Visalia City Council
October 2, 2023

ௐRUௐ
HPDLO
ௐ0DUW\/XFLZ#JUDLQJHUFDௐௐௐௐ
*UDLQJHU¶Vௐ86ௐHPHUJHQF\ௐSKRQHௐQXPEHUௐLVௐ&$//::*ௐ2WKHUௐ SULPDU\ௐSRLQWVௐRIௐFRQWDFWௐZLOOௐEHௐLGHQWLILHGௐIRUௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐPHPEHU 7KHௐORFDOௐ*UDLQJHUௐ$FFRXQWௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐWHDPௐZLOOௐHQJDJHௐWKHௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐPHPEHUௐWRௐDGGUHVVௐWKHௐFLUFXPVWDQFHௐZLWKLQௐௐPLQXWHV WRௐXQGHUVWDQGௐWKHௐFKDOOHQJHௐDQGௐWRௐFRPPHQFHௐUHVSRQVHௐ*UDLQJHUௐ SURYLGHVௐHPHUJHQF\ௐUHVSRQVHௐVHUYLFHVௐZKHWKHUௐWKHௐLQFLGHQWௐLVௐVPDOOௐ RUௐODUJHௐDWௐDQ\ௐWLPHௐ8SRQௐUHFHLYLQJௐDௐFDOOௐWKHௐ*UDLQJHUௐ UHSUHVHQWDWLYHௐFRQWDFWVௐWKHௐ&RUSRUDWHௐ&ULVLVௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ7HDPௐ OHDGHUVKLSௐDQGRUௐFRPPXQLFDWHVௐZLWKௐWKHௐORFDOௐ%UDQFKௐUHSUHVHQWDWLYHௐ WRௐRSHQௐWKHௐQHDUHVWௐEUDQFKௐORFDWLRQ
*UDLQJHU FRPPLWV WR VSHFLDO VHUYLFHV WR 6RXUFHZHOO PHPEHUV Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


373
*UDLQJHU ZLOO RSHQ D EUDQFK GHSOR\ WHDP PHPEHUV WR WDNH RUGHUV DVVLVWௐFXVWRPHUVௐORDGௐWUXFNVௐDQGௐWRௐGLVWULEXWHௐVXSSOLHVௐDWௐWKH LQFLGHQWௐVFHQHௐ*UDLQJHU
VௐSULFLQJௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐGRHVௐQRWௐFKDQJHௐLQௐ
DQௐHPHUJHQF\ௐODUJHௐRUௐVPDOOௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐPHPEHUௐSURGXFWௐFRVWVௐZLOOௐ PLUURUௐWKHௐFRQWUDFW
7DEOH
3ULFLQJ2IIHUHG
/LQH
,WHP 7KH3ULFLQJ2IIHUHGLQWKLV3URSRVDOLV

&RPPHQWV
 GRWKHUWKDQZKDWWKH3URSRVHUW\SLFDOO\RIIHUV
SOHDVHGHVFULEH
 7KHௐSULFLQJௐRIIHUௐLVௐSUHPLVHG
XSRQௐGHWDLOHGௐKLVWRULFௐ
SXUFKDVHௐKLVWRU\ௐWUHQGVௐZLWKLQ
WKLVௐPDUNHWௐVHJPHQWௐDQGௐ
FXVWRPHUௐHYROYLQJௐ
UHTXLUHPHQWVௐDQGௐEDVHGௐRQ
WKLVௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐUHIOHFWVௐDௐ
FRPSHWLWLYHௐRIIHUௐIRUௐ
FXVWRPHUVௐZLWKௐSXUFKDVLQJௐ
QHHGVௐLQௐWKHௐVWDWHௐSURYLQFH
ORFDOௐHGXFDWLRQௐDQGௐQRQ
SURILWௐVHJPHQWV
Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


374
7DEOH
$XGLWDQG$GPLQLVWUDWLYH)HH
/LQH
,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH

 6SHFLILFDOO\ௐGHVFULEHௐDQ\ௐVHOIDXGLWௐSURFHVVௐRUௐSURJUDPௐWKDWௐ\RXௐ SODQௐWRௐHPSOR\ௐWRௐYHULI\ௐFRPSOLDQFHௐZLWKௐ\RXUௐSURSRVHGௐ&RQWUDFW ZLWKௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ7KLVௐSURFHVVௐLQFOXGHVௐHQVXULQJௐWKDWௐ6RXUFHZHOO SDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHVௐREWDLQௐWKHௐSURSHUௐSULFLQJௐWKDWௐWKHௐ9HQGRUௐ UHSRUWVௐDOOௐVDOHVௐXQGHUௐWKHௐ&RQWUDFWௐHDFKௐTXDUWHUௐDQGௐWKDWௐWKH 9HQGRUௐUHPLWVௐWKHௐSURSHUௐDGPLQLVWUDWLYHௐIHHௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ3URYLGHௐ VXIILFLHQWௐGHWDLOௐWRௐVXSSRUWௐ\RXUௐDELOLW\ௐWRௐUHSRUWௐTXDUWHUO\ௐVDOHVௐWRௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐDVௐGHVFULEHGௐLQௐWKHௐ&RQWUDFWௐWHPSODWH
*UDLQJHUௐSHUIRUPVௐPRQWKO\ௐSULFLQJௐUHYLHZVௐWRௐHQVXUHௐ
6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUVௐUHFHLYHௐYDOLGௐFRQWUDFWௐSULFLQJௐ7KHVHௐ UHYLHZVௐDUHௐDXWRPDWHGௐDQGௐWKHQௐFRQILUPHGௐDFFXUDWHௐE\ௐWHDPௐ PHPEHUVௐYHUVHGௐLQௐFRQWUDFWௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐ,IௐLQFRQVLVWHQFLHVௐ DUHௐLGHQWLILHGௐ*UDLQJHUௐSHUIRUPVௐDQௐLQWHUQDOௐLQTXLU\ௐWRௐWUDFNௐ WKHௐRULJLQௐRIௐWKHௐLQFRQVLVWHQF\ௐDIWHUௐZKLFKௐFRUUHFWLYHௐDFWLRQௐLVௐ WDNHQௐWRௐDGGUHVVௐWKHௐLVVXHௐ*UDLQJHUௐHQVXUHVௐDGMXVWPHQWVௐ DUHௐPDGHௐDQGௐWKHௐ0HPEHUௐLVௐLQIRUPHGௐRIௐWKHௐLVVXHௐWKHௐ
FRUUHFWLYHௐDFWLRQௐWDNHQௐDQGௐLVௐFUHGLWHGௐ
)ORZLQJௐIURPௐWKHௐPRQWKO\ௐSULFLQJௐUHYLHZௐLVௐDௐUHSRUWௐSURYLGHGௐ WRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐWKDWௐGRFXPHQWVௐ*UDLQJHU¶VௐDXGLWௐILQGLQJVௐ7KLVௐ OHYHOௐRIௐVFUXWLQ\ௐLVௐDOVRௐDSSOLHGௐWRௐRXUௐUHYLHZௐRIௐRYHUDOOௐ FRQWUDFWௐVDOHVௐDQGௐFDOFXODWLRQௐRIௐDGPLQLVWUDWLYHௐIHHVௐZKLFKௐLV GRFXPHQWHGௐLQௐ*UDLQJHU¶Vௐ'LUHFWௐ6DOHVௐ$GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HHௐ UHSRUWௐSURYLGHGௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐIROORZLQJௐWKHௐHQGௐRIௐHDFKௐ TXDUWHUௐ
*UDLQJHU¶VௐFXVWRPHUௐIDFLQJௐFRPSOLDQFHௐLQLWLDWLYHVௐLQFOXGHௐ DVVLVWLQJௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLWKௐWKHLUௐUHJXODWRU\ௐDQGௐSROLF\ௐGULYHQௐ DXGLWௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐZKLFKௐLQFOXGHௐSHUIRUPLQJௐDXGLWVௐXSௐWRௐ WKUHHௐ\HDUVௐEH\RQGௐWKHௐRUGHUௐLQYRLFHௐGDWHௐDQGRUௐSURYLGHௐ SXUFKDVHௐKLVWRU\ௐUHSRUWLQJௐXSௐWRௐWKUHHௐ\HDUVௐEH\RQGௐWKHௐ RUGHUௐLQYRLFHௐGDWHௐ7KHVHௐDFWLRQVௐDOORZௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐRUௐDௐ WKLUGௐSDUW\ௐWRௐSHUIRUPௐDௐUHYLHZௐRIௐRUGHUVௐVXEPLWWHGௐWRௐ *UDLQJHUௐWRௐHQVXUHௐWKHௐDFFXUDF\ௐRIௐFRQWUDFWௐSULFLQJ


 ,Iௐ\RXௐDUHௐDZDUGHGௐDௐFRQWUDFWௐSURYLGHௐDௐIHZௐH[DPSOHVௐRIௐLQWHUQDOௐ PHWULFVௐWKDWௐZLOOௐEHௐWUDFNHGௐWRௐPHDVXUHௐZKHWKHUௐ\RXௐDUHௐKDYLQJௐ VXFFHVVௐZLWKௐWKHௐFRQWUDFW
*UDLQJHUௐRIIHUVௐDௐUDQJHௐRIௐVWDQGDUGௐUHSRUWV
ௐWKHௐNH\ௐPHWULFVௐ
FXVWRPHUVௐFDQௐH[SHFWௐLQFOXGH

‡ௐௐௐௐ7LHU
ௐ7KLVௐZRUNERRNௐLQFOXGHVௐWKHௐ2YHUDOOௐ3XUFKDVHௐ
$QDO\VLVௐ,WHPௐ3XUFKDVHௐ+LVWRU\ௐ3URGXFWௐ/LQHௐ'LVWULEXWLRQௐ 3XUFKDVHௐE\ௐ6XSSOLHUௐDQGௐ&RVWௐ6DYLQJVௐ$QDO\VLVௐUHSRUWVௐ SOXVௐDௐVXPPDU\ௐSDJH
‡ௐௐௐௐ.3,
ௐ2UGHUௐVXPPDU\ௐZLWKௐVKLSFRPSOHWHௐUDWLQJௐRUGHUௐ
DFFXUDF\ௐRUGHUௐDGMXVWPHQWVௐDQGௐRQWLPHௐVKLSSLQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ,WHPௐ3XUFKDVHௐ+LVWRU\
ௐ7KLVௐVXPPDU\ௐUHSRUWௐVKRZVௐ
LWHPVௐSXUFKDVHGௐE\ௐWUDFNௐFRGHௐVXEWUDFNௐFRGHௐDQGRUௐ
DFFRXQWௐQXPEHUௐ,QFOXGHVௐWRWDOௐVDOHVௐDQGௐTXDQWLW\ௐSHUௐLWHP ‡ௐௐௐௐ6XSSOLHUௐ'LYHUVLW\
ௐ5HSRUWVௐVDOHVௐE\ௐKLVWRULFDOO\ௐ
XQGHUUHSUHVHQWHGௐSDUWQHUV


