojave Desert (Whitley 2000). In the Delta region to the north, this same period of favorable environmental conditions was characterized by the appearance of the Windmiller culture which exhibited a high degree of ritual elaboration (especially in burial practices) and perhaps even a rudimentary mound -building tradition (Meighan, personal communication, 1985). Along with ritual elaboration, Middle Horizon times experienced increasing subsistence specialization, perhaps correlating with the appearance of acorn processing technology. Penutian speaking peoples (including the Yokuts) are also posited to have entered the state roughly at the beginning of this period and, perhaps to have brought this technology with them (cf. Moratto 1984). Likewise, it appears the so-called “Shoshonean Wedge ” in southern California, the Tak ic-speaking groups that include the Gabrielino/Fernandeño, Tataviam, and Kitanemuk, may have moved into the region at that time (Sutton 2009), rather than at about 1500 YBP as first suggested by Kroeber (1925).

Evidence for Middle Horizon occupation of interior south-central California is substantial. For example, in northern Los Angeles County along the upper Santa Clara River, to the south of the San Joaquin Valley, the Agua Dulce village complex indicates occupation extending back to the Intermediate Period, when the population of the village may have been 50 or more people (King et al. n.d.). Similarly, inhabitation of the Hathaway Ranch region near Lake Piru, and the Newhall Ranch near Valencia, appears to date to the Intermediate Period (W&S Consultants 1994). To the west, little or no evidence exists for pre -Middle Horizon occupation in the upper Sisquoc and Cuyama River drainages; populations first appear there at roughly 3500 YBP (Horne 1981). The Carrizo Plain, the valley immediately west of the San Joaquin, experienced a major population expansion during the Middle Horizon (W&S Consultants 2004; Whitley et al. 2007), and recently collected data indicates the Tehachapi Mountains region was first significantly occupied during the Middle Horizon (W&S Consultants 2006). A parallel can be drawn to the inland Ventura County region where a similar pattern has been identified (Whitley and Beaudry 1991), as well as the western Mojave Desert (Sutton 1988a, 1988b), the southern Sierra Nevada (W&S Consultants 1999), and the Coso Range region (Whitley et al. 1988). In all of these areas a major expansion in settlement, the establishment of large site complexes and an increase in the range of environments exploited appear to have occurred sometime roughly around 4,000 years ago. Although most efforts to explain this expansion have focused on local circumstances and events, it is increasingly

2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 9
apparent this was a major southern California -wide occurrence, and any explanation must be sought at a larger level of analysis (Whitley 2000). Additionally, evidence from the Carrizo Plain suggests the origins of the tribelet level of political organization developed during this period (W&S Consultants 2004; Whitley et al. 2007). Whether this same demographic process holds for the southern San Joaquin Valley, including the Project area, is yet to be determined.

The beginning of the Late Horizon is set variously at 1500 and 800 YBP, with a growing archaeological consensus for the shorter chronology. Increasing evidence suggests the importance of the Middle -Late Horizons transition (AD 800 to 1200) in the understanding of south-central California prehistory. This corresponds to the so-called Medieval Climatic Anomaly, followed by the Little Ice Age, and this general period of climatic instability extended to about A.D. 1860 . It included major droughts matched by intermittent “mega-floods,” and resul ted in demographic disturbances across much of the west (Jones et al. 1999). It is believed to have resulted in major population decline and abandonments across south-central California, involving as much as 90 percent of the interior populations in some regions, including the Carrizo Plain (Whitley et al. 2007). It is not clear whether site abandonment was accompanied by a true reduction in population or an agglomeration of the same numbers of peoples into fewer but larger villages in more favorable locations. Population along the Santa Barbara coast appears to have spiked at about the same time that it collapsed on the Carrizo Plain (Whitley et al. 2007). Along Buena Vista Lake, in Kern County, population appears to have been increasingly concentrated towa rds the later end of the Medieval Climatic Anomaly (Culleton 2006), and population intensification also appears to have occurred in the well -watered Tehachapi Mountains during this same period (W &S Consultants 2006).

What is then clear is that Middle Period villages and settlements were widely dispersed across the south-central California landscape, including in the Sierras and the Mojave Desert. Many of these sites are found at locations that lack existing or known historical fresh water sources. Late Horizon sites, in contrast, are typically concentrated in areas where fresh water was available during the historical period, if not currently.

One extensively studied site that shows evidence of intensive occupation during the Middle-Late Horizons transition (~1500 to 500 YBP) is the Redtfeldt Mound (CA-KIN-66/H), located west of the current Project area, near the north shore of ancient Tulare Lake. There, Siefkin (1999) reported on human burials and a host of artifacts and ecofacts excavated from a modest -sized mound. He found that both Middle Horizon and Middle -Late Horizons transition occupations were more intensive than Late Horizon occupations, which were sporadic and less intensive (Siefkin 1999:110-111).

The Late Horizon can then be understood as a p eriod of recovery from a major demographic collapse. One result is the development of regional archaeological cultures as the precursors to ethnographic Native California , suggesting that ethnographic life -ways recorded by anthropologists extend roughly 800 years into the past.

The position of southern San Joaquin Valley prehistory relative to patterns seen in surrounding areas is still somewhat unknown. The presence of large lake systems in the valley bottoms appears to have mediated some of the desiccation seen elsewhere. But, as the reconstruction of Soda Lake

2. Environmental and Cultural Background
10 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project
in the nearby Carrizo Plain demonstrates (see Whitley et al. 2007) , environmental perturbations had serious impacts on lake systems too. Identifying certain of the prehistoric demographic trends for the southern San Joaquin Valley and dete rmining how these trends (if present) correlate with those seen elsewhere is a current important research objective.

2.4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Spanish explorers first visited the San Joaquin Valley in 1772, but its lengthy distance from the missions and presidios along the Pacific Coast delayed permanent settlement for many years, including during the Mexican period of control over the Californian region. In the 1840s, Mexican rancho owners along the Pacific Coast allowed their cattle to wander and graze in the San Joaquin Valley (JRP Historical Consulting 2009). The Mexican government granted the first ranchos in the southern part of the San Joaquin Valley in the early 1840s, but these did not result in permanent settlement. It was not until the annexation of California in 1848 that the exploitation of the southern San Joaquin Valley began (Pacific Legacy 2006).

In the 1840s, Mexican rancho owners along the Pacific Coast allowed their cattle to wander and graze in the San Joaquin Valley (JRP Historical Con sulting 2009). But the Mexican government did not grant ranchos in the San Joaquin Valley until the early 1840s, and even then these did not result in significant permanent settlement. The Laguna de Tache Rancho was granted by Governor Pio Pico in 1846 to Manuel de Jesus Castro, a former captain in the Mexican army. The rancho extended for 26 mi. down the north bank of the Kings River from modern Kingsburg to approximately Riverdale. It was sometimes called the “River Ranch.” Castro’s ownership of the Laguna de Tache Rancho grant was confirmed by the U.S. Public Land Commission in 1866, at which point it was sold to Jeremiah Clark.

The discovery of gold in northern California in 1848 resulted in a dramatic increase of population, consisting in good part of fortune seekers and gold miners, who began to scour other parts of the state. After 1851, when gold was discovered in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in eastern Kern County, the population of the area grew rapidly. Some new immigrants began ranching in the San Joaquin Valley to supply the miners and mining towns. Ranchers grazed cattle and sheep, and farmers dry-farmed or used limited irrigation to grow grain crops, leading to the creation of small agricultural communities throughout the valley (JRP Historical Consulting 2009).

After the American annexation of California, the southern San Joaquin Valley became significant as a center of food production for this new influx of people in California. The expansive unfenced and principally public foothill spaces w ere well suited for grazing both sheep and cattle (Boyd 1997). As the Sierra Nevada gold rush presented extensive financial opportunities, ranchers introduced new breeds of livestock, consisting of cattle, sheep, and pigs (Boyd 1997).

With the increase o f ranching in the southern San Joaquin came the dramatic change in the landscape, as non-native grasses more beneficial for grazing and pasture replaced native flora (Preston 1981). After the passing of the Arkansas Act in 1850, efforts were made to reclaim small tracts of land in order to create more usable spaces for ranching. Eventually, as farming supplanted ranching as a more profitable enterprise, large tracts of land began to be reclaimed for agricultural use, aided in part by the extension of the railroad in the 1870s (Pacific Legacy 2006).

2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 11

Following the passage of statewide ‘No-Fence’ laws in 1874, ranching practices began to decline, while farming expanded in the San Joaquin Valley in both large land holdings and smaller, subdivided properties. As the farming population grew, so did the demand for irrigation. Settlers began reclamation of swampland in 1866, and built small dams across the Kern River to divert water into the fields. By 1880, 86 different groups were taking water from the Kern River. Ten years later, 15 major canals provided water to thousands of acres in Kern County.

During the period of reclaiming unproductive land in the southern San Joaquin Valley, grants were given to individuals who had both the resources and the finances to undertake the operation alone.

One small agricultural settlement, founded by Colonel Thomas Baker in 1861 after procuring one such grant, took advantage of reclaimed swampland along the Kern River. This settlement became the City of Bakersfield in 1869, and quickly became the center of activity in the southern San Joaquin Valley, and in the newly formed Kern County. Located on the main stage road through the San Joaquin Valley, the town became a primary market and transportation hub for stock and crops, as well as a popular stopping point for travelers on the Los Angeles and Stockton Road. The Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) reached the Bakersfield area in 1873, connecting it with important market towns elsewhere in the state, dramatically impacting both agr iculture and oil production (Pacific Legacy 2006).

Three competing partnerships developed during this period which had a great impact on control of water, land reclamation and ultimately agricultural development in the San Joaquin Valley:

Livermore and Chester, Haggin and Carr, and Miller and Lux, perhaps the most famous of the enterprises. Livermore and Chester were responsible, among other things, for developing the large Hollister plow ( 3 ft. wide by 2 ft. deep), pulled by a 40-mule team, which was used for ditch digging. Haggin and Carr were largely responsible for reclaiming the beds of the Buena Vista and Kern lakes, and for creating the Calloway Canal, which drained through the Rosedale area in Bakersfield to Goose Lake (Morgan 1914). Miller and Lux ultimately became one of the biggest private property holders in the country, controlling the rights to over 22,000 square miles. Miller and Lux’s impact extended beyond Kern County, however. They recognized early-on that control of water would have important economic implications, and they played a major role in the water development of the state. They controlled, for example, over 100 mi . of the San Joaquin River with the San Joaquin and Kings River Canal and Irrigation System. They were also embroiled for many years in litigation against Haggin and Carr over control of the water rights to the Kern River.

The San Joaquin Valley was dominated by agricultural pursuits until the oil boom of the early 1900s, which saw a shift som e parts of the region, as some reclaimed lands previously used for farming were leased to oil companies. Nonetheless, the shift of the San Joaquin Valley towards oil production did not halt the continued growth of agriculture (Pacific Legacy 2006). The Gre at Depression of the 1930s brought with it the arrival of great number of migrants from the drought- affected Dust Bowl region, looking for agricultural labor. These migrants established temporary camps in the valley, staying on long past the end of the drought and the Great Depression, eventually settling in towns such as Bakersfield where their descendants live today (Boyd 1997).

The town of Visalia, originally called Four Creeks, was founded in 1852 and is believed to be the earliest settlement in the San Joaquin Valley between Los Angeles and the Stockton area. It was

2. Environmental and Cultural Background
12 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project
made the county seat of Tulare County in 1853 and became a stop on the Butterfield Overland Mail stage route, which ran from Los Angeles to Stockton, in 1858. Camp Babbitt was created 1- mi outside of Visalia during the Civil War, due to a significant number of southern sympathizers in the area. In 1874, the town was incorporated. Visalia has continued to grow due to industry and agriculture in the surrounding area, currently having a population of over 130,000 people (City of Visalia n.d.).

3. Archival Records Search and Tribal Coordination
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 13

3. ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH AND TRIBAL

CORRESPONDENCE

3.1 ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH
The Project began with an archival records search conducted by the staff of the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (IC), California State University Bakersfield, on May 16, 2022.

The records search was completed to determine: (i) if prehistoric or historical archaeological sites had previously been recorded within the Project area; (ii) if the study area had been systematically surveyed by archaeologists prior to the initiation of this field study; and/or (iii) whether the general area within which the P roject lies was known to contain archaeological sites and to thereby be archaeologically sensitive. Records examined included archaeological site files and maps, the NRHP, Historic Property Data File, California Inventory of Historic Resources, and the California Points of Historic Interest.

According to the IC records search, no previous studies had been conducted in the study area. 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 previous studies had been completed within

0.5-mi of the study area (Table 1), resulting in the recordation of six resources within that outer radius (Table 2). The results of the records search are available in Confidential Appendix A.

Historical maps that included the Project area were consulted to identify potential historical structures or resources. According to USGS topographic quadrangles, historical aerials, and Google Earth imagery, the Project area has undergone minimal development since at least the early twentieth century.

Table 1. Survey Reports within the 0.5-mi of the Study Area

Report No. Year Author (s)/Affiliation Title
TU-01167 2002 Villacorta, Estella/ GeoTek,
Inc.

Section 106 Review, GeoTek Project #0032SA2-017B Caldwell Avenue, Visalia, California 93292
TU-01383 2010 Parr, Robert E./ Cal Heritage
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Southern California Edison Company Rector Substation Waterline Improvement Project near the City of Visalia, Tulare County, California (WO 800249915)
TU-01690 2014 Travers, Aniela/ EBI
Consulting
Cultural Resources Survey Farmersville West/CVU3073 28685 Road 148, Visalia, Tulare County, California
TU-01764 2017
Foglia, Shannon E,
Cooley, Theodore G.,
and Miller, Chandra/ AECOM
Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Proposed Southern California Edison North of Magunden Transmission Line Rating Remediation Project, Kern and Tulare Counties, California
TU-01770 2017 Chandler, Evelyn/ Paleo
Solutions, Inc.

Archaeological Survey Report for the Southern California Edison Company Transmission Line Rating Remediation (TLRR) Project for the Rector Material Yard, Tulare County, California

3. Archival Records Search and Tribal Coordination
14 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project
Table 2. Resources within the 0.5-mi of the Study Area

3.2 TRIBAL CORRESPONDENCE
An SLF search from the NAHC was requested on May 2, 2022 and received on June 29, 2022.

The search was negative for sacred sites and tribal cultural resources. ASM sent outreach letters prior to the receipt of the contact list from the NAHC based on a previous contact list from the area. The letters were sent on June 13, 2022. One additional tribe was listed on the contact list received June 29, 2022, North Fork Mono Tribe, and a letter was sent out that same day to the tribe. As of the writing of this report no responses of been received from any of the contacted tribes. The results of the SLF search and tribal correspondence are available in Confidential Appendix A.

Primary # Type Description
P-54-004626 Structure Southern Pacific Railroad
P-54-004832 Structure Big Creek East & West Transmission Line P-54-004878 Building Historic buildings
P-54-004884 Structure Tulare irrigation canal
P-54-005221 Structure Rector Substation
P-54-005289 Structure Bliss Ditch

4. Methods and Results
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 15

4. METHODS AND RESULTS

4.1 FIELD METHODS
The field methods employed included intensive pedestrian examination of the ground surface for evidence of built environment resources and archaeological sites in the form of artifacts, surface features (e.g., bedrock mortars, historical mining equipment), and archaeological indicators (e.g., organically enriched midden soil, burnt animal bone). Special attention was paid to any exposed ground surface areas, rodent burrow spoils piles, cut-banks, cleared edges of disturbed areas, and other spots with better ground surface visibility. The survey methodology was designed to include the identification and location of any discovered sites, should they have been 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, using DPR 523 forms. The Project study area was examined by walking parallel transects spaced 15-m apart.

An intensive Phase I cultural resources survey of the Pearl Woods Subdivision Project study area was conducted on June 15, 2022 by ASM Associate Archaeologist Robert Azpitarte, B.A., with assistance in the field from ASM Assistant Archaeologist Margarita Medina-Lemus, B.A.

4.2 SURVEY RESULTS
The approximately 68-ac Project study area consists of active almond and walnut orchards with dirt agricultural roads (Figure 2 and 3). Surface visibility within the study area was excellent for the Phase I survey.

No prehistoric or historic archaeological resources or built environment resources were identified as a result of the Phase I survey.

4. Methods and Results
16 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project

Figure 2. Overview of Project study area from the approximate center, looking southwest.

Figure 3. Overview of the Project study area from the southwest corner, looking east- northeast.

5. Summary and Recommendations
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 17

5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
An intensive Phase I cultural resources survey was conducted for the Pearl Woods Subdivision Project, Tulare County, California. A records search conducted at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Archaeological Information Center, Californi a Sta te University, Bakersfiel d indicated that the Project study area had not been previously surveyed. The results indicated that one linear resource (P-54-004877, Cameron Creek) intersected the study area; however, this was due to inaccuracies in the plotted location, and it is actually located entirely outside of the study area.

An SLF search from the NAHC was requested on May 2, 2022 and received on June 29, 2022.

The intensive Phase I pedestrian survey was conducted on June 15, 2022, with parallel transects spaced at 15-m i ntervals walked across the entire Project study area. No prehistoric or historic archaeological sites or built environment resources were identified within the study area.

5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on these findings, the development of the Pearl Woods Subdivision Project will not result in adverse impacts to known significant or unique cultural resources as defined by CEQA. It is recommended, however, that an archaeologist be c ontacted in the unlikely event that cultural resources are uncovered during the development or use of the property to evaluate the discovery.

References
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 19

REFERENCES
Boyd, W.H.
1997 Lower Kern River Country 1850-1950: Wilderness to Empire . Kings River Press , Lemoore.

City of Visalia
n.d. History of Visalia. Available online at
https://www.visalia.city/about/history_of_visalia.asp; accessed July 8, 2022.

Cook, S.F.
1978 Historical Demography. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, pp. 91-98. Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8. Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C.

Culleton, Brendan J.
2006 Implications of a freshwater radiocarbon reservoir correction for the timing of the late Holocene settlement of the Elk Hills, Kern County, California . Journal of Science 33:1331-1339.

Driver, H.E.
1937 Cultural Element Distributions: VI, Southern Sierra Nevada. University of California Anthropological Records 1(2):53-154. Berkeley

Elsasser, A.
1962 Indians of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks . Sequoia Natural History Association, Three Rivers.

Fenenga, F.
1952 The Archaeology of the Slick Rock Village, Tulare County, California. American Antiquity 17:339-347.

Fenenga, G.
1993 Test Excavations at the Witt Site (CA -KIN-32). In Finding the Evidence: T he Quest for Tulare Lake’s Archaeological Past, edited by W.J. Wallace and F.A. Riddell, pp. 25-38. Contributions to Tulare Lake Archaeology II. Tulare Lake Archaeological Research Group, Redondo Beach.

Fredrickson, D.A., and J. Grossman
1977 A San Dieguito Component at Buena Vista Lake, California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 4:173-190.

Gayton, A.H.
1930 Yokuts-Mono Chiefs and Shamans. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 24:361-420. Berkeley.
1948 Yokuts and Western Mono Ethnography. University of California Anthropological Records 10:1-290. Berkeley.

References
20 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project

Gifford, E.W., and W.E. Schenck
1926 Archaeology of the Southern San Joaquin Valley. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 23(1):1-122.

Glennan, W.S.
1987a Concave-Based Lanceolate Fluted Projectile Points from California. Prehistory of the Antelope Valley, California: An Overview, edited by R.W. Robinson. Antelope Valley Archaeological Society, Occasional Papers No. 1: 21-24. 1987b Evidence for Paleoeastern Culture Type in the Southwestern Great Basin. Prehistory of the Antelope Valley, California: An Overview, edited by R.W. Robinson. Antelope Valley Archaeological Society, Occasional Papers No. 1:11-20.

Harrington, John Peabody
n.d. Yokuts ethnographic notes. National Anthropological Archives.

Hewes, G.
1941 Archaeological reconnaissance of the central San Joaquin Valley. American Antiquity 7:123-133.

Horne, S.P.
1981 The Inland Chumash: Ethnography, Ethnohistory and Archaeology. Ph.D. dissertation, UCSB. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.

Jones, T.L., G.M. Brown, L.M. Raab, J.L. McVickar, W.G. Spaulding. D.J. Kennett, A. York, and P.L. Walker
1999 Demographic Crisis in Western North Ameri ca during the Medieval Climatic Anomaly. Current Anthropology 40:137-170.

JRP Historical Consulting
2009 North Kern Water Storage District, Lateral Canal 8-1: Inventory and Evaluations, Kern County, California. Prepared for North Kern Water Storage District.

King, C., C. Smith, and T. King
n.d. Archaeological Report Related to the Interpretation of Archaeological Resources Present at the Vasquez Rocks County Park. Report on file, SCCIC.

Kroeber, A.L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 78 .

Washington, D.C.

Latta, F.F.
1977 Handbook of the Yokuts Indians. Bear State Books, Santa Cruz.

References
Pearl Woods Subdivision Project 21
Meyer, J., D. Craig Young, and Jeffrey S. Rosenthal
2010 Volume I: A Geoarchaeological Overview and Assessment of Caltrans Districts 6 and 9. Submitted to California Department of Transportation.

Moratto, M.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.

Morgan, W.A.
1914 History of Kern County, California with Biographical Sketches . Historic Record Company, Los Angeles.

Pacific Legacy, Inc.
2006 Southern San Joaquin Valley Oil Fields Comprehensive Study . Manuscript on file, BLM Bakersfield office.

Powers, Stephen
1971 The Yokuts Dance for the Dead. In The California Indians: A Source Book (second edition), edited by R.F. Heizer and M.A. Whipple, pp. 513-519. University of California Press, Berkeley (original 1877).
1976 Tribes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley (original 1877).

Preston, William L.
1981 Vanishing Landscapes: Land and Life in the Tulare Lake Basin. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Rosenthal, J.S., G.G. White, and M.Q. Sutton
2007 The Central Valley: A view from the catbird’s seat. In California Prehistory:

Colonization, Culture, and Complexity , edited by T.L. Jones and K.A. Klar, pp. 147- 163. AltaMira Press.

Schiffman, R.A., and A.P. Garfinkel
1981 Prehistory of Kern County: An Overview. Bakersfield College Publications in Archaeology, Number 1.

Schoenherr, A.A.
1992 A Natural History of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Siefkin, Nelson
1999 Archaeology of the Redfeldt Mound (CA -KIN-66), Tulare Basin, California. M.A. thesis, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, California State University, Bakersfield.

References
22 Pearl Woods Subdivision Project
Sutton, M.Q.
1988a An Introduction to the Archaeology of the Western Mojave Desert, California. Archives of California Prehistory, No. 14. Coyote Press, Salinas. 1988b On the Late Prehistory of the Western Mojave Desert. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 24(1):22-29.
2009 People and Language: Defining the Takic Expansion into the Southern California.

Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 40(2, 3):31-73.

W&S Consultants
1994 Phase II Test Excavations and Determinations of Significance at CA-LAN-2133, -2233, -2234, -2235, -2236, -2240, -2241 and -2242, Los Angeles County, California.

Manuscript on file, SCCIC.
1999 Class III Inventory/Limited Archaeological Testing Program for the Ducor Telephone Project, Kennedy Meadows, Tulare County, California. Manuscript on file, SCCIC. 2004 Class II Inventory of the Carrizo Plain National Monument, San Luis Obispo County, California. Report on file, BLM Bakersfield office.
2006 Phase II Test Excavations and Determinations of Significance for the Tejon Mountain Village Project, Kern County, California. Report on file, Tejon Ranch Company.

Wedel, W.
1941 Archaeological Investigations at Buena Vista Lake, Kern County, California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 130.

Whitley, D.S.
1992 Shamanism and Rock Art in Far Western North America. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 2(1):89-113.
2000 The Art of th e Shaman: Rock Art of California. University of Utah Press , Salt Lake City.

Whitley, D.S., and M.P. Beaudry
1991 Chiefs on the Coast: The Development of Complex Society in the Tiquisate Region in Ethnographic Perspective. The Development of Complex Civilizations in Southeastern Mesoamerica, edited by W. Fowler, pp. 101-120. CRC Press, Orlando.

Whitley, D.S., G. Gumerman IV, J. Simon, and E. Rose
1988 The Late Prehistoric Period in the Coso Range and Environs. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 24(1):2-10.

Whitley, D.S., J. Simon, and J.H.N. Loubser
2007 The Carrizo Collapse: Art and Politics in the Past. In A Festschrift Honoring the Contributions of California Archaeologist Jay von Werlhof, edited by R.L. Kaldenberg, pp. 199-208. Maturango Museum Publication 20, Ridgecrest.

Zimmerman, K.L., C.L. Pruett, and M.Q. Sutton
1989 A Clovis-Like Projectile Point from the Southern Sierra Nevada. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 11:89-91.

May 16, 2022

Big Sandy Rancheria of Western Mono Indians
Elizabeth D. Kipp, Chairperson
PO. Box 337
Auberry, CA 93602

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

This letter is provided in accordance with the notification procedures prescribed by AB 52 (CEQA-Tribal Cultural Resources). The City of Visalia is in receipt of a project application whose project description is provided below, and which is shown on the enclosed aerial map.

The City of Visalia respectfully requests your review of the project, and invites your comments or request for further coordination if deemed necessary. As you may be aware, AB 52 allows for a 30-day early review period before the City may proceed further in the project entitlement process or an associated CEQA environmental review. The project is described as follows:

Annexation No. 2022-05: A request by D.R. Horton to annex one parcel totaling approximately 67.7 acres into the City limits of Visalia. Upon annexation the area would be zoned R-1-5 (Single Family Residential, 5,000 sq. ft. minimum), QP (Quasi-public zone) and OS (Open Space) which is consistent with the General Plan. The property is located in between South Lovers Lane and Road 148, just south of East Cherry Avenue (APN: 0127-030-038).

Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5591: A request by D.R. Horton to subdivide a 67.70- acre parcel into 273 single family lots for residential use consistent with the R-1-5 zoning district and create a 8.96 acre park and regional basin.

If you have any concerns or information regarding archaeological resources or traditional tribal cultural places in or near the Planning Area, or if you would like to be involved in the planning process, please let us know. You can contact me at (559) 713-4031 or e-mail [email protected]. We would appreciate receiving your comments by June 15, 2022.

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Dunlap Band of Mono Indians
Benjamin Charley Jr., Tribal Chair
P.O. Box 14
Dunlap, CA 93621

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Dunlap Band of Mono Indians
Dirk Charley, Tribal Secretary
5509 E. McKenzie Avenue
Fresno, CA 93727

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Kern Valley Indian Community
Julie Turner, Secretary
P.O. Box 1010
Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Kern Valley Indian Community
Robert Robinson, Chairperson
P.O. Box 1010
Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Kern Valley Indian Community
Brandy Kendricks
30741 Foxridge Court
Tehachapi, CA 93561

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe
Shana Powers, Cultural Director
P.O. Box 8
Lemoore, CA 93245

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Tubatulabals of Kern Valley
Robert L. Gomez, Jr., Tribal Chairperson
P.O. Box 226
Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Tule River Indian Tribe
Neil Peyron, Chairperson
P.O. Box 589
Porterville, CA 93258

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

May 16, 2022

Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band
Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson
1179 Rock Haven Ct.

Salinas, CA 93906

Subject: Invitation for Early Consultation for a Pending Project

Dear Chairperson:

Regards,
Rafael Garcia
Senior Planner

Attachment: Location Map
315 East Acequia Ave., Visalia, CA 93291 Tel: (559) 713-4359 Fax: (559) 713-4813 City of Visalia Planning Division

Appendices
Pearl Woods Subdivision
April 2023 D-1
Appendix D: Traffic Impact Study

City of Visalia

DR Horton – Pearl Woods Traffic
Impact Study

Visalia, CA
July 2022

Prepared for:

D.R. Horton
419 West Murray Avenue
Visalia, CA 93291

Prepared by:

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
400 East Main Street, Suite 300
Visalia, CA 93291-6337
\\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\200 Technical\220 Traffic\TIS\2022-0715-TIS DRAFT.docx

Report Prepared for:

D.R. Horton
419 West Murray Avenue
Visalia, CA 93291

Contact:

Melody Haigh – Forward Planner
(559) 631-3121

Report Prepared by:

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Matt Hamilton, PE
Rebekah Brechmann, EIT

Contact:

Matt Hamilton, PE
(559) 636-1166, Ext. 532

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group expressly reserves its common law copyright and other applicable property rights to this document. This document is not to be reproduced, changed, or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to a third party without first obtaining the written permission and consent of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group In the event of unauthorized reuse of the information contained herein by a third party, the third party shall hold the firm of Provo st & Pritchard Consulting Group harmless, and shall bear the cost of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group's legal fees associated with defending and enforcing these rights.