 ,GHQWLI\ௐDௐSURSRVHGௐDGPLQLVWUDWLYHௐIHHௐWKDWௐ\RXௐZLOOௐSD\ௐWRௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐIRUௐIDFLOLWDWLQJௐPDQDJLQJௐDQGௐSURPRWLQJௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ &RQWUDFWௐLQௐWKHௐHYHQWௐWKDWௐ\RXௐDUHௐDZDUGHGௐDௐ&RQWUDFWௐௐ7KLVௐIHHௐ LVௐW\SLFDOO\ௐFDOFXODWHGௐDVௐDௐSHUFHQWDJHௐRIௐ9HQGRU¶VௐVDOHVௐXQGHUௐWKHௐ &RQWUDFWௐRUௐDVௐDௐSHUXQLWௐIHH
ௐLWௐLVௐQRWௐDௐOLQHLWHPௐDGGLWLRQௐWRௐWKHௐ
0HPEHU¶VௐFRVWௐRIௐJRRGVௐ
6HHௐWKHௐ5)3ௐDQGௐWHPSODWHௐ&RQWUDFWௐIRUௐ
DGGLWLRQDOௐGHWDLOV

*UDLQJHUௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐZLWKௐDௐ'LUHFWௐ6DOHVௐ
$GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HHௐ
³'6$)´
ௐRIௐ7ZRௐ3HUFHQWௐ

ௐRQௐௐDOOௐ
GLUHFWௐ3URGXFWௐ3XUFKDVHVௐ4XDOLI\LQJௐGLUHFWௐ3URGXFWௐ
3XUFKDVHVௐDUHௐWKRVHௐSXUFKDVHVௐPDGHௐGLUHFWO\ௐE\ௐDௐ
6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUௐ
*UDLQJHUௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐZLWKௐDௐ'LUHFWௐ6DOHVௐ
$GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HHௐ
³'6$)´
ௐRIௐ2QHௐ3HUFHQWௐ

ௐRQௐDOOௐ
3URGXFWௐ3XUFKDVHVௐPDGHௐWKURXJKௐDௐ0HPEHU¶VௐSDUWLFLSDWLRQௐLQௐ WKHௐ*UDLQJHUௐ$XWKRUL]HGௐ5HVHOOHUௐ3URJUDPௐ
*UDLQJHUௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐZLWKௐDௐ'LUHFWௐ6DOHVௐ
$GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HHௐ
³'6$)´
ௐRIௐ2QHௐ3HUFHQWௐ

ௐRQௐDOOௐ
3URGXFWௐ3XUFKDVHVௐPDGHௐWKURXJKௐDௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUௐ
DIILOLDWHGௐWRௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ3OXVௐ3URJUDPௐ
4XDOLI\LQJௐ3URGXFWௐ3XUFKDVHVௐDUHௐWKRVHௐSXUVXDQWௐWRௐWKHௐ DZDUGHGௐFRQWUDFWௐDQGௐVKDOOௐLQFOXGHௐWRWDOௐQHWௐLQYRLFHௐSULFHௐ OHVVௐIUHLJKWௐWD[HVௐUHWXUQHGௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐFUHGLWVௐ*UDLQJHUௐ ZLOOௐFDOFXODWHௐWKHௐ'6$)ௐDPRXQWௐTXDUWHUO\ௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐWKHௐ '6$)ௐSD\PHQWௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐZLWKLQௐIRUW\ILYHௐ

ௐGD\VௐIURPௐ
WKHௐHQGௐRIௐWKHௐTXDUWHUௐ*UDLQJHUௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐDௐTXDUWHUO\ௐ '6$)ௐUHSRUWௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐZLWKLQௐIRUW\ILYHௐ

ௐGD\VௐIURPௐ
WKHௐHQGௐRIௐWKHௐTXDUWHU


7DEOH$
'HSWKDQG%UHDGWKRI2IIHUHG(TXLSPHQW3URGXFWVDQG6HUYLFHV Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


375
/LQH
,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH


3URYLGHௐDௐGHWDLOHGௐGHVFULSWLRQௐRIௐWKHௐ
HTXLSPHQWௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐ
DUHௐRIIHULQJௐLQௐ\RXUௐSURSRVDO
1RUWKௐ$PHULFDௐ*UDLQJHU¶VௐRIIHUௐHQFRPSDVVHVௐWKHௐHQWLUHௐ86ௐSRUWIROLRௐRIௐௐPLOOLRQௐ PDLQWHQDQFHௐUHSDLUௐDQGௐRSHUDWLQJௐVXSSOLHVௐDQGௐௐ052ௐSURGXFWVௐLQௐ &DQDGD¶VௐSRUWIROLRௐDFURVVௐௐFDWHJRULHVௐSURYLGHGௐE\ௐௐVXSSOLHUVௐ,WௐLVௐ VXSSOHPHQWHGௐE\ௐVRXUFLQJௐSURILFLHQF\ௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWKDWௐFRPSOHPHQWௐRXUௐSURGXFWௐ RIIHUௐDORQJௐZLWKௐWKHௐH[SHUWLVHௐRIௐ*UDLQJHUௐWHDPௐPHPEHUVௐ,WௐFDSWXUHVௐWKHௐURXWLQHௐWRௐ VSHFLDOL]HGௐ052ௐSURGXFWௐRUௐVHUYLFHௐDQGௐLVௐFRQWLQXDOO\ௐHQKDQFHGௐWRௐPHHWௐHYROYLQJௐ 0HPEHUௐQHHGVௐ*UDLQJHU¶VௐDELOLW\ௐWRௐVHOOௐDௐVHUYLFHௐRUௐVROXWLRQௐZLWKLQௐDௐVSHFLILFௐ86ௐ RUௐ&DQDGLDQௐMXULVGLFWLRQௐPD\ௐEHௐOLPLWHGௐE\ௐODZௐDQGRUௐUHJXODWLRQௐ 3URGXFWௐFDWHJRULHVௐLQFOXGHGௐLQௐWKLVௐSURSRVDOௐUHIOHFWௐWKHௐIXOOௐVSHFWUXPௐRIௐIDFLOLW\ௐ052ௐ LQGXVWULDOௐDQGௐEXLOGLQJUHODWHGௐVXSSOLHVௐDQGௐUHODWHGௐHTXLSPHQWௐDFFHVVRULHVௐDQGௐ VHUYLFHVௐௐௐ&DWHJRULHVௐDQGௐVROXWLRQVௐRIIHUHGௐDUHௐFRPSOHPHQWDU\ௐWRௐWKHௐHTXLSPHQWௐ SURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUVௐZLWKௐFRQVROLGDWHGௐHIILFLHQWௐ DQGௐFRPSUHKHQVLYHௐFRVWVDYLQJVௐRSWLRQV