City of Visalia
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 iii
Table of Contents
1 Introduction and Executive Summary................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 Site Location ................................................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Study Area .................................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2.1 Intersections ................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2.2 Study Scenarios .............................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.3 Conclusions & Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 1-1 2 Proposed Development ........................................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.1 Land Use and Intensity .............................................................................................................................. 2-1

2.2 Site Plan ........................................................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.2.1 Access Geometrics ....................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.3 Development phasing and timing ............................................................................................................. 2-1 3 Study Area Conditions .......................................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Area of significant traffic impacts ............................................................................................................. 3-1

3.1.1 Market area ..................................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Land use ........................................................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.2.1 Existing land use ........................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2.2 Anticipated future development ................................................................................................. 3-1

3.3 Site accessibility............................................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.3.1 Existing and future area roadway system .................................................................................. 3-1

3.4 Analysis of Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................ 3-2

3.4.1 Physical characteristics of Roadways ......................................................................................... 3-2

3.4.2 Traffic control devices ................................................................................................................. 3-2

3.4.3 Transit service ................................................................................................................................ 3-2

3.4.4 Pedestrian/bicycle facilities ......................................................................................................... 3-2

3.5 Traffic volumes ............................................................................................................................................ 3-2

3.6 Level of service ............................................................................................................................................ 3-5

3.6.1 Intersection LOS Summary ......................................................................................................... 3-6

3.7 Safety-related deficiencies, crash experience ........................................................................................... 3-6

3.8 Data sources ................................................................................................................................................. 3-6 4 Projected Traffic .................................................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Site traffic forecasting (each horizon year) .............................................................................................. 4-1

4.1.1 Trip generation .............................................................................................................................. 4-1 City of Visalia
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 iv
Trip distribution/ Trip assignment .......................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Non-site traffic forecasting (each horizon year) ..................................................................................... 4-1

4.2.1 Projections by TCAG ................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2.2 Total traffic (each horizon year) ................................................................................................. 4-1

4.2.3 Total traffic volumes with Project (each horizon year) .......................................................... 4-2 5 Traffic and Improvements Analysis .................................................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 LOS analysis ................................................................................................................................................. 5-1

5.1.1 Without project ............................................................................................................................. 5-1

5.1.2 With project ................................................................................................................................... 5-2

5.2 Roadway improvements ............................................................................................................................. 5-2

5.2.1 Improvements by the City of Visalia or others to accommodate non-site traffic .............. 5-2 6 Conclusions & Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 6-1

6.1 Traffic Operations Analysis and Roadway improvements ................................................................... 6-1

6.1.1 Phasing ............................................................................................................................................ 6-1

6.2 Final Conclusions & Recommendations ................................................................................................. 6-1

Appendix A – Traffic Count Data ............................................................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B – TCAG Models ....................................................................................................................................... B-1 Appendix C – Synchro Analysis Reports .................................................................................................................... C-1 Appendix D – Synchro Mitigated Analysis Reports ................................................................................................ D-1

List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Regional Location ....................................................................................................................................... 1-3 Figure 2-1. Site Plan........................................................................................................................................................ 2-2 Figure 2-2: Development Phasing ................................................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 3-1: Existing Lane Configuration ...................................................................................................................... 3-3 Figure 3-2: Existing Turn Counts ................................................................................................................................. 3-4 Figure 4-1:Opening Year Lane Configuration with Counts ..................................................................................... 4-3 Figure 4-2 Project Only Lane Configuration with Counts ........................................................................................ 4-4 Figure 4-3: Opening No Project Year 2027 Lane Configuration with Counts ...................................................... 4-5 Figure 4-4: Future No Project Year 2027 Lane Configuration with Counts ......................................................... 4-6 Figure 4-5: Opening Plus Project Lane Configuration with Counts ....................................................................... 4-7 Figure 4-6: Future Plus Project 2032 Lane Configuration with Counts ................................................................. 4-8 City of Visalia
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 v
List of Tables
Table 3-1. Existing Roadway Characteristics ............................................................................................................. 3-2 Table 3-2. Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions (Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition) ...... 3-5 Table 3-3. Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions (Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition) . 3-5 Table 3-4: Summary of Existing Interactions AM and PM Peak LOS ................................................................... 3-6 Table 4-1– Trip Generation Summary ......................................................................................................................... 4-1 Table 5-1: Summary of Opening Year Intersection’s AM and PM Peak LOS ...................................................... 5-1 Table 5-2: Summary of 5 Year Intersection’s AM and PM Peak LOS ................................................................... 5-1 Table 5-3: Summary of Opening Year plus Project Intersection’s AM and PM Peak LOS ................................ 5-2 Table 5-4: Summary of 5 Year Plus Project Intersection’s AM and PM Peak LOS ............................................. 5-2 Table 5-5: Summary of the Mitigated Analysis for Lover’s Lane and Walnut Ave AM and PM Peak LOS .... 5-3

City of Visalia
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 vi
Abbreviations
ADA ................................................................................................................................ Americans with Disabilities Act HCM ......................................................................................................................................... Highway Capacity Manual LOS ............................................................................................................................................................. Level of Service TCAG ....................................................................................................... Tulare County Association of Governments TIS ...................................................................................................................................................... Traffic Impact Study

Section One: Introduction and Executive Summary
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 1-1
1 Introduction and Executive Summary

1.1 Site Location
The project site location is approximately 68 acres in size and located in the southeast vicinity of Visalia. The proposed residential subdivision will be constructed on the south side of Cherry between Lovers Lane and Road 148. The regional context and site location in relation to the City Limits is shown in Figure 1-1.

1.2 Study Area

1.2.1 Intersections
This study is composed of the analysis of existing and proposed intersections. The existing intersections are as follows:
• 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

New intersections analyzed in this study:
• Cherry Avenue at 2nd Street (lettered and numbered streets will be re-named by City staff) • McAuliff Street at A Street
• McAuliff Street at B Street
• McAuliff Street at C Street

1.2.2 Study Scenarios
The AM and PM peak hours for existing intersections were determined based on existing 15-minute interval counts network wide. Peak hour counts for each intersection, can be found in the Appendix A. Proposed intersections were evaluated for the calculated AM peak of 7:30am - 8:30 am and PM peak of 3:30pm- 4:30pm. A level of service (LOS) analysis was completed for the AM and PM peak with the below scenarios:
• Existing Conditions
• Opening Year (2027, with and without project)
• 5-Year Horizon (2032, with and without project)
• Mitigation Scenarios

1.3 Conclusions & Recommendations
A level of service analyses was completed on all scenarios and intersections as stated above. The intersections level of service was determined using Synchro 11 using existing counts, ITE trip generation guidelines, and TCAG models. According to the City of Visalia standards a minimum Level of Service (LOS) of D is required for all intersections. After completing the analysis of all intersections, the signalized intersection of Lover’s Lane and Walnut was found to be failing in all scenarios including existing without project. To mitigate not only the impacts of the proposed development, but also other base traffic, the intersection layout Section One: Introduction and Executive Summary
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 1-2
was adjusted based on the 2030 Visalia General Plan. The General plan calls for widening Walnut Ave to a four-lane arterial. In addition to the road widening, the signal was adjusted to have protected left-turn lanes in both Eastbound and Westbound directions. With those adjustments, the LOS improved to a “D” for the 5- year 2032 with Project scenario. Based on these findings, the development is not making a significant impact on existing or proposed intersections.

Project Site
?ª
?Î
?ª
?ð
?ð
?¤
?¤
?¢
?¢
?¹
?Ò
T
u
l
a
r
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
Kings County
Lindsay
Woodlake
Farmersville
Exeter
Tulare
Visalia
0 1 2
Miles
Cities
Counties
Figure 1-1 Traffic Impact Study: Regional Locationo
DR Horton
Prepared By7/15/2022 \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\400 GIS\Map\PearlWoods_TIS\PearlWoods_TIS.aprx City of Visalia, Fresno County Dept. PWP, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, USDA, Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS Vista St
Simon St
Teakwood Ct
Seeger Ave
Lovers Ln
Cherry Ave
McAuliff St
Palm St
Walnut Ave
K Ave
Mary Ave
E St
7th St
4th St3rd St 5th St1st St 2nd St
D StC St
A St
B St
2 1
3 4
56 7
8 9
Laguna Ave
Seeger Ave
Laura Ave
S Rio Vista St
P
a
c
k
w
o
o
d
C
r
e
e
k
C
a
m
e
r
o
n
C
r
e
e
k
0 250 500
Feet
Intersection Status
Existing
Proposed
Development
Basin
Bike Trail
Fenced Basin
Park Area
Well Site
Boundaries
Visalia City Limits
DR Horton
Figure 1-2 Traffic Impact Study: Site Plano
Prepared By7/15/2022 \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\400 GIS\Map\PearlWoods_TIS\PearlWoods_TIS.aprx Section Two: Proposed Development
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 2-1
2 Proposed Development

2.1 Land Use and Intensity
The proposed development is located within the city limits of Visalia and designated in the City of Visalia’s General Plan as low density residential. The project site is approximately 68 acres (APN:127-030-038) and will be comprised of 273 lots. The proposed development also includes a Class I Bike Trail that will run along a portion of the south end of the site. A park area and basin will be constructed at the southeast corner of the site just south of the bike trail. The development has an existing land use of Agriculture/Vacant. The proposed use is Single family Residential Subdivision, Parks/Recreation, and Reservoirs/Canals.

2.2 Site Plan
The site plan is shown below in Figure 2-1, showing the street and lot layout, in addition to the location of the proposed park basin, park area, and Class I Bike Trail.

2.2.1 Access Geometrics
There will be several access points to the project site. On the north edge of the site along Cherry Avenue, cars can access the site on 2nd Street as well as McAuliff Street. Residents will also be able to access the development through South Rio Vista Street, Simon St, and N Teakwood Ct which connects to the existing developments to the north and north-east. These access points are shown on Figure 1-1.

2.3 Development phasing and timing
Construction of the development will be completed in three phases, as seen in Figure 2-2. The first phase consists of the construction of 101 homes located in the northwest corner of the site just south of Chery Avenue. The second phase will continue with the construction of 89 homes east of the houses built in phase one. Phase 3 will continue the site’s development to the south and will be comprised of 83 homes. Phase one has an estimated start date of 2023-2024 with final completion of the Pearl Woods Subdivision in 2027.

Vista St
Simon St
Teakwood Ct
Seeger Ave
Lovers Ln
Cherry Ave
McAuliff St
Palm St
Walnut Ave
K Ave
Mary Ave
E St
7th St
4th St3rd St 5th St1st St 2nd St
D StC St
A St
B St
2 1
3 4
56 7
8 9
Laguna Ave
Seeger Ave
Laura Ave
S Rio Vista St
P
a
c
k
w
o
o
d
C
r
e
e
k
C
a
m
e
r
o
n
C
r
e
e
k
0 250 500
Feet
Intersection Status
Existing
Proposed
Development
Basin
Bike Trail
Fenced Basin
Park Area
Well Site
Phases
1 2
3 Boundaries
Visalia City Limits
DR Horton
Fig 2-2 Traffic Impact Study: Development Phasingo
Prepared By7/15/2022 \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\DR Horton - 1594\0159421003-Pearl Woods\400 GIS\Map\PearlWoods_TIS\PearlWoods_TIS.aprx Section Three: Study Area Conditions
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 3-1
3 Study Area Conditions

3.1 Area of significant traffic impacts
Road segments and intersections near the site were analyzed using methodologies within the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) as described in the following sections. Intersections included in this study are as follows:
• 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
• McAuliff Street at A Street
• McAuliff Street at B Street
• McAuliff Street at C Street

3.1.1 Market area
The bulk of traffic traveling within the study area is made up of passenger cars due to the location being in a primarily residential area. However, existing traffic counts indicated that surrounding areas account for some truck traffic. Intersections along Walnut Avenue had approximately 2% heavy vehicles, while intersections along Lovers Lane had around 3.5% heavy vehicles.

3.2 Land use

3.2.1 Existing land use
The existing land use for the site is Agriculture/Vacant.

3.2.2 Anticipated future development
The proposed land use consists of the following: Single Family Residential Subdivision, Parks/Recreation, and Reservoirs/Canals.

3.3 Site accessibility

3.3.1 Existing and future area roadway system
Currently, the roadway system within the study area encompasses Arterial Roads, Collector Roads, and Local Streets. With the construction of the development, local streets will be added within the project site.

Existing Roads can be found in Figure 1-1, and the future roadway system within the site is shown in Figure 2-1. Other planned roadway systems are shown in the City of Visalia’s General plan and consist of the continuation of K Avenue to the east and S McAuliff Street to the south. Because of the unknown timing for construction and short horizons of this study, neither of these continuations are evaluated here.

Section Three: Study Area Conditions
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 3-2

3.4 Analysis of Existing Conditions

3.4.1 Physical characteristics of Roadways
The table below summarizes the physical characteristics of the existing roadway system within the study area.

Information on the classification of each roadway was obtained from the City of Visalia General Plan.

Table 3-1. Existing Roadway Characteristics
Summary of Existing Roads within Study Area
Road Name Direction of Traffic Max Number of Lanes Classification Lover's Lane Northbound 2 Arterial Southbound 2
McAuliff St Northbound 1 Collector Southbound 1
Rio Vista St Northbound 1 Local Street Southbound 1
Walnut Avenue Eastbound 1 Arterial Westbound 2
Cherry Avenue Eastbound 1 Local Street Westbound 1
K Avenue Eastbound 1 Arterial Westbound 1

3.4.2 Traffic control devices
The intersection of Lovers Lane and Walnut Avenue is signalized. The remaining four existing and four proposed intersections are two-way stop controlled.

3.4.3 Transit service
Although there are no transit stops within the study area, Visalia Transit has two fixed routes – 9A and 9B – that fall within the study area and run along Lover’s Lane, Walnut Avenue, and McAuliff Street.

3.4.4 Pedestrian/bicycle facilities
Within the study area several of the roadways have pedestrian facilities which include ADA curb ramps and sidewalk, especially in the newer developed areas. There are minimal bicycle facilities within the study area.

McAuliff has a dedicated northbound and southbound bicycle lane between Cherry and Walnut Avenues.