‡ௐௐௐௐ$EUDVLYHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ$LUௐ)LOWHUV
‡ௐௐௐௐ*ORYHVௐDQGௐKDQGௐSURWHFWLRQ
‡ௐௐௐௐ6DIHW\ௐ ௐ6HFXULW\
‡ௐௐௐௐ/LJKWLQJௐ/DPSVௐDQGௐ%DOODVWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ(OHFWULFDO
‡ௐௐௐௐ(OHFWURQLFVௐ$SSOLDQFHVௐDQGௐ%DWWHULHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ7RROVௐ ௐ7HVWௐ,QVWUXPHQWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ&OHDQLQJௐ ௐ-DQLWRULDO
‡ௐௐௐௐ+9$&ௐDQGௐ5HIULJHUDWLRQ
‡ௐௐௐௐ0HWDOZRUNLQJௐ0DFKLQLQJௐ ௐ)DEULFDWLRQ
‡ௐௐௐௐ0RWRUVௐ ௐ3RZHUௐ7UDQVPLVVLRQ
‡ௐௐௐௐ3QHXPDWLFVௐ ௐ+\GUDXOLFV
‡ௐௐௐௐ0DWHULDOௐ+DQGOLQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ3DFNDJLQJௐ ௐ6KLSSLQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ3DLQW
‡ௐௐௐௐ7DSHVௐ$GKHVLYHVௐ ௐ/XEULFDQWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ)OHHWௐ ௐ9HKLFOHௐ0DLQWHQDQFH
‡ௐௐௐௐ/DERUDWRU\
‡ௐௐௐௐௐ2IILFHௐ ௐ+RVSLWDOLW\ௐ6XSSOLHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ3LSHVௐ+RVHௐ7XEHௐ ௐ)LWWLQJV
‡ௐௐௐௐ3OXPELQJௐ ௐ3XPSV
‡ௐௐௐௐ)DVWHQHUVௐ+DUGZDUHௐ ௐ5DZௐ0DWHULDOV
‡ௐௐௐௐ%XLOGLQJௐ ௐ*URXQGௐ0DLQWHQDQFH
6(59,&(6ௐ$&5266ௐ)$&,/,7<ௐ052ௐ,1'8675,$/ௐ$1'ௐ%8,/',1*ௐ5(/$7('ௐ 6833/,(6ௐ$1'ௐ(48,30(17
,QௐDGGLWLRQௐWRௐWKHௐ$VVHVVPHQWVௐDQGௐ7UDLQLQJௐZHௐRIIHUௐZKLFKௐDUHௐGHWDLOHGௐLQௐ 5HVSRQVHௐௐ*UDLQJHUௐSURYLGHVௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLWKௐYDOXHDGGHGௐVXSSRUWௐVHUYLFHVௐZKLFKௐ FRPSOHPHQWௐWKHௐIDFLOLW\ௐ052ௐSURGXFWVௐZHௐRIIHU