3.5 Traffic volumes
Existing 24-hour counts were taken on Tuesday, May 17th, 2022, in 15-minute intervals by Metro Traffic Data Inc. Heavy vehicles were also counted and considered in this study. Following the collection of counts, AM and PM peak hours were computed by adding four consecutive 15-minute intervals throughout the day to determine the peak volume of vehicles during the morning and evening hours. Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-2 show existing lane configurations and existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes.

K Ave
Lovers Ln
Walnut Ave
McAuliff St
Cherry Ave
Lovers Ln
Walnut Ave
Lovers Ln
Cherry Ave
McAuliff St
1 2
3 4
5 Cherry Ave
2nd St B St
McAuliff St
A St
McAuliff St
C St
McAuliff St

STOPSTOP
STOP

STOPSTOP

STOPSTOP
6 7 8 9
Existing Lane Configuration
See Figure 4-1 for Proposed Lane Configurations
Figure 3-1
1 2
3 4
5 27(28)39(23)8(8)52(79)184(250)10(19)64(51)10(15)45(54)95(68)228(218)5(10)Walnut AveMcAuliff St 116(63)325(426)55(97)77(87)134(160)89(62)99(92)390(449)77(136)54(76)216(158)83(83)Walnut AveLovers Ln41(28)435(581)22(22)35(26)17(37)564(535)9(3)Lovers Ln 18(19)429(561)11(38)48(22)25(21)535(518)18(44)77(26)Cherry AveLovers Ln 7(13)20(44)16(4)3(18)24(18)32(8)Cherry AveMcAuliff St
K Ave
Cherry Ave2nd St B StMcAuliff StA StMcAuliff StC StMcAuliff St6 7 8 9 Existing Turn Counts
INTERSECTIONS WERE NOT CONSIDEREDFOR "NO PROJECT" SCENARIOS Figure 3-2
Section Three: Study Area Conditions
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 3-5

3.6 Level of service
The level of service (LOS) for each intersection was assessed using Synchro 11software. In order to determine the LOS of each intersection several parameters were taken into consideration such as turning movements of each leg, traffic volumes, geometrics, and several more. The 6th Edition of the Highway Capacity Manual was used within Synchro in the determination of LOS. The level of service ranges from A to F as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition. A description of each level of service is shown for signalized and unsignalized intersections in Table 3-2 and Table 3-3. The City of Visalia’s general plan considers an LOS of “D” as the minimum acceptable LOS designation.

Table 3-2. Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions (Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition) Level of Service for Signalized Intersections
Level of
Service Description Average Control
Delay (s/veh)
A
Low volume-to-capacity ratio and no greater than 1.0. Either progression is exceptionally favorable, or the cycle length is very short. If there is favorable progression, most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel through the intersection without stopping.
≤10
B
Low volume-to-capacity ratio and no greater than 1.0. Either progression is highly favorable, or the cycle length is short. More vehicles stop than LOS A.
>10-20
C
Volume-to-capacity ratio is no greater than 1.0. Progression is favorable or the cycle length is moderate. Individual cycle failures (i.e., one or more queued vehicles are not able to depart as a result of insufficient capacity during the cycle) may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many vehicles still pass through the intersection without stopping.
>20-35
D
Volume-to-capacity ratio is high, but no greater than 1.0. Progression is ineffective or the cycle length is long. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable.
>35-55
E
Volume-to-capacity ratio is high, but no greater than 1.0. Progression is unfavorable, and the cycle length is long. Individual cycle failures are frequent.
>55-80
F Volume-to-capacity is very high and greater than 1.0. Progression is very poor, and the cycle length is long. Most cycles fail to clear the queue. >80

Table 3-3. Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions (Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition) Level of Service for Unsignalized Intersections
Level of Service Control Delay (s/veh) Volume to Capacity Ratio (V/C) A 0-10 V/C ≤ 1.0
B >10-15 V/C ≤ 1.0
C >15-25 V/C ≤ 1.0
D >25-35 V/C ≤ 1.0
E >35-50 V/C ≤ 1.0
F >50 V/C >1.0

Section Three: Study Area Conditions
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 3-6

3.6.1 Intersection LOS Summary
Table 3-4 below displays the existing LOS of each intersection during the AM and PM peak hours. Currently, the only intersection that is failing is Lover’s Lane and Walnut Avenue, with a delay of 66.5 seconds and an LOS of E during the morning peak hour.

Table 3-4: Summary of Existing Interactions AM and PM Peak LOS Intersection Level of Service Summary - Existing Conditions ID Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS

1 Lover's Lane/K Avenue One-Way Stopped 16.2 C 16.5 C
2 Lover's Lane/Cherry Avenue Two-Way Stopped 11 B 10.6 B 3 Lover's Lane/Walnut Avenue Signalized 66.5 E 54.8 D
4 Walnut Avenue/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 15.6 C 16.8 C 5 McAuliff Street/Cherry Avenue Four-Way Stopped 7.3 A 7.9 A

3.7 Safety-related deficiencies, crash experience
Crash experience was collected from the Transportation Injury Mapping System, (TIMS) to determine what type of accidents have occurred within the project area. The most recent data available was between the years of 2019 and 2021. During that duration, a total of eight collisions were reported – one in 2019, three in 2020, and four in 2021. Four collisions were reported at the intersection of Walnut Avenue at McAuliff Avenue in the three-year duration. Based on this data, none of the intersections studied should be considered a safety risk.

3.8 Data sources
Existing counts were taken on Tuesday, May 17th 2022, and 15-minute interval counts were taken over a period of 24 hours by Metro Traffic Data Inc and can be seen in Appendix A. Tulare Council Association of Government (TCAG) provided volumes of their traffic model for years 2022, 2027, and 2032 and are included in Appendix B.

Section Four: Projected Traffic
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 4-1
4 Projected Traffic

4.1 Site traffic forecasting (each horizon year)

4.1.1 Trip generation
The trip generation for the proposed development was estimated using ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th edition. The Land Use Code 210- “Single family detached Housing” and time period “Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic” was used for the analysis. Please refer to Table 4-1.1 for Project Trip Generation Volumes.

Table 4-1– Trip Generation Summary
Site Plan Rates and Totals
Land Use Dwelling
Units
Daily
Total
AM Peak
Total
PM Peak
Total
210
Single-family
Detached
Housing
273 2574 192 257
Trip distribution/ Trip assignment
Trip distribution was estimated based on existing traffic patterns, major points of interest and engineering judgement. The majority of traffic was directed North/ Southbound on Lovers Lane and East/ Westbound on Walnut Avenue. Figure 4-1. and Figure 4-2 show proposed Lane configuration and traffic volumes for the proposed development, respectively.

4.2 Non-site traffic forecasting (each horizon year)

4.2.1 Projections by TCAG
Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG) provided base model numbers for the Opening year 2027 and 5- Year Horizon 2032. However, the total intersection numbers, provided by TCAG, were much lower than current total intersection volumes obtained in the field. After careful review, it was determined that the TCAG numbers should only be used for growth rate calculations.

To obtain 2027 and 2032 base model numbers for Synchro analysis, total intersection growth rates, based on the TCAG volumes for 2022, 2027 and 2032, were calculated and applied to the existing field counts.

Individual intersection turning movements were calculated based on existing turning movement ratios.

4.2.2 Total traffic (each horizon year)
Total traffic volumes for Opening year 2027 and 5- Year Future 2032 without Project scenarios are shown on Figure 4-3 and Figure 4-4.

Section Four: Projected Traffic
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 4-2

4.2.3 Total traffic volumes with Project (each horizon year) Total traffic volumes for Opening year 2027 and 5- Year Future 2032 with Project scenarios are shown on Figure 4-5 and Figure 4-6.

K Ave
Lovers Ln
Walnut Ave
McAuliff St
Cherry Ave
Lovers Ln
Walnut Ave
Lovers Ln
Cherry Ave
McAuliff StCherry Ave
2nd St B St
McAuliff St
A St
McAuliff St
C St
McAuliff St
1 2
3 4
5 6 7 8 9

STOPSTOP
STOP

STOPSTOP

STOPSTOP
STOP
STOP

STOPSTOP
Opening Year Lane Configuration
Figure 4-1
1 2
3 4
5 66(42)4(0)8(4)0(0)0(0)0(0)0(0)12(4)0(0)0(0)0(0)4(8)Walnut AveMcAuliff St 22(14)44(28)0(0)0(0)0(0)12(40)0(0)16(48)0(0)0(0)27(18)39(24)Walnut AveLovers Ln0(0)16(56)0(4)0(0)4(0)48(32)0(0)Lovers Ln 0(0)0(0)16(60)0(0)0(0)52(32)28(88)66(43)Cherry AveLovers Ln 1(3)3(9)0(0)Cherry AveMcAuliff St
K Ave
6 7 8 9
33(21)3(1)33(111)11(37)33(21)1(3)Cherry Ave2nd St
0(0)72(44)36(22)0(0)12(40)24(80)McAuliff StA St
36(22)0(0)12(40)12(40)36(22)0(0)B StMcAuliff St
0(0)0(0)36(22)0(0)12(40)0(0)McAuliff StC St3(1)0(1)33(111)0(0)0(0)0(0)33(21)75(45)0(0) Project
Figure 4-2
1 2
3 4
5 30(32)44(26)9(9)58(90)205(284)11(22)71(58)11(17)50(61)106(77)254(248)5(11)Walnut AveMcAuliff St 133(72)371(491)63(112)88(100)153(184)102(71)113(106)446(518)88(157)62(88)247(182)95(96)Walnut AveLovers Ln48(33)511(680)26(26)41(30)20(43)662(626)11(4)Lovers Ln 21(21)504(632)13(43)56(25)29(24)629(583)21(49)90(29)Cherry AveLovers Ln 20(5) 4(21)Cherry AveMcAuliff St
K Ave
9(15)25(52)30(21)40(9)Cherry Ave2nd St B StMcAuliff StA StMcAuliff StC StMcAuliff St6 7 8 9 Opening Year 2027- No Project
INTERSECTIONS WERE NOT CONSIDEREDFOR "NO PROJECT" SCENARIOS Figure 4-3
1 2
3 4
5 31(34)45(28)9(10)60(97)213(307)12(23)74(63)12(18)52(66)110(83)264(267)5(13)Walnut AveMcAuliff St 142(79)397(532)67(121)94(109)164(200)109(77)121(115)477(560)94(170)66(95)264(197)101(104)Walnut AveLovers Ln51(34)540(695)27(26)43(31)21(44)701(640)11(4)Lovers Ln 22(22)530(662)14(45)59(26)31(25)661(611)22(52)95(31)Cherry AveLovers Ln 21(5)4(22)Cherry AveMcAuliff St
K Ave
9(16)26(55)31(22)42(10)Cherry Ave2nd St B StMcAuliff StA StMcAuliff StC StMcAuliff St6 7 8 9 5 Year 2032- No Project
INTERSECTIONS WERE NOT CONSIDEREDFOR "NO PROJECT" SCENARIOS Figure 4-4
1 2
3 4
5 96(74)48(26)17(13)58(90)205(284)11(22)71(58)11(21)50(61)106(77)254(248)9(19)Walnut AveMcAuliff St 155(86)415(519)63(112)88(100)153(184)114(111)113(106)462(566)88(157)62(88)274(200)134(120)Walnut AveLovers Ln48(33)527(736)26(30)41(30)24(43)710(658)11(4)Lovers Ln 21(21)504(632)29(103)56(25)29(24)681(615)49(137)156(71)Cherry AveLovers Ln 21(8) 3(9)4(21)Cherry AveMcAuliff St
K Ave
6 7 8 9
33(21)3(1)33(111)11(37)33(21)1(3)Cherry Ave2nd St
0(0)72(44)36(22)0(0)12(40)24(80)McAuliff StA St
36(22)0(0)12(40)12(40)36(22)0(0)B StMcAuliff St
0(0)0(0)36(22)0(0)12(40)0(0)McAuliff StC St12(16)25(51)33(112)30(21)40(9)0(0)33(21)75(45)0(0) Opening Year 2027- Plus Project
Figure 4-5
1 2
3 4
5 97(76)49(28)17(14)60(97)213(307)12(23)74(63)12(22)52(66)110(83)264(267)9(21)Walnut AveMcAuliff St 164(93)441(560)67(121)94(109)164(200)121(117)121(115)493(608)94(170)66(95)291(215)140(128)Walnut AveLovers Ln51(34)556(751)27(30)43(31)25(44)749(672)11(4)Lovers Ln 22(22)530(662)30(105)59(26)31(25)713(643)50(140)161(73)Cherry AveLovers Ln 22(8) 3(9)4(22)Cherry AveMcAuliff St
K Ave
6 7 8 9
33(21)3(1)33(111)11(37)33(21)1(3)Cherry Ave2nd St
0(0)72(44)36(22)0(0)12(40)24(80)McAuliff StA St
36(22)0(0)12(40)12(40)36(22)0(0)B StMcAuliff St
0(0)0(0)36(22)0(0)12(40)0(0)McAuliff StC St12(17)26(55)33(111)31(22)42(10)0(0)33(21)75(45)0(0) 5 Year 2032- Plus Project
Figure 4-6
Section Five: Traffic and Improvements Analysis
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 5-1
5 Traffic and Improvements Analysis

5.1 LOS analysis
The analyses provided in the following were determined based on running all scenarios through the Synchro 11 software. Synchro generated reports for each scenario can be found in Appendix C.

5.1.1 Without project
Table 5-1: Summary of Opening Year Intersection’s AM and PM Peak LOS Intersection Level of Service Summary - Opening Year
ID Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS

1 Lover's Lane/K Avenue One-Way Stopped 19.9 C 20.6 C
2 Lover's Lane/Cherry Avenue Two-Way Stopped 11.7 B 11 B 3 Lover's Lane/Walnut Avenue Signalized 81.9 F 64.8 E
4 Walnut Avenue/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 17.4 C 19.6 C 5 McAuliff Street/Cherry Avenue Four-Way Stopped 7.4 A 8.2 A 6 Cherry Avenue/2nd Street Does Not Exist - - - -
7 A Street/McAuliff Street Does Not Exist - - - -
8 B Street/McAuliff Street Does Not Exist - - - -
9 C Street/McAuliff Street Does Not Exist - - - -
Table 5-2: Summary of 5 Year Intersection’s AM and PM Peak LOS Intersection Level of Service Summary - 5-Year
ID Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS

1 Lover's Lane/K Avenue One-Way Stopped 21.8 C 21.1 C
2 Lover's Lane/Cherry Avenue Two-Way Stopped 11.9 B 11.2 B 3 Lover's Lane/Walnut Avenue Signalized 90.9 F 73 E
4 Walnut Avenue/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 18.1 C 22.9 C 5 McAuliff Street/Cherry Avenue Four-Way Stopped 8.1 A 7.9 A 6 Cherry Avenue/2nd Street Two-Way Stopped - - - -
7 A Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped - - - -
8 B Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped - - - -
9 C Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped - - - -
Section Five: Traffic and Improvements Analysis
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 5-2

5.1.2 With project
Table 5-3: Summary of Opening Year plus Project Intersection’s AM and PM Peak LOS Intersection Level of Service Summary - Opening + Project ID Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS

1 Lover's Lane/K Avenue One-Way Stopped 21.6 C 23.8 C
2 Lover's Lane/Cherry Avenue Two-Way Stopped 12.3 B 11.9 B 3 Lover's Lane/Walnut Avenue Signalized 106.2 F 71.9 E
4 Walnut Avenue/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 18.8 C 22.6 C 5 McAuliff Street/Cherry Avenue Four-Way Stopped 8.6 A 8.2 A 6 Cherry Avenue/2nd Street Two-Way Stopped 9 A 9.5 A
7 A Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 9.3 A 9.4 A
8 B Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 8.6 A 8.5 A
9 C Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 8.7 A 8.7 A
Table 5-4: Summary of 5 Year Plus Project Intersection’s AM and PM Peak LOS Intersection Level of Service Summary - 5-Year + Project ID Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS

1 Lover's Lane/K Avenue One-Way Stopped 23.8 C 24.5 C
2 Lover's Lane/Cherry Avenue Two-Way Stopped 12.6 B 12.1 B 3 Lover's Lane/Walnut Avenue Signalized 116.2 F 81.0 F
4 Walnut Avenue/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 19.8 C 26.1 D 5 McAuliff Street/Cherry Avenue Four-Way Stopped 8.6 A 8.2 A 6 Cherry Avenue/2nd Street Two-Way Stopped 9 A 9.5 A
7 A Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 9.3 A 9.4 A
8 B Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 8.6 A 8.5 A
9 C Street/McAuliff Street Two-Way Stopped 8.7 A 8.7 A

5.2 Roadway improvements

5.2.1 Improvements by the City of Visalia or others to accommodate non-site traffic The intersection at Lover’s Lane and Walnut Ave is expected to experience a LOS of “E” for the 5-year 2032 without Project PM scenario and a LOS of “F” for the 5- year 2032 with Project PM scenario. To mitigate not only the impacts of the proposed development, but also other base traffic, the intersection layout was adjusted based on the 2030 Visalia General Plan. The General plan calls for widening Walnut Ave to a four- Section Five: Traffic and Improvements Ana
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 5-3
lane arterial. In addition to the road widening, the signal was adjusted to have protected left-turn lanes in both Eastbound and Westbound direction. With those adjustments, the LOS increased to a “D” for the 5-year 2032 with Project scenario. All other scenarios can be found in Table 5-5.

Table 5-5: Summary of the Mitigated Analysis for Lover’s Lane and Walnut Ave AM and PM Peak LOS Lover's Lane / Walnut Avenue Mitigated LOS Comparison
Scenario
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
No Improvements With Improvements No Improvements With Improvements Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS

Existing Conditions 66.5 E - - 54.8 D - -
Opening Year 81.9 F 47.6 D 64.8 E 48.3 D
Opening + Project 106.2 F 50.8 D 71.9 E 48.5 D
5-Year 90.9 F 49.4 D 73 E 50.7 D
5-Year + Project 116.2 F 52.9 D 81 F 50.6 D

Section Six: Conclusions/Recommendations
Pearl Woods – Traffic Impact Study
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 6-1
6 Conclusions & Recommendations

6.1 Traffic Operations Analysis and Roadway improvements

6.1.1 Phasing
Within the development, the roads will be constructed in phases along with the development of lots as seen in Figure 2-2. In phase I, A Street will be fully built out, the northern portion of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Street will be built, and McAuliff St will be extended to the south. Phase II will include the construction of B, D, 6th, and 7th Street, a connection to McAuliff, and the continuation of Rio Vista Street south. During phase III, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Street will be fully constructed, in addition to C Street. McAuliff Street will be extended even further south in Phase III.

Improvements at the intersection of Lover’s Lane and Walnut Ave done by the city, as proposed in the general plan, will ultimately mitigate the current issues at the intersection.

6.2 Final Conclusions & Recommendations
Existing and Proposed intersections below were evaluated for the calculated AM peak of 7:30am - 8:30 am and PM peak of 3:30pm-4:30pm:

• 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
• McAuliff Street at A Street
• McAuliff Street at B Street
• McAuliff Street at C Street
•
A level of service (LOS) analysis was completed for the AM and PM peak with the below scenarios:
• Existing Conditions
• Opening Year (2027, with and without project)
• 5-Year Horizon (2032, with and without project)
• Mitigation Scenarios

It was determined that all intersections passed LOS requirements per the City of Visalia standards (minimum LOS of D) except for the intersection at Lovers Lane and Walnut Avenue. This intersection is currently failing in all scenarios including existing. However, given that the General plan calls for widening Walnut Ave to a four-lane arterial, these improvements will provide mitigation needed to bring the LOS up to a D, and therefore passing City of Visalia requirements.

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 Appendix-A-1

Appendix A – Traffic
Count Data

Metro Traffic Data Inc. Turning Movement Report
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20 (Total)
Hanford, CA 93230
Prepared For:
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group www.metrotrafficdata.com 130 North Garden Street
Visalia, CA 93291

LOCATION LATITUDE

CITY/COUNTY LONGITUDE

COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Grand
Time U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total 0:00 - 0:15 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 15 3 18 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 26 77 0:15 - 0:30 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 8 0 8 0 3 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 19 65 0:30 - 0:45 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 59 0:45 - 1:00 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 55 1:00 - 1:15 0 0 7 0 7 1 0 5 0 6 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 14 46 1:15 - 1:30 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 7 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 37 1:30 - 1:45 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 4 0 4 0 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 13 28 1:45 - 2:00 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 4 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 23 2:00 - 2:15 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 28 2:15 - 2:30 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 39 2:30 - 2:45 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 53 2:45 - 3:00 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 56 3:00 - 3:15 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 69 3:15 - 3:30 0 0 12 0 12 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 67 3:30 - 3:45 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 84 3:45 - 4:00 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 16 0 16 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 24 118 4:00 - 4:15 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 7 0 7 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 14 152 4:15 - 4:30 0 1 13 0 14 0 0 18 0 18 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 35 202 4:30 - 4:45 0 0 22 0 22 0 0 22 0 22 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 45 267 4:45 - 5:00 0 0 21 0 21 0 0 34 1 35 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 58 331 5:00 - 5:15 0 0 17 0 17 1 0 40 1 42 0 4 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 64 403 5:15 - 5:30 0 0 29 0 29 1 0 63 1 65 0 4 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 100 448 5:30 - 5:45 0 1 33 0 34 1 0 71 0 72 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 109 461 5:45 - 6:00 0 0 37 0 37 1 0 88 1 90 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 130 499 6:00 - 6:15 0 3 35 0 38 1 0 63 0 64 0 1 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 109 543 6:15 - 6:30 0 2 46 0 48 3 0 54 0 57 0 3 0 5 8 0 0 0 0 0 113 659 6:30 - 6:45 0 2 53 0 55 0 0 85 1 86 0 3 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 147 774 6:45 - 7:00 0 1 67 0 68 2 0 85 5 92 0 7 0 7 14 0 0 0 0 0 174 929 7:00 - 7:15 1 3 96 0 100 1 0 102 6 109 0 9 0 7 16 0 0 0 0 0 225 1083 7:15 - 7:30 0 6 88 0 94 0 0 117 7 124 0 2 0 8 10 0 0 0 0 0 228 1113 7:30 - 7:45 0 3 123 0 126 3 0 151 2 156 0 5 0 15 20 0 0 0 0 0 302 1123 7:45 - 8:00 0 12 118 0 130 2 0 174 3 179 0 9 0 10 19 0 0 0 0 0 328 1009 8:00 - 8:15 1 15 101 0 117 1 0 123 6 130 0 5 0 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 255 855 8:15 - 8:30 0 10 93 0 103 3 0 116 6 125 0 3 0 7 10 0 0 0 0 0 238 759 8:30 - 8:45 1 3 88 0 92 3 0 87 3 93 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 188 680 8:45 - 9:00 1 1 90 0 92 3 0 72 1 76 0 3 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 174 698 9:00 - 9:15 1 0 79 0 80 1 0 66 3 70 0 7 0 2 9 0 0 0 0 0 159 713 9:15 - 9:30 0 4 64 0 68 0 0 76 4 80 0 7 0 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 159 711 9:30 - 9:45 0 4 101 0 105 1 0 89 2 92 0 4 0 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 206 727 9:45 - 10:00 1 1 91 0 93 3 0 86 1 90 0 1 0 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 189 685 10:00 - 10:15 3 3 70 0 76 1 0 68 3 72 0 4 0 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 157 678 10:15 - 10:30 1 3 70 0 74 0 0 89 2 91 0 5 0 5 10 0 0 0 0 0 175 691 10:30 - 10:45 0 1 62 0 63 1 0 88 5 94 0 1 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 164 709 10:45 - 11:00 0 4 65 0 69 1 0 96 7 104 0 4 0 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 182 721 11:00 - 11:15 0 3 80 0 83 3 0 76 2 81 0 3 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 170 731 11:15 - 11:30 2 3 91 0 96 4 0 84 4 92 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 193 782 11:30 - 11:45 1 3 79 0 83 0 0 78 3 81 0 5 0 7 12 0 0 0 0 0 176 782 11:45 - 12:00 2 5 96 0 103 1 0 82 2 85 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 192 791 12:00 - 12:15 0 1 100 0 101 3 0 100 4 107 0 3 0 10 13 0 0 0 0 0 221 816 12:15 - 12:30 0 1 90 0 91 2 0 83 3 88 0 4 0 10 14 0 0 0 0 0 193 804 12:30 - 12:45 0 2 86 0 88 2 0 84 4 90 0 1 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 185 803 12:45 - 13:00 0 3 109 0 112 1 0 93 5 99 0 5 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 217 806 13:00 - 13:15 3 3 100 0 106 2 0 92 6 100 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 209 793 13:15 - 13:30 1 2 94 0 97 0 0 88 2 90 0 3 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 192 828 13:30 - 13:45 0 8 98 0 106 0 0 76 4 80 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 188 878 13:45 - 14:00 0 2 98 0 100 3 0 93 0 96 0 4 0 4 8 0 0 0 0 0 204 930 14:00 - 14:15 1 4 96 0 101 1 0 125 6 132 0 1 0 10 11 0 0 0 0 0 244 984 14:15 - 14:30 0 0 108 0 108 2 0 113 8 123 0 1 0 10 11 0 0 0 0 0 242 1028 14:30 - 14:45 1 3 126 0 130 1 0 100 2 103 0 2 0 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 240 1082 14:45 - 15:00 0 9 134 0 143 3 0 94 4 101 0 6 0 8 14 0 0 0 0 0 258 1131 15:00 - 15:15 1 7 138 0 146 2 0 124 7 133 0 5 0 4 9 0 0 0 0 0 288 1222 15:15 - 15:30 0 4 136 0 140 0 0 138 6 144 0 3 0 9 12 0 0 0 0 0 296 1202 15:30 - 15:45 1 15 149 0 165 0 0 112 5 117 0 1 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 289 1207 15:45 - 16:00 0 8 162 0 170 2 0 157 9 168 0 3 0 8 11 0 0 0 0 0 349 1232 16:00 - 16:15 3 2 136 0 141 1 0 102 11 114 0 5 0 8 13 0 0 0 0 0 268 1158 16:15 - 16:30 1 8 145 0 154 0 0 125 9 134 0 8 0 5 13 0 0 0 0 0 301 1168 16:30 - 16:45 1 5 138 0 144 0 0 151 8 159 0 6 0 5 11 0 0 0 0 0 314 1193 16:45 - 17:00 1 7 135 0 143 2 0 116 4 122 0 4 0 6 10 0 0 0 0 0 275 1147 17:00 - 17:15 1 5 144 0 150 2 0 111 6 119 0 4 0 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 278 1116 17:15 - 17:30 0 6 171 0 177 4 0 130 2 136 0 6 0 7 13 0 0 0 0 0 326 1071 17:30 - 17:45 0 3 118 0 121 2 0 121 13 136 0 6 0 5 11 0 0 0 0 0 268 939 17:45 - 18:00 1 10 113 0 124 3 0 108 3 114 0 4 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 244 889 18:00 - 18:15 0 1 112 0 113 1 0 99 4 104 3 6 0 7 16 0 0 0 0 0 233 831 18:15 - 18:30 1 3 92 0 96 1 0 76 13 90 0 3 0 5 8 0 0 0 0 0 194 784 18:30 - 18:45 0 4 98 0 102 2 0 103 4 109 0 3 0 4 7 0 0 0 0 0 218 745 18:45 - 19:00 0 12 78 0 90 4 0 76 9 89 0 3 0 4 7 0 0 0 0 0 186 687 19:00 - 19:15 0 3 87 0 90 0 0 79 9 88 0 4 0 4 8 0 0 0 0 0 186 666 19:15 - 19:30 1 3 85 0 89 1 0 57 3 61 0 2 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 155 633 19:30 - 19:45 0 2 74 0 76 0 0 75 5 80 0 2 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 160 635 19:45 - 20:00 1 0 79 0 80 0 0 70 7 77 1 3 0 4 8 0 0 0 0 0 165 620 20:00 - 20:15 2 2 88 0 92 1 0 48 8 57 0 3 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 153 578 20:15 - 20:30 2 5 68 0 75 3 0 72 2 77 0 4 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 157 535 20:30 - 20:45 1 0 76 0 77 1 0 59 1 61 0 1 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 145 492 20:45 - 21:00 1 4 59 0 64 0 0 45 8 53 0 4 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 123 464 21:00 - 21:15 0 3 46 0 49 0 0 51 4 55 0 4 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 110 410 21:15 - 21:30 0 2 55 0 57 3 0 47 1 51 0 2 0 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 114 360 21:30 - 21:45 0 1 52 0 53 0 0 54 5 59 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 117 304 21:45 - 22:00 1 1 44 0 46 0 0 19 2 21 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 69 242 22:00 - 22:15 0 0 36 0 36 0 0 19 2 21 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 60 212 22:15 - 22:30 0 1 27 0 28 0 0 25 3 28 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 58 209 22:30 - 22:45 0 0 28 0 28 0 0 23 3 26 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 55 192 22:45 - 23:00 1 1 15 0 17 0 0 20 1 21 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 39 164 23:00 - 23:15 1 1 26 0 28 0 0 27 1 28 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 57 155 23:15 - 23:30 0 2 19 0 21 1 0 18 0 19 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 41 23:30 - 23:45 0 0 13 0 13 0 0 11 1 12 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 27 1232 23:45 - 0:00 0 1 15 0 16 0 0 13 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 Total 43 269 6507 0 6819 99 0 6485 314 6898 4 255 0 343 602 0 0 0 0 0 14319 Grand
PEAK HOUR U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total PHF 7:30-8:30 1 40 435 0 476 9 0 564 17 590 0 22 0 35 57 0 0 0 0 0 1123 0.856 15:45 - 16:45 5 23 581 0 609 3 0 535 37 575 0 22 0 26 48 0 0 0 0 0 1232 0.883 Total Percent
505 3.5%Heavy Vehicles
Lovers Ln @ K Ave 36.3056115
Visalia, Tulare -119.2605931
Tuesday, May 17, 2022 Clear
Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles

LOCATION LATITUDE

CITY/COUNTY LONGITUDE

COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Grand
Time U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total 0:00 - 0:15 0 1 7 0 8 0 1 19 3 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 85 0:15 - 0:30 0 0 8 0 8 0 2 8 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 69 0:30 - 0:45 0 0 8 0 8 0 1 9 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 65 0:45 - 1:00 0 0 6 0 6 0 1 8 3 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 56 1:00 - 1:15 0 0 8 1 9 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 15 43 1:15 - 1:30 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 8 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 33 1:30 - 1:45 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 22 1:45 - 2:00 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 22 2:00 - 2:15 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 28 2:15 - 2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 39 2:30 - 2:45 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 9 52 2:45 - 3:00 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 56 3:00 - 3:15 0 0 6 1 7 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 69 3:15 - 3:30 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 68 3:30 - 3:45 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 6 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 87 3:45 - 4:00 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 15 0 15 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 24 124 4:00 - 4:15 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 15 160 4:15 - 4:30 0 0 14 0 14 0 0 17 2 19 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 35 216 4:30 - 4:45 0 0 25 0 25 0 0 21 0 21 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 1 1 50 286 4:45 - 5:00 0 0 22 0 22 0 0 33 1 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 4 60 354 5:00 - 5:15 0 0 22 0 22 0 1 42 0 43 0 0 0 3 3 0 2 0 1 3 71 432 5:15 - 5:30 0 0 40 0 40 1 1 60 0 62 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 105 463 5:30 - 5:45 0 0 30 0 30 0 0 76 2 78 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 4 4 118 474 5:45 - 6:00 0 1 42 0 43 0 2 85 1 88 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 4 4 138 505 6:00 - 6:15 0 1 35 2 38 0 1 55 1 57 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 1 1 102 545 6:15 - 6:30 0 2 47 7 56 0 0 51 0 51 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 1 0 1 116 667 6:30 - 6:45 0 1 52 0 53 0 2 85 2 89 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 3 3 149 786 6:45 - 7:00 1 0 64 5 70 0 3 91 1 95 0 0 0 4 4 0 2 0 7 9 178 941 7:00 - 7:15 0 0 100 5 105 0 1 93 6 100 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 8 8 224 1110 7:15 - 7:30 0 3 87 2 92 0 2 117 4 123 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 19 19 235 1161 7:30 - 7:45 0 1 120 6 127 0 2 141 5 148 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 18 18 304 1160 7:45 - 8:00 0 4 126 1 131 1 8 152 12 173 0 0 0 20 20 0 0 0 23 23 347 1082 8:00 - 8:15 0 10 96 2 108 0 5 125 4 134 0 0 0 16 16 0 0 0 17 17 275 909 8:15 - 8:30 0 7 84 5 96 0 8 106 6 120 0 0 0 12 12 0 1 0 5 6 234 795 8:30 - 8:45 0 3 95 0 98 1 3 85 5 94 0 0 0 27 27 0 0 0 7 7 226 728 8:45 - 9:00 0 4 89 3 96 0 2 66 1 69 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 4 4 174 711 9:00 - 9:15 0 2 79 1 82 1 2 64 1 68 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 10 10 161 726 9:15 - 9:30 0 3 60 1 64 0 8 79 6 93 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 6 6 167 719 9:30 - 9:45 0 0 100 5 105 0 2 91 3 96 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 5 5 209 738 9:45 - 10:00 0 1 91 4 96 0 3 78 2 83 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 7 7 189 701 10:00 - 10:15 0 4 65 6 75 0 4 63 3 70 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 7 7 154 687 10:15 - 10:30 0 0 78 2 80 0 2 92 4 98 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 4 4 186 708 10:30 - 10:45 0 0 62 0 62 0 1 98 4 103 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 5 5 172 722 10:45 - 11:00 1 1 64 4 70 1 0 96 1 98 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 4 4 175 725 11:00 - 11:15 0 1 77 4 82 0 0 80 4 84 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 5 5 175 747 11:15 - 11:30 0 3 88 3 94 0 8 83 2 93 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 5 5 200 800 11:30 - 11:45 0 4 79 3 86 0 2 79 4 85 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 3 175 791 11:45 - 12:00 0 1 91 3 95 0 6 87 4 97 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 2 197 812 12:00 - 12:15 0 1 101 4 106 0 8 97 5 110 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 8 8 228 827 12:15 - 12:30 0 1 93 2 96 0 4 81 4 89 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 3 3 191 803 12:30 - 12:45 0 0 87 3 90 0 3 88 4 95 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 7 7 196 813 12:45 - 13:00 0 1 108 4 113 0 2 92 1 95 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 212 810 13:00 - 13:15 0 1 99 3 103 0 6 89 1 96 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 2 204 824 13:15 - 13:30 1 4 89 2 96 0 7 89 3 99 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 3 4 201 867 13:30 - 13:45 1 6 85 5 97 0 10 73 2 85 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 9 9 193 910 13:45 - 14:00 0 1 100 3 104 0 5 89 6 100 0 0 0 7 7 0 0 0 15 15 226 960 14:00 - 14:15 0 4 98 4 106 0 5 115 6 126 0 0 0 8 8 0 1 0 6 7 247 997 14:15 - 14:30 0 3 95 7 105 0 11 106 4 121 0 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 7 7 244 1040 14:30 - 14:45 0 3 118 5 126 0 4 98 5 107 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 5 5 243 1074 14:45 - 15:00 0 5 135 5 145 0 5 91 5 101 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 11 11 263 1156 15:00 - 15:15 0 5 126 5 136 1 9 117 2 129 0 0 0 15 15 0 0 0 10 10 290 1219 15:15 - 15:30 1 7 124 2 134 0 7 120 3 130 0 1 0 8 9 0 1 0 4 5 278 1209 15:30 - 15:45 0 5 140 5 150 0 18 138 12 168 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 4 4 325 1243 15:45 - 16:00 0 8 144 14 166 0 11 137 2 150 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 5 5 326 1228 16:00 - 16:15 0 5 134 6 145 0 11 115 4 130 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 3 3 280 1192 16:15 - 16:30 1 1 148 4 154 0 12 134 4 150 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 5 6 312 1221 16:30 - 16:45 0 8 120 11 139 3 9 142 4 158 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 1 8 9 310 1249 16:45 - 17:00 0 6 138 6 150 0 10 120 3 133 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 3 3 290 1222 17:00 - 17:15 0 2 136 11 149 0 10 129 6 145 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 9 9 309 1203 17:15 - 17:30 0 3 167 10 180 0 12 127 8 147 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 5 5 340 1137 17:30 - 17:45 1 0 117 7 125 0 12 122 7 141 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 9 9 283 1007 17:45 - 18:00 0 1 119 7 127 0 8 109 15 132 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 8 8 271 954 18:00 - 18:15 0 4 104 11 119 0 7 100 7 114 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 7 7 243 874 18:15 - 18:30 0 3 88 7 98 2 8 88 7 105 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 3 3 210 828 18:30 - 18:45 0 1 90 10 101 0 10 107 8 125 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 3 230 773 18:45 - 19:00 0 7 74 6 87 0 8 84 5 97 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 2 2 191 720 19:00 - 19:15 0 3 82 4 89 0 8 86 6 100 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 4 4 197 703 19:15 - 19:30 0 5 77 6 88 0 2 54 5 61 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 4 4 155 675 19:30 - 19:45 0 0 68 10 78 0 9 81 7 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 177 671 19:45 - 20:00 0 2 66 9 77 1 5 79 5 90 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 6 6 174 657 20:00 - 20:15 1 1 87 5 94 0 5 65 1 71 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 169 624 20:15 - 20:30 0 5 66 4 75 0 4 60 3 67 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 4 4 151 577 20:30 - 20:45 0 2 74 2 78 0 4 66 5 75 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 5 5 163 552 20:45 - 21:00 0 1 64 4 69 1 7 53 4 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 141 511 21:00 - 21:15 0 0 55 1 56 0 6 59 0 65 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 122 448 21:15 - 21:30 0 3 59 3 65 0 7 47 4 58 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 126 390 21:30 - 21:45 0 1 54 6 61 0 3 48 2 53 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 3 3 122 335 21:45 - 22:00 0 1 43 0 44 0 6 24 1 31 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 78 280 22:00 - 22:15 0 0 35 1 36 0 3 22 2 27 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 64 241 22:15 - 22:30 0 0 29 0 29 0 5 34 1 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 71 236 22:30 - 22:45 0 1 27 3 31 0 2 28 2 32 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 1 1 67 203 22:45 - 23:00 0 0 12 3 15 0 1 23 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 164 23:00 - 23:15 0 0 26 1 27 0 2 29 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 59 159 23:15 - 23:30 0 0 17 2 19 0 1 18 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 23:30 - 23:45 0 0 11 1 12 0 1 12 0 13 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 28 1249 23:45 - 0:00 0 0 19 0 19 0 2 13 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 Total 8 179 6361 311 6859 13 399 6517 290 7219 0 1 3 356 360 0 11 3 400 414 14852 Grand
PEAK HOUR U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total PHF 16:30 - 17:30 0 18 429 11 458 1 17 535 25 578 0 0 0 48 48 0 0 0 77 77 1161 0.836 16:30 - 17:30 0 19 561 38 618 3 41 518 21 583 0 0 0 22 22 0 0 1 25 26 1249 0.918 Total Percent
527 3.5%Heavy Vehicles
Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles Lovers Ln @ Cherry Ave 36.3090927
Visalia, Tulare -119.2605984
Tuesday, May 17, 2022 Clear