‡ௐௐௐௐ*UDLQJHU
VௐQHWZRUNௐRIௐLQVWDOOHUVௐSURYLGHVௐWXUQNH\ௐDQGRUௐODERURQO\ௐIL[HGௐIHHௐ LQVWDOODWLRQௐDQGௐVXSSRUWௐVHUYLFHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ7XUQNH\ௐVHUYLFHௐRIIHULQJVௐLQFOXGHௐPDWHULDOVௐODERUௐUHF\FOLQJௐUHEDWHௐDGPLQLVWUDWLRQ ‡ௐௐௐௐ&XUUHQWO\ௐ*UDLQJHUௐKDVௐLGHQWLILHGௐௐFRPSDQLHVௐWKDWௐKDYHௐVDWLVILHGௐRXUௐYHWWLQJௐ SURFHVVௐ$OOௐFRPSDQLHVௐXVHGௐE\ௐ*UDLQJHUௐDUHௐOLFHQVHGௐLQVXUHGௐTXDOLILHGௐDQGௐ FDSDEOHௐRIௐSHUIRUPLQJௐLQௐDFFRUGDQFHௐZLWKௐ0HPEHUௐVHUYLFHௐUHTXLUHPHQWV $ௐ*UDLQJHUௐWHDPௐPHPEHUௐZLOOௐZRUNௐZLWKௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐPHPEHUௐWRௐVHFXUHௐWKHௐW\SHௐ RIௐVHUYLFHௐDQGௐGHVFULSWLRQௐRUௐSURYLGHௐUHTXLUHPHQWௐGHWDLOVௐ*UDLQJHU¶VௐVSHFLDOL]HGௐ WHDPௐZLOOௐH[DPLQHௐDQGௐVHOHFWௐWKHௐEHVWௐVXSSOLHUௐWRௐIXOILOOௐQHHGVௐLQFOXGLQJௐGHWHUPLQLQJௐ OHDGௐWLPHௐDQGௐFRPSHWLWLYHௐSULFLQJௐ2QFHௐDௐVXSSOLHUௐLVௐVHOHFWHGௐDௐTXRWHௐZLOOௐEHௐ SURYLGHGௐDQGௐVHQWௐWRௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐIRUௐUHYLHZௐDQGௐDSSURYDO 6(59,&(6ௐ2))(5
ௐ6HUYLFHVௐLQFOXGHௐLQYHQWRU\ௐPDQDJHPHQWௐVROXWLRQVௐ
LQFOXGLQJௐ
*UDLQJHUௐ³0DQDJHGௐ052´ௐVROXWLRQ
ௐLQVWDOODWLRQௐDVVHPEO\ௐDQGௐFRQVXOWLQJௐVHUYLFHVௐ
VHUYLFHVௐDGGUHVVLQJௐVDIHW\ௐWUDLQLQJௐDVVHVVPHQWVௐDQGௐVXVWDLQDELOLW\ௐ2XUௐWHFKQLFDOௐ H[SHUWVௐDVVLVWௐDJHQF\ௐRSHUDWLRQVௐDQGௐFRPSOLDQFHௐUHVSRQVLELOLWLHVௐ$GGLWLRQDOௐGHWDLOVௐ SHUWDLQLQJௐWRௐRXUௐVHUYLFHVௐRIIHUௐDUHௐSURYLGHGௐEHORZ
&RQVXOWLQJௐ6HUYLFHV
*UDLQJHUௐ&RQVXOWLQJௐHQJDJHVௐFXVWRPHUVௐXVLQJௐDௐSURYHQௐPHWKRGRORJ\ௐFRQVLVWLQJௐRIௐ $QDO\VLVௐ6WUDWHJ\ௐ'HYHORSPHQWௐDQGௐ,PSOHPHQWDWLRQௐ&RQVXOWDQWVௐDOVRௐKHOSௐLGHQWLI\ௐ RSSRUWXQLWLHVௐIRUௐHIILFLHQF\ௐWKDWௐDUHௐRIWHQௐIRUJRWWHQௐDVௐWRௐLQGLUHFWௐPDWHULDOVௐ PDQDJHPHQWௐ*UDLQJHU¶VௐLQGXVWU\ௐUHVHDUFKௐDQGௐH[SHULHQFHௐHQDEOHVௐLWௐWRௐLGHQWLI\ௐDQGௐ PRQLWRU LQGXVWU\ௐVWDQGDUGV 7KLV H[SHULHQFHௐSURYLGHV D VWDUWLQJௐSRLQW IRU FRVW GULYHUV Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


376

OLNH UHGXFLQJ ZDVWH LQ SURFHVVLQJ RU GHPRQVWUDWLQJ KRZ D FXVWRPHU FDQ UHGXFH LWV LQYHQWRU\ௐ:HௐOHDUQௐFXVWRPHUௐSURFHVVHVௐUHFRJQL]HௐLPSURYHPHQWௐRSSRUWXQLWLHVௐDQGௐ GHYHORSௐDௐVWUDWHJLFௐSODQௐRIௐVROXWLRQVௐ7KLVௐLQFOXGHVௐDௐFRPSUHKHQVLYHௐGDWDௐ PHDVXUHPHQWௐSDFNDJHௐWKDWௐGHPRQVWUDWHVௐKRZௐWRௐPHDVXUHௐSURJUHVVௐDQGௐVXVWDLQௐ UHVXOWVௐ2XUௐUHFRPPHQGDWLRQVௐKHOSௐLPSURYHௐVHUYLFHௐDQGௐHIILFLHQF\ௐIRUௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ 0HPEHUV
3OHDVHௐVHHௐ&RQVXOWLQJௐ6HUYLFHVௐ2YHUYLHZௐDORQJௐZLWKௐGRFXPHQWVௐGHWDLOLQJௐ*UDLQJHUௐ &RQVXOWLQJௐ6HUYLFHV
ௐ,QYHQWRU\ௐ%DVHOLQHௐ3URFXUHௐWRௐ3D\ௐDQGௐ6WRUHURRPௐ/D\RXWௐ VHUYLFHௐRIIHULQJVௐLQௐWKHௐ$GGLWLRQDOௐ'RFXPHQWVௐ=LSௐ)LOHௐ )$&,/,7<ௐ6(59,&(6
*UDLQJHUௐ)DFLOLWLHVௐ6HUYLFHVௐKHOSௐSURORQJௐWKHௐOLIHௐRIௐDௐ0HPEHU¶VௐEXLOGLQJVௐDQGௐ VWUXFWXUHVௐDQGௐVXSSRUWௐVDIHW\ௐLQLWLDWLYHVௐ%DFNHGௐE\ௐDௐQHWZRUNௐRIௐTXDOLILHGௐSURYLGHUVௐ WKHVHௐVHUYLFHVௐNHHSௐIDFLOLWLHVௐGU\ௐVDIHௐDQGௐVXVWDLQDEOHௐௐ 6HUYLFHVௐLQFOXGH

‡ௐௐௐௐ$LUௐEDUULHUௐDXGLWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ&HLOLQJௐ7LOHௐ,QVWDOODWLRQ5HSODFHPHQW

‡ௐௐௐௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐVHUYLFHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ3DWFKௐDQGௐUHSDLUௐVHUYLFHV

‡ௐௐௐௐ3UHYHQWDWLYHௐPDLQWHQDQFHௐFRQWUDFWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ5HVWRUDWLRQௐVHUYLFHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ5RRIௐFOHDQLQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ5RRIௐ5HVWRUDWLRQ

‡ௐௐௐௐ5RRIWRSௐVDIHW\ௐLQVWDOODWLRQ

)/225,1*ௐ6(59,&(6
‡ௐௐௐௐ&RQFUHWHௐ3ROLVKLQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ)ORRUௐ'HVLJQௐDQGௐ,QVWDOODWLRQ
‡ௐௐௐௐ)ORRUௐ5HSDLUV
‡ௐௐௐௐ)ORRUௐ6WULSLQJ
(1(5*<ௐ6(59,&(6
7KHௐ*UDLQJHUௐ(QHUJ\ௐ6HUYLFHVௐWHDPௐFDQௐLGHQWLI\ௐDQGௐLPSOHPHQWௐDௐZLGHௐUDQJHௐRIௐ HIILFLHQWௐVROXWLRQV
ௐWKURXJKௐLWVௐQHWZRUNௐRIௐTXDOLILHGௐLQVXUHGௐDQGௐOLFHQVHGௐVHUYLFHௐ SURYLGHUVௐ2XUௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUVௐKHOSௐIDFLOLWDWHௐWKHௐLQVWDOODWLRQௐRIௐHQHUJ\VDYLQJௐDQGௐ ZDWHUௐFRQVHUYDWLRQௐPHDVXUHVௐ*UDLQJHUௐFDQௐDOVRௐKHOSௐVHFXUHௐDSSOLFDEOHௐLQFHQWLYHVௐ DQGௐUHEDWHVௐIRUௐHQHUJ\ௐDQGௐZDWHUVDYLQJௐSURMHFWVௐௐ
+9$&ௐ)LOWHUௐ&KDQJH2XWௐDQGௐ3UHYHQWDWLYHௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ6HUYLFHV ௐ7RௐKHOSௐHQVXUHௐ
+9$&ௐXQLWVௐDUHௐIXQFWLRQLQJௐSURSHUO\ௐDQGௐHIILFLHQWO\ௐ*UDLQJHU¶VௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUVௐZLOO ௐ
‡ௐௐௐௐ9LVXDOO\ௐLQVSHFWௐDOOௐ+9$&ௐHTXLSPHQW
‡ௐௐௐௐ/RRNௐRYHUௐHOHFWULFDOௐDQGௐPHFKDQLFDOௐFRPSRQHQWVௐIRUௐH[FHVVLYHௐZHDUௐRUௐGDPDJH ‡ௐௐௐௐ&KDQJHௐILOWHUV
‡ௐௐௐௐ&KHFNௐEHOWVௐDQGௐVWDUWXS
$VVHVVPHQWV
ௐ$Q\ௐPHFKDQLFDOௐRUௐHOHFWULFDOௐLVVXHௐZLWKLQௐDௐV\VWHPௐFDQௐUHGXFHௐLWVௐ HIILFLHQF\ௐ*UDLQJHUௐFDQௐKHOSௐDGGUHVVௐWKHVHௐFRQFHUQVௐZLWKௐVHUYLFHVௐLQFOXGLQJௐVWHDPௐ OHDNௐLGHQWLILFDWLRQௐDQGௐPLWLJDWLRQௐGHIHFWLYHௐVWHDPௐWUDSௐUHSODFHPHQWௐDQGௐXSJUDGHVௐ LQIUDUHGௐVWXGLHVௐDQGௐLQVXODWLRQௐXSJUDGHVௐ$GMXVWPHQWVௐWRௐVWHDPௐV\VWHPௐFDQௐKHOSௐ LPPHGLDWHO\ௐUHGXFHௐRSHUDWLRQDOௐFRVWVௐ
(/(&75,&$/ௐ6(59,&(6
‡ௐௐௐௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ(PHUJHQF\ௐ6HUYLFHVௐ ௐ'LVDVWHUௐ5HFRYHU\
‡ௐௐௐௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ(QJLQHHULQJௐ6HUYLFHV
ௐ$UFௐ)ODVKௐ$QDO\VLVௐ&LUFXLWௐ/RDGLQJௐ6WXG\ௐ
(OHFWULFDOௐ6\VWHPVௐ$QDO\VLVௐ+DUPRQLFVௐ$VVHVVPHQW7HVWLQJௐ6HUYLFHVௐ3RZHUௐ &RQVXOWLQJௐ3RZHUௐ4XDOLW\ௐ&RUUHFWLRQௐ3URMHFWௐ(QJLQHHULQJ&XVWRPௐ'HVLJQௐ3URMHFWௐ 0DQDJHPHQWௐ5HPRWHௐ3RZHUௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ8QJURXQGHGௐWRௐ+LJKௐ5HVLVWDQFHௐ &RQYHUVLRQ
‡ௐௐௐௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ ௐ7HVWLQJ
ௐ,QIUDUHGௐ7HVWLQJௐ0RQLWRULQJௐ6\VWHPVௐ2Q6LWHௐ
3UHYHQWDWLYHௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ5HOD\ௐDQGௐ0HWHULQJௐ&DOLEUDWLRQௐ6HUYLFHௐ$JUHHPHQWVௐ 6SDUHௐ3DUWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ7XUQNH\ௐ,QVWDOODWLRQௐ6HUYLFHV
ௐௐ,QIUDUHGௐ9LHZLQJௐ:LQGRZௐ,QVWDOODWLRQௐ
&RRUGLQDWLRQௐ2Q6LWHௐ7UDLQLQJௐ3URMHFWௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ6LWHௐ0HDVXUHPHQWௐ6HUYLFHVௐ 6WDUWௐ8Sௐ6HUYLFHVௐ7XUQNH\ௐ&DSDELOLWLHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ0HGLXPௐ9ROWDJH/RZௐ9ROWDJHௐ6HUYLFHV
ௐௐ&LUFXLWௐ%UHDNHUௐ&RQYHUVLRQௐWRௐ9DFXXPௐ
6WDUWHUௐ'LUHFWௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ&LUFXLWௐ%UHDNHUVௐ,QGXVWULDOௐ(OHFWURQLFௐ5HSDLUVௐ1HWZRUNௐ 3URWHFWRUVௐ5HFRQGLWLRQLQJௐ3URJUDPௐIRUௐ&LUFXLWௐ%UHDNHUVௐ5HOD\ௐDQGௐ0HWHULQJௐ 5HWURILWV5HSODFHPHQWௐ5HPRWHௐ5DFNLQJௐ6\VWHPVௐ5HWURILOOௐ6ROXWLRQVௐ6ZLWFKJHDUௐ ([SDQVLRQVௐDQGௐ8SJUDGHVௐ7ULSௐ8QLWௐ5HWURILOOV
(0(5*(1&<ௐ35(3$5('1(66ௐ
*UDLQJHU DVVLVWV LQௐSODQQLQJ UHVSRQVH DQG UHFRYHU\ௐDFURVV WKH UDQJH RI 

Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


377

HPHUJHQFLHV LQFOXGLQJ

‡ௐௐௐௐ([SHULHQFHGௐFXVWRPHUௐVHUYLFHௐSURIHVVLRQDOVௐDUHௐDYDLODEOHௐSULRUௐWRௐDQ\ௐ HPHUJHQF\ௐDQGௐKRXUVௐDௐGD\ௐGD\VௐDௐZHHNௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDVVLVWDQFHௐZLWKௐXUJHQWௐ QHHGV
‡ௐௐௐௐ(PHUJHQF\ௐSUHSDUHGQHVVௐFDWDORJVௐFDSDELOLW\ௐJXLGHVௐDQGௐKD]DUGVSHFLILFௐ HPHUJHQF\ௐFKHFNOLVWVௐDUHௐDYDLODEOHௐIRUௐGRZQORDGௐRQOLQH
‡ௐௐௐௐ3URGXFWVௐDQGௐWHFKQLFDOௐH[SHUWLVHௐWRௐKHOSௐLQVWLWXWLRQVௐGHYHORSௐERWKௐEDVLFௐDQGௐ DGYDQFHGௐHPHUJHQF\ௐUHVSRQVHௐFDSDELOLWLHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ*UDLQJHUௐZLOOௐDOVRௐRSHQௐDௐEUDQFKௐORFDWLRQௐDWௐDQ\ௐWLPHௐWRௐDVVLVWௐUHVSRQVH ‡ௐௐௐௐ2QVLWHௐFRQWDLQHUVௐILOOHGௐZLWKௐVXSSOLHVௐFDQௐEHௐSURYLGHG ‡ௐௐௐௐ,QௐHPHUJHQF\ௐVLWXDWLRQVௐ*UDLQJHUௐEUDQFKௐKRXUVௐPD\ௐEHௐH[WHQGHGௐWRௐKRXUVௐDௐ GD\
‡ௐௐௐௐ&RQWUDFWௐSULFLQJௐUHPDLQVௐFRQVLVWHQWௐLQௐHPHUJHQF\ௐVLWXDWLRQV (19,5210(17$/ௐ+($/7+ௐ ௐ6$)(7<ௐ6(59,&(6
)HH%DVHGௐ6DIHW\ௐ$VVHVVPHQWVௐ ௐ$XGLWVௐDQGௐ7HVWLQJௐLQFOXGH ௐௐ
‡ௐௐௐௐ*DVௐ'HWHFWLRQௐ6HUYLFHௐ
5HIHUUDO

‡ௐௐௐௐ0DQDJHGௐ)RRWZHDUௐ3URJUDP
‡ௐௐௐௐ3UHVFULSWLRQௐ(\HZHDUௐ6ROXWLRQV
‡ௐௐௐௐ+HDWௐ6WUHVVௐ$VVHVVPHQWௐ
+RWௐ ௐ&ROG

‡ௐௐௐௐ+HDULQJௐ±ௐ(DUௐ)LWௐ7HVWௐ+HDULQJௐ/RVVௐ'HWHUPLQDWLRQVௐ :RUNௐ5HODWHG
ௐ±ௐ
$XGLRORJLVWௐUHYLHZHG
‡ௐௐௐௐ2QOLQHௐ5HVSLUDWRUௐ0HGLFDOௐ&OHDUDQFHௐ7HVWLQJௐ
‡ௐௐௐௐ3XOPRQDU\ௐ)XQFWLRQௐ7HVWLQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ5LJJLQJௐ ௐ6OLQJௐ,QVSHFWLRQVௐ
‡ௐௐௐௐ5HVSLUDWRUௐ)LWௐ7HVWLQJௐ5HVSLUDWRUௐ)LWௐ7HVWLQJௐௐ
‡ௐௐௐௐ,QGRRUௐ$LUௐ4XDOLW\ௐ$VVHVVPHQWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ,QGXVWULDOௐ+\JLHQHௐ$VVHVVPHQWVௐ
‡ௐௐௐௐ/DGGHUௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ6HUYLFHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ/RFNRXWௐ7DJRXWௐ$VVHVVPHQWVௐ0DFKLQHௐ*XDUGLQJௐ$XGLWVௐ ‡ௐௐௐௐ6LOLFDௐ'XVWௐ([SRVXUHௐ&RPSOLDQFHௐ6OLSVௐ7ULSVௐDQGௐ)DOOVௐ$VVHVVPHQW ௐ6XUYH\ௐ ௐ
$QDO\VLVௐRIௐ%XLOGLQJௐ:DWHUௐ6\VWHPVௐ7XUQNH\ௐ(QJLQHHUHGௐ ‡ௐௐௐௐ)DOOௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ6\VWHPௐ
5HIHUUDO

‡ௐௐௐௐ9HKLFOHௐ/LIWௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ6HUYLFHௐ9HQWLODWLRQௐ6\VWHPௐ7HVWLQJௐ:DUHKRXVH'&ௐ5DFNௐ ,QVSHFWLRQV
‡ௐௐௐௐ$('ௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ6HUYLFHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ(PHUJHQF\ௐ(\HZDVKௐ6WDWLRQௐ$VVHVVPHQWVௐ ௐ,QVSHFWLRQVௐ ‡ௐௐௐௐ(PHUJHQF\ௐ/LJKWௐDQGௐ([LWௐ/LJKWVௐ,QVSHFWLRQVௐ ௐ6HUYLFHௐ(PSOR\HHௐ([SRVXUHௐ 0RQLWRULQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ)DOOௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ$VVHVVPHQWV$XGLWVௐ)DOOௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ,QVSHFWLRQV +DUQHVVHVௐHWF
),5(ௐ6$)(7<
‡ௐௐௐௐ)LUHௐ$ODUPௐ6\VWHPௐ'HVLJQௐ ௐ,QVWDOODWLRQௐ
‡ௐௐௐௐ)LUHௐ$ODUPௐ6\VWHPௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ ௐ6HUYLFH
‡ௐௐௐௐௐ)LUHௐDQGௐ6PRNHௐ'DPSHUௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ ௐ5HSDLUV

‡ௐௐௐௐௐ)LUHௐDQGௐ6PRNHௐ'RRUௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ ௐ5HSDLUV

‡ௐௐௐௐௐ)LUHௐ([WLQJXLVKHUௐ,QVSHFWLRQVௐDQGௐ6HUYLFH
‡ௐௐௐௐௐ)LUHௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ$ZDUHQHVVௐ ௐ7HVWLQJௐ
VSULQNOHUௐV\VWHPV
ௐ)LUHVWRSௐDQGௐ)LUHௐ
%DUULHUௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ ௐ5HSDLUV
‡ௐௐௐௐ6SHFLDOௐ+D]DUGௐ)LUHௐ6XSSUHVVLRQௐ6\VWHPௐ'HVLJQௐ ௐ,QVWDOODWLRQௐ 5HIHUUDO

/$%ௐ6(59,&(6
‡ௐௐௐௐ/DEௐ)XUQLWXUHௐ$VVHPEO\ௐ ௐ,QVWDOODWLRQ

‡ௐௐௐௐ79ௐ)XUQLWXUHௐ$VVHPEO\ௐ ௐ,QVWDOODWLRQ
21/,1(ௐ6$)(7<ௐ6(59,&(6
(+ 6ௐ2QOLQHௐ6HUYLFHVௐ ௐ7UDLQLQJ
,QFLGHQWௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐDQGௐ$VVHWௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ
L&HUWDLQW\
ௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ

$XGLW3UR
ௐ/HDUQLQJௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ6\VWHPௐDQGௐ2QOLQHௐ(+ 6ௐ7UDLQLQJௐ/LEUDULHVௐ 2QOLQHௐ(+ 6ௐ7UDLQLQJௐ/LEUDULHVௐ
9LDௐ&XVWRPHU¶Vௐ/06
ௐ2QOLQHௐ+HDOWKFDUHௐ
&RPSOLDQFHௐ6\VWHPௐ
&5[

2QOLQHௐ6DIHW\ௐ7UDLQLQJௐ
&XVWRPHU¶Vௐ/06
ௐ6SHFLDOL]HGௐ2QOLQHௐ6DIHW\ௐ7UDLQLQJௐ
26+$ௐ
ௐ1)3$ௐ(
ௐ2QOLQHௐ6'6ௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ6\VWHPௐ2QOLQHௐ2FFXSDWLRQDOௐ+HDOWKௐ (YDOXDWLRQVௐ
$XGLRௐ3XOPRQDU\ௐ5HVSLUDWRU\

(+ 6ௐ7UDLQLQJௐ±ௐ,QVWUXFWRU/('/,9(ௐRUௐ9LUWXDO
‡ௐௐௐௐ0HGLFDOௐ*DVௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ3HUVRQQHOௐ&HUWLILFDWLRQௐ7UDLQLQJௐ $66(ௐ

‡ௐௐௐௐ0RUHௐWKDQௐௐ&ULWLFDOௐ7RSLFV
ௐௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ%%3ௐ&RQILQHGௐ6SDFHௐ)LUHௐ)DOOVௐ
+$=&20ௐ+$=0$7ௐ/272ௐDQGௐPRUH
‡ௐௐௐௐ5&5$ௐ7UDLQLQJௐ±ௐ6ROLGௐDQGௐKD]DUGRXVௐZDVWHௐGLVSRVDO ‡ௐௐௐௐ7RROER[ௐ7DONௐ5HVRXUFHVௐRQௐ0XOWLSOHௐ6DIHW\(+6ௐ&ULWLFDOௐ7RSLFV Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


378
352*5$0 352&('85( '(9(/230(17
(IIHFWLYHௐSURJUDPVௐDQGௐSURFHGXUHVௐKHOSௐHQVXUHௐFRPSOLDQFH DQGௐFUHDWHௐDௐVDIHௐZRUNSODFHௐIRUௐ\RXUௐHPSOR\HHVௐ7KHVHௐSURJUDPVௐDUHௐGHYHORSHGௐVRௐ WKDWௐ\RXUௐEXVLQHVVௐRSHUDWLRQVௐFDQௐEHௐFRQGXFWHGௐVDIHO\ௐDQGௐDUHௐSURYLGHGௐWKURXJKௐ RQOLQHௐWHPSODWHVௐRUௐFXVWRPௐRQVLWHௐGHYHORSPHQW
‡ௐௐௐௐ$UFௐ)ODVK(OHFWULFDOௐ6DIHW\
‡ௐௐௐௐ&RQILQHGௐ6SDFH
‡ௐௐௐௐ(PHUJHQF\ௐ$FWLRQௐ3ODQV
‡ௐௐௐௐ(QYLURQPHQWDOௐ6DIHW