LOCATION LATITUDE

CITY/COUNTY LONGITUDE

COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Grand
Time U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total 0:00 - 0:15 0 0 7 2 9 0 4 22 5 31 0 4 1 0 5 0 0 1 1 2 47 133 0:15 - 0:30 0 0 8 0 8 0 2 11 3 16 0 3 3 0 6 0 0 2 1 3 33 102 0:30 - 0:45 0 0 6 1 7 0 2 9 0 11 0 3 4 0 7 0 0 1 2 3 28 83 0:45 - 1:00 0 0 5 2 7 0 2 11 1 14 0 1 0 1 2 1 0 1 0 2 25 67 1:00 - 1:15 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 3 0 3 0 1 2 1 4 0 1 0 0 1 16 49 1:15 - 1:30 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 5 0 5 0 1 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 3 14 46 1:30 - 1:45 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 1 4 12 38 1:45 - 2:00 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 3 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 7 40 2:00 - 2:15 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 4 0 7 0 0 1 1 2 13 47 2:15 - 2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 6 53 2:30 - 2:45 0 0 3 0 3 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 0 3 14 64 2:45 - 3:00 0 0 5 0 5 0 1 4 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 14 76 3:00 - 3:15 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 8 1 9 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 3 4 19 97 3:15 - 3:30 0 0 6 2 8 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 4 17 103 3:30 - 3:45 0 0 3 1 4 0 1 8 0 9 0 2 2 0 4 0 2 4 3 9 26 127 3:45 - 4:00 0 0 6 2 8 0 0 11 1 12 0 2 3 1 6 0 2 3 4 9 35 170 4:00 - 4:15 0 0 9 0 9 0 2 5 1 8 0 0 1 1 2 0 2 1 3 6 25 211 4:15 - 4:30 0 1 10 2 13 0 1 13 2 16 0 2 0 0 2 0 4 3 3 10 41 272 4:30 - 4:45 0 0 24 3 27 0 3 15 4 22 0 5 0 2 7 0 3 5 5 13 69 367 4:45 - 5:00 0 0 24 0 24 0 2 30 1 33 0 2 1 0 3 0 3 10 3 16 76 442 5:00 - 5:15 0 0 24 2 26 0 0 29 2 31 0 4 2 0 6 0 10 9 4 23 86 533 5:15 - 5:30 0 1 36 2 39 0 6 53 2 61 0 4 0 6 10 0 6 13 7 26 136 575 5:30 - 5:45 0 0 30 4 34 0 3 60 1 64 0 5 11 2 18 0 14 10 4 28 144 600 5:45 - 6:00 0 4 36 5 45 0 9 70 3 82 0 7 3 8 18 0 4 12 6 22 167 654 6:00 - 6:15 0 0 31 5 36 1 5 43 3 52 0 2 9 5 16 0 6 9 9 24 128 733 6:15 - 6:30 1 4 40 7 52 1 8 35 4 48 0 8 17 9 34 0 7 8 12 27 161 897 6:30 - 6:45 1 2 49 5 57 1 5 65 3 74 1 8 12 12 33 0 12 8 14 34 198 1066 6:45 - 7:00 1 5 60 8 74 1 12 57 7 77 0 9 16 9 34 0 26 22 13 61 246 1289 7:00 - 7:15 5 16 82 5 108 0 12 72 9 93 0 12 13 8 33 0 15 29 14 58 292 1556 7:15 - 7:30 3 8 89 8 108 0 16 81 13 110 0 15 14 8 37 0 31 31 13 75 330 1685 7:30 - 7:45 3 24 94 14 135 3 15 90 19 127 0 20 26 24 70 0 32 43 14 89 421 1715 7:45 - 8:00 7 29 94 22 152 2 20 113 35 170 0 20 37 25 82 0 27 67 15 109 513 1585 8:00 - 8:15 1 36 77 10 124 1 18 99 22 140 0 19 24 26 69 0 10 66 12 88 421 1370 8:15 - 8:30 2 14 60 9 85 2 16 88 23 129 0 18 47 14 79 0 14 40 13 67 360 1218 8:30 - 8:45 0 15 80 8 103 1 10 67 17 95 0 9 26 10 45 0 12 24 12 48 291 1125 8:45 - 9:00 1 9 70 15 95 3 18 59 14 94 0 20 25 8 53 0 9 30 17 56 298 1153 9:00 - 9:15 0 6 78 9 93 5 14 54 8 81 0 9 19 7 35 0 13 27 20 60 269 1166 9:15 - 9:30 2 10 45 9 66 1 12 69 18 100 0 13 18 9 40 0 14 32 15 61 267 1149 9:30 - 9:45 0 14 77 11 102 1 18 69 16 104 0 22 13 9 44 0 20 35 14 69 319 1193 9:45 - 10:00 4 12 71 10 97 1 17 54 28 100 0 17 20 10 47 0 19 32 16 67 311 1182 10:00 - 10:15 0 8 61 6 75 0 11 57 20 88 0 9 24 7 40 0 8 32 9 49 252 1170 10:15 - 10:30 1 10 69 8 88 0 14 82 18 114 0 12 27 7 46 0 10 37 16 63 311 1217 10:30 - 10:45 1 8 53 7 69 0 23 80 21 124 0 14 23 10 47 0 13 39 16 68 308 1229 10:45 - 11:00 1 6 57 10 74 1 22 77 18 118 0 21 25 10 56 0 7 32 12 51 299 1218 11:00 - 11:15 2 13 60 5 80 0 14 67 24 105 0 17 34 15 66 0 8 31 9 48 299 1237 11:15 - 11:30 0 14 74 13 101 1 18 77 20 116 0 24 22 7 53 0 10 27 16 53 323 1288 11:30 - 11:45 1 10 52 15 78 2 17 55 25 99 0 15 27 12 54 0 17 37 12 66 297 1271 11:45 - 12:00 1 13 67 8 89 1 18 66 28 113 0 10 28 6 44 0 20 35 17 72 318 1291 12:00 - 12:15 1 11 76 18 106 2 17 84 25 128 0 13 33 7 53 0 15 35 13 63 350 1293 12:15 - 12:30 2 10 74 19 105 0 14 72 20 106 0 15 20 8 43 0 10 33 9 52 306 1275 12:30 - 12:45 0 9 79 9 97 2 20 73 20 115 0 6 24 7 37 0 18 37 13 68 317 1300 12:45 - 13:00 0 9 87 14 110 3 13 72 17 105 0 12 26 9 47 0 16 27 15 58 320 1311 13:00 - 13:15 0 12 68 13 93 1 19 76 21 117 0 20 34 6 60 0 15 37 10 62 332 1357 13:15 - 13:30 0 8 79 9 96 4 25 76 24 129 0 12 31 9 52 0 11 30 13 54 331 1404 13:30 - 13:45 3 12 76 12 103 2 14 67 17 100 0 16 34 8 58 0 11 34 22 67 328 1459 13:45 - 14:00 5 9 69 18 101 2 18 75 25 120 0 28 29 9 66 0 14 53 12 79 366 1515 14:00 - 14:15 2 6 88 10 106 1 21 87 17 126 0 23 45 27 95 0 14 29 9 52 379 1559 14:15 - 14:30 2 6 75 16 99 2 20 89 23 134 0 20 39 18 77 0 20 45 11 76 386 1633 14:30 - 14:45 0 11 108 17 136 3 20 77 19 119 0 17 31 11 59 0 23 35 12 70 384 1654 14:45 - 15:00 3 17 95 24 139 1 21 73 21 116 0 13 35 10 58 0 13 65 19 97 410 1782 15:00 - 15:15 3 15 105 17 140 2 25 102 26 155 0 25 47 21 93 0 15 39 11 65 453 1838 15:15 - 15:30 2 12 80 24 118 3 24 92 27 146 0 23 39 17 79 0 16 36 12 64 407 1799 15:30 - 15:45 2 16 113 23 154 1 38 119 25 183 0 16 49 19 84 0 24 46 21 91 512 1889 15:45 - 16:00 1 15 100 26 142 2 28 110 17 157 0 31 37 22 90 0 22 33 22 77 466 1811 16:00 - 16:15 3 17 89 20 129 1 26 93 22 142 0 15 36 12 63 0 20 44 16 80 414 1784 16:15 - 16:30 2 7 124 28 161 0 40 127 28 195 0 25 38 9 72 0 17 35 17 69 497 1848 16:30 - 16:45 3 13 90 29 135 0 26 109 19 154 0 13 31 24 68 0 22 37 18 77 434 1853 16:45 - 17:00 1 10 87 32 130 1 26 98 24 149 0 19 46 16 81 0 22 45 12 79 439 1859 17:00 - 17:15 0 16 115 26 157 1 25 109 23 158 0 30 50 18 98 0 12 41 12 65 478 1827 17:15 - 17:30 0 17 130 34 181 1 32 109 36 178 0 15 53 19 87 0 18 32 6 56 502 1725 17:30 - 17:45 3 12 92 18 125 1 31 89 31 152 0 17 47 19 83 0 28 33 19 80 440 1575 17:45 - 18:00 2 7 86 17 112 0 21 101 23 145 0 25 42 10 77 0 23 44 6 73 407 1505 18:00 - 18:15 4 12 84 17 117 0 19 83 24 126 0 23 34 10 67 0 12 47 7 66 376 1387 18:15 - 18:30 1 10 66 22 99 0 21 77 26 124 0 12 49 15 76 0 15 27 11 53 352 1318 18:30 - 18:45 2 6 63 18 89 2 21 99 20 142 0 24 36 9 69 0 24 30 16 70 370 1231 18:45 - 19:00 2 5 66 14 87 0 13 64 15 92 0 12 33 11 56 0 11 32 11 54 289 1141 19:00 - 19:15 0 8 63 15 86 0 12 79 15 106 0 18 32 9 59 0 11 33 12 56 307 1143 19:15 - 19:30 1 4 54 16 75 0 23 48 19 90 0 12 37 3 52 0 10 27 11 48 265 1102 19:30 - 19:45 1 3 54 11 69 0 17 63 11 91 0 13 33 6 52 0 24 34 10 68 280 1083 19:45 - 20:00 1 14 48 19 82 0 17 75 18 110 0 9 33 4 46 0 9 38 6 53 291 1033 20:00 - 20:15 1 9 56 22 88 1 24 49 15 89 0 10 20 6 36 0 12 30 11 53 266 964 20:15 - 20:30 3 4 52 12 71 0 17 54 11 82 0 9 25 7 41 0 9 35 8 52 246 910 20:30 - 20:45 1 7 52 11 71 0 9 53 10 72 0 17 26 7 50 0 11 21 5 37 230 836 20:45 - 21:00 1 2 52 13 68 0 11 43 11 65 0 10 34 7 51 0 9 19 10 38 222 764 21:00 - 21:15 0 3 35 12 50 0 25 43 13 81 0 13 27 5 45 0 10 23 3 36 212 657 21:15 - 21:30 0 5 34 9 48 0 13 53 6 72 0 9 14 6 29 0 7 11 5 23 172 559 21:30 - 21:45 2 5 35 13 55 1 8 42 13 64 0 3 16 2 21 0 5 9 4 18 158 485 21:45 - 22:00 2 5 23 11 41 0 8 23 7 38 0 11 7 3 21 0 0 11 4 15 115 429 22:00 - 22:15 0 1 18 11 30 1 11 19 7 38 0 7 18 2 27 0 2 10 7 19 114 375 22:15 - 22:30 0 2 22 5 29 0 7 29 6 42 0 5 7 3 15 0 2 6 4 12 98 336 22:30 - 22:45 0 2 20 8 30 0 6 22 3 31 0 5 16 4 25 0 5 8 3 16 102 293 22:45 - 23:00 0 1 11 0 12 0 6 12 6 24 0 2 6 3 11 0 3 10 1 14 61 229 23:00 - 23:15 0 1 14 8 23 0 4 22 2 28 0 3 10 3 16 0 4 2 2 8 75 217 23:15 - 23:30 0 1 15 2 18 0 2 15 3 20 0 3 6 1 10 0 4 2 1 7 55 23:30 - 23:45 0 2 8 0 10 0 2 11 1 14 0 1 4 0 5 0 1 6 2 9 38 1889 23:45 - 0:00 0 2 14 1 17 0 2 15 5 22 0 4 2 0 6 0 2 1 1 4 49 Total 100 683 4997 1002 6782 70 1254 5332 1259 7915 1 1079 2006 755 3841 1 1038 2255 871 4165 22703 Grand
PEAK HOUR U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total PHF 7:30 - 8:30 13 103 325 55 496 8 69 390 99 566 0 77 134 89 300 0 83 216 54 353 1715 0.836 15:30 - 16:30 8 55 426 97 586 4 132 449 92 677 0 87 160 62 309 0 83 158 76 317 1889 0.922 Total Percent
784 3.5%Heavy Vehicles
Lovers Ln @ Walnut Ave 36.3127057
Visalia, Tulare -119.2605956
Tuesday, May 17, 2022 Clear
Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles

LOCATION LATITUDE

CITY/COUNTY LONGITUDE

COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Grand
Time U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total 0:00 - 0:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 0 3 3 0 6 0 0 2 0 2 11 33 0:15 - 0:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 1 1 2 5 28 0:30 - 0:45 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 3 0 5 0 0 3 0 3 11 28 0:45 - 1:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 5 0 0 1 0 1 6 25 1:00 - 1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 6 19 1:15 - 1:30 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 5 24 1:30 - 1:45 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 1 0 1 8 23 1:45 - 2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2:00 - 2:15 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 4 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 11 25 2:15 - 2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 18 2:30 - 2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 1 4 6 24 2:45 - 3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 3 4 35 3:00 - 3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 4 48 3:15 - 3:30 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 2 1 3 10 55 3:30 - 3:45 0 2 5 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 6 0 6 17 60 3:45 - 4:00 0 4 2 0 6 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 5 0 5 17 74 4:00 - 4:15 0 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 3 0 3 11 78 4:15 - 4:30 0 3 1 0 4 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 6 1 7 15 95 4:30 - 4:45 0 2 3 1 6 0 3 0 4 7 0 3 8 0 11 0 0 5 2 7 31 118 4:45 - 5:00 0 3 2 0 5 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 3 2 5 0 0 6 2 8 21 139 5:00 - 5:15 0 2 1 1 4 0 1 0 4 5 0 2 3 0 5 0 0 12 2 14 28 170 5:15 - 5:30 0 2 3 1 6 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 6 0 7 0 0 21 2 23 38 196 5:30 - 5:45 0 2 5 0 7 0 4 0 1 5 0 3 14 0 17 0 0 22 1 23 52 233 5:45 - 6:00 0 3 6 0 9 0 7 0 2 9 0 1 13 0 14 0 0 16 4 20 52 261 6:00 - 6:15 0 2 6 0 8 0 6 0 2 8 0 5 11 3 19 0 0 15 4 19 54 324 6:15 - 6:30 0 3 8 1 12 0 5 2 4 11 0 3 20 3 26 0 0 19 7 26 75 371 6:30 - 6:45 0 5 5 2 12 0 1 1 8 10 0 3 20 1 24 1 1 22 10 34 80 432 6:45 - 7:00 0 2 13 2 17 0 5 2 13 20 0 6 22 3 31 0 2 35 10 47 115 543 7:00 - 7:15 0 7 16 1 24 0 2 1 12 15 0 1 23 5 29 0 0 29 4 33 101 652 7:15 - 7:30 0 5 10 5 20 0 5 0 13 18 0 7 30 2 39 0 1 43 15 59 136 743 7:30 - 7:45 1 6 13 4 24 0 9 1 22 32 0 8 44 0 52 1 0 61 21 83 191 767 7:45 - 8:00 0 11 11 1 23 0 17 3 15 35 0 16 64 3 83 1 1 62 19 83 224 676 8:00 - 8:15 0 4 9 2 15 0 7 3 15 25 0 14 34 4 52 0 1 64 35 100 192 568 8:15 - 8:30 0 5 6 1 12 0 12 3 12 27 0 14 42 3 59 0 1 41 20 62 160 488 8:30 - 8:45 0 6 5 0 11 0 7 2 10 19 0 9 20 2 31 0 0 34 5 39 100 433 8:45 - 9:00 0 1 3 0 4 0 5 2 11 18 1 14 39 1 55 0 2 32 5 39 116 447 9:00 - 9:15 0 2 5 1 8 0 7 3 8 18 0 10 30 3 43 0 0 36 7 43 112 450 9:15 - 9:30 0 4 9 0 13 0 3 0 14 17 0 6 23 2 31 0 1 37 6 44 105 436 9:30 - 9:45 0 5 7 0 12 0 4 2 12 18 0 5 27 2 34 0 2 43 5 50 114 462 9:45 - 10:00 0 8 3 2 13 0 7 0 10 17 0 12 21 4 37 0 0 45 7 52 119 452 10:00 - 10:15 0 2 3 2 7 0 7 2 7 16 0 5 26 4 35 0 0 32 8 40 98 445 10:15 - 10:30 0 4 5 1 10 0 8 2 7 17 0 10 32 3 45 1 1 49 8 59 131 453 10:30 - 10:45 0 5 5 0 10 0 4 0 6 10 0 7 29 1 37 1 0 37 9 47 104 436 10:45 - 11:00 0 4 3 0 7 0 6 0 8 14 0 9 41 2 52 0 0 35 4 39 112 468 11:00 - 11:15 0 6 1 1 8 0 4 2 7 13 0 8 35 3 46 0 0 34 5 39 106 490 11:15 - 11:30 0 1 4 0 5 0 5 0 11 16 0 6 36 1 43 0 0 39 11 50 114 514 11:30 - 11:45 0 6 6 1 13 0 8 2 12 22 0 11 38 0 49 0 1 43 8 52 136 526 11:45 - 12:00 0 3 7 0 10 0 5 4 11 20 0 11 38 2 51 0 1 45 7 53 134 530 12:00 - 12:15 0 3 1 0 4 0 4 1 14 19 0 17 39 0 56 0 0 44 7 51 130 509 12:15 - 12:30 0 3 6 0 9 0 11 2 8 21 0 18 40 3 61 0 1 29 5 35 126 526 12:30 - 12:45 0 7 3 1 11 0 8 3 11 22 0 6 42 2 50 1 1 42 13 57 140 545 12:45 - 13:00 0 7 1 2 10 0 3 1 10 14 0 16 30 1 47 0 1 35 6 42 113 553 13:00 - 13:15 0 5 3 1 9 0 10 3 14 27 0 15 41 2 58 0 1 41 11 53 147 584 13:15 - 13:30 0 6 8 0 14 0 7 4 16 27 0 12 47 2 61 0 2 34 7 43 145 591 13:30 - 13:45 0 3 4 2 9 0 8 3 9 20 0 14 37 3 54 0 0 53 12 65 148 602 13:45 - 14:00 0 6 5 0 11 0 13 4 7 24 0 10 43 1 54 0 1 43 11 55 144 624 14:00 - 14:15 0 4 8 0 12 0 7 1 16 24 0 14 48 5 67 0 3 32 16 51 154 659 14:15 - 14:30 0 6 4 2 12 0 10 1 12 23 0 14 55 1 70 0 0 45 6 51 156 667 14:30 - 14:45 0 4 5 1 10 0 13 3 15 31 0 17 41 3 61 0 4 49 15 68 170 700 14:45 - 15:00 0 2 3 1 6 0 8 1 13 22 0 18 55 1 74 0 1 64 12 77 179 761 15:00 - 15:15 0 6 4 1 11 0 8 0 5 13 0 17 57 1 75 2 2 44 15 63 162 786 15:15 - 15:30 0 3 7 2 12 0 16 3 13 32 0 17 64 1 82 0 1 49 13 63 189 815 15:30 - 15:45 0 6 4 4 14 0 12 2 8 22 0 22 71 5 98 2 0 72 23 97 231 823 15:45 - 16:00 0 10 7 2 19 0 13 4 19 36 0 21 53 5 79 0 4 49 17 70 204 776 16:00 - 16:15 0 7 3 2 12 0 14 4 16 34 0 23 52 2 77 0 1 48 19 68 191 772 16:15 - 16:30 0 5 9 0 14 0 15 5 8 28 0 13 74 7 94 1 2 49 9 61 197 762 16:30 - 16:45 0 3 3 0 6 0 14 3 22 39 0 14 54 6 74 0 0 51 14 65 184 777 16:45 - 17:00 0 2 8 2 12 0 19 4 10 33 0 21 66 4 91 0 2 55 7 64 200 794 17:00 - 17:15 0 2 3 1 6 0 10 3 18 31 0 20 71 2 93 0 1 44 6 51 181 769 17:15 - 17:30 0 2 12 2 16 0 15 5 14 34 0 30 75 3 108 0 0 36 18 54 212 748 17:30 - 17:45 0 7 9 2 18 0 13 6 16 35 0 19 57 4 80 0 2 51 15 68 201 702 17:45 - 18:00 0 7 6 0 13 0 10 4 9 23 0 14 63 1 78 0 0 48 13 61 175 643 18:00 - 18:15 0 6 6 1 13 0 8 2 11 21 0 12 53 1 66 1 1 50 8 60 160 604 18:15 - 18:30 0 3 8 3 14 0 10 3 16 29 0 16 60 3 79 2 1 31 10 44 166 569 18:30 - 18:45 0 5 4 2 11 0 6 2 11 19 0 12 46 3 61 0 1 43 7 51 142 538 18:45 - 19:00 0 6 7 0 13 0 13 3 13 29 0 17 37 3 57 0 1 25 11 37 136 541 19:00 - 19:15 0 3 3 1 7 0 12 1 9 22 0 14 36 0 50 3 0 36 7 46 125 545 19:15 - 19:30 0 5 1 1 7 0 6 3 7 16 0 16 48 3 67 0 0 39 6 45 135 546 19:30 - 19:45 0 8 5 1 14 0 8 2 9 19 0 13 38 0 51 0 2 48 11 61 145 526 19:45 - 20:00 0 3 5 0 8 0 13 2 5 20 0 17 46 1 64 0 0 36 12 48 140 472 20:00 - 20:15 0 4 5 1 10 0 11 1 11 23 0 13 41 1 55 0 0 35 3 38 126 447 20:15 - 20:30 0 4 1 0 5 0 6 5 6 17 0 15 37 1 53 0 0 36 4 40 115 427 20:30 - 20:45 0 1 3 0 4 0 2 3 6 11 0 9 30 4 43 0 0 27 6 33 91 384 20:45 - 21:00 0 2 6 1 9 0 3 2 9 14 0 12 39 1 52 0 1 25 14 40 115 362 21:00 - 21:15 0 4 7 0 11 0 4 2 9 15 0 14 34 0 48 0 0 26 6 32 106 289 21:15 - 21:30 0 2 2 0 4 0 5 1 2 8 0 2 36 1 39 0 1 14 6 21 72 239 21:30 - 21:45 0 0 0 1 1 0 6 1 3 10 0 6 27 3 36 0 0 14 8 22 69 203 21:45 - 22:00 0 0 2 0 2 0 6 0 1 7 0 11 11 0 22 0 1 8 2 11 42 179 22:00 - 22:15 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 1 4 7 0 11 18 2 31 0 0 14 3 17 56 164 22:15 - 22:30 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 1 2 5 0 2 14 1 17 0 1 6 5 12 36 141 22:30 - 22:45 0 3 0 0 3 0 1 1 2 4 0 2 22 0 24 0 0 10 4 14 45 130 22:45 - 23:00 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 2 4 10 0 1 7 0 8 0 0 6 2 8 27 106 23:00 - 23:15 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 1 1 4 0 5 16 0 21 0 0 6 0 6 33 88 23:15 - 23:30 0 0 4 0 4 0 1 0 3 4 0 2 8 0 10 0 0 5 2 7 25 23:30 - 23:45 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 1 2 6 0 2 5 0 7 0 0 5 2 7 21 823 23:45 - 0:00 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 3 9
Total 1 313 396 72 782 0 571 147 725 1443 1 850 2815 154 3820 17 56 2709 691 3473 9518 Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles Grand PEAK HOUR U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total PHF 7:30 - 8:30 1 26 39 8 74 0 45 10 64 119 0 52 184 10 246 2 3 228 95 328 767 0.856 15:30 - 16:30 0 28 23 8 59 0 54 15 51 120 0 79 250 19 348 3 7 218 68 296 823 0.891 Total Percent
193 2.0%Heavy Vehicles
Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles McAuliff St @ Walnut Ave 36.3126418
Visalia, Tulare -119.2516071
Tuesday, May 17, 2022 Clear

LOCATION LATITUDE

CITY/COUNTY LONGITUDE

COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Grand
Time U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total 0:00 - 0:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0:15 - 0:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 0:30 - 0:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0:45 - 1:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1:00 - 1:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 1:15 - 1:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1:30 - 1:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 5 1:45 - 2:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2:00 - 2:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 3 2:15 - 2:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2:30 - 2:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2:45 - 3:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3:00 - 3:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3:15 - 3:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 9 3:30 - 3:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 4 7 3:45 - 4:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:00 - 4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 7 4:15 - 4:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:30 - 4:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 9 4:45 - 5:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 15 5:00 - 5:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 21 5:15 - 5:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 3 4 25 5:30 - 5:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 8 8 32 5:45 - 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 8 8 36 6:00 - 6:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 5 48 6:15 - 6:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 2 4 6 11 67 6:30 - 6:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 5 4 9 12 73 6:45 - 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 5 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 3 10 13 20 88 7:00 - 7:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 7 10 17 24 102 7:15 - 7:30 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 7 7 14 17 103 7:30 - 7:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 4 0 3 3 0 6 0 0 11 6 17 27 103 7:45 - 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 2 5 0 7 0 0 9 9 18 34 94 8:00 - 8:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 6 1 1 10 0 12 0 0 5 2 7 25 70 8:15 - 8:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 5 0 6 0 0 3 5 8 17 53 8:30 - 8:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 3 4 0 7 0 0 5 4 9 18 48 8:45 - 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 4 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 3 4 10 45 9:00 - 9:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 8 8 53 9:15 - 9:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 3 1 0 4 0 0 1 4 5 12 67 9:30 - 9:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 5 3 8 15 72 9:45 - 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 4 2 0 6 0 0 4 5 9 18 68 10:00 - 10:15 0 3 0 0 3 0 5 0 1 6 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 6 2 8 22 69 10:15 - 10:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 0 3 4 0 7 0 0 2 5 7 17 67 10:30 - 10:45 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 6 7 11 65 10:45 - 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 1 12 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 3 3 19 69 11:00 - 11:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 5 5 1 11 0 0 3 3 6 20 64 11:15 - 11:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 2 9 0 0 3 3 6 15 60 11:30 - 11:45 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 3 0 4 0 0 2 5 7 15 56 11:45 - 12:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 4 1 1 4 0 6 0 0 0 4 4 14 54 12:00 - 12:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 2 6 0 8 0 0 5 1 6 16 49 12:15 - 12:30 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 3 5 11 46 12:30 - 12:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 6 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 3 2 5 13 52 12:45 - 13:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 2 0 5 0 0 1 2 3 9 60 13:00 - 13:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 3 0 5 0 0 1 4 5 13 71 13:15 - 13:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 6 0 2 3 0 5 0 0 2 4 6 17 77 13:30 - 13:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 7 0 8 0 0 8 3 11 21 81 13:45 - 14:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 7 0 8 0 0 9 2 11 20 76 14:00 - 14:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 9 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 3 3 6 19 73 14:15 - 14:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 2 11 0 14 0 0 4 1 5 21 79 14:30 - 14:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 4 0 2 3 0 5 0 0 1 6 7 16 75 14:45 - 15:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 4 0 0 10 1 11 17 88 15:00 - 15:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 2 11 0 13 0 0 8 1 9 25 102 15:15 - 15:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 2 4 0 6 0 0 1 7 8 17 99 15:30 - 15:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 6 0 4 12 0 16 0 0 2 5 7 29 106 15:45 - 16:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 6 0 6 13 0 19 0 0 2 4 6 31 98 16:00 - 16:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 0 2 11 0 13 0 0 2 4 6 22 85 16:15 - 16:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 7 0 1 8 1 10 0 0 2 5 7 24 84 16:30 - 16:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 4 5 0 9 0 0 5 4 9 21 91 16:45 - 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 5 4 0 9 0 0 2 3 5 18 92 17:00 - 17:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 4 0 4 8 0 12 0 0 4 1 5 21 100 17:15 - 17:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 4 13 0 17 0 0 4 8 12 31 101 17:30 - 17:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 5 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 6 6 12 22 94 17:45 - 18:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 4 9 0 14 0 0 5 5 10 26 97 18:00 - 18:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11 0 13 0 0 4 5 9 22 90 18:15 - 18:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 5 0 4 9 0 13 0 0 2 4 6 24 81 18:30 - 18:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 4 0 5 10 0 15 0 0 2 4 6 25 74 18:45 - 19:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 5 0 3 6 0 9 0 0 2 3 5 19 68 19:00 - 19:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 4 1 5 13 65 19:15 - 19:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 8 0 9 0 0 4 2 6 17 60 19:30 - 19:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 0 12 0 0 0 7 7 19 60 19:45 - 20:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 4 5 0 9 0 0 3 2 5 16 59 20:00 - 20:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 1 3 4 8 61 20:15 - 20:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 5 0 1 6 0 7 0 0 4 1 5 17 64 20:30 - 20:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 7 0 7 0 1 2 4 7 18 57 20:45 - 21:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 7 0 9 0 0 2 6 8 18 50 21:00 - 21:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 4 4 11 40 21:15 - 21:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 2 2 10 37 21:30 - 21:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 6 0 7 0 0 2 0 2 11 35 21:45 - 22:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 2 1 3 8 27 22:00 - 22:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 4 0 0 1 2 3 8 23 22:15 - 22:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 2 3 8 20 22:30 - 22:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 16 22:45 - 23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 4 16 23:00 - 23:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 5 13 23:15 - 23:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 4 23:30 - 23:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 106 23:45 - 0:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Total 0 6 1 0 7 0 139 0 76 215 4 125 353 4 486 0 1 226 287 514 1222 Grand
PEAK HOUR U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Total PHF 7:15-8:15 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 16 19 1 6 20 0 27 0 0 32 24 56 103 0.757 15:30 - 16:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 4 22 0 13 44 1 58 0 0 8 18 26 106 0.855 Total Percent
8 0.7%Heavy Vehicles
Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles Northbound Vehicles Southbound Vehicles Eastbound Vehicles Westbound Vehicles McAuliff St @ Cherry Ave 36.3090426
Visalia, Tulare -119.2517298
Tuesday, May 17, 2022 Clear

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 Appendix-B-1

Appendix B – TCAG
Models

TCAG 2022 Travel Demand Model - No Project
(Licensed to San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Age)
Peak AM 1 Hr Volume
Peak PM 1 Hr Volume
46127Cherry46128 46127000061201164372
K Ave3296711
8224718843682247188436
19120236LOVERS LANE139224117169100149100149100149100149 144264
145264145264129237129237128233120163491331681934913316819350114169159Walnut50114169159McAuliff0000 3021446300000000302144633993122131368396129368396129
161344371613443717124339175302

TCAG 2027 Travel Demand Model - No Project
(Licensed to San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Age)
Peak AM 1 Hr Volume
Peak PM 1 Hr Volume
56148Cherry57149 56148000068227198423
K Ave391010112
90274224489
27135241163290Lovers Lane135203116182116182116182116182 170281
1722831722831552541552541522461441895815319722458153197224571271921820000 322249670000McAuliff0000322249674410414215041931151464193115146 201651452016514520155047197362

TCAG 2032 Travel Demand Model - No Project
(Licensed to San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Age)
Peak AM 1 Hr Volume
Peak PM 1 Hr Volume
4181Cherry4284 41818121619812161971252256499
K Ave45512710
9430128454094301284540
Lovers Lane169305132191118173118173118173118173
187280
1902841902841732601732601692491552135916221624259162216242Walnut5512719919155127199191 8121619
McAuliff769125471054710342355754610614616134871081383487108138 35289473352894733627947543418981208368

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group • 7/15/22 Appendix-C-1

Appendix C – Synchro
Analysis Reports
HCM 6th TWSC
1: LOVERS LANE & K AVE 07/07/2022
Existing - AM Synchro 11 Light Report

Page 1 ends

Visalia City CouncilJuly 17, 2023

Visalia City Council
July 17, 2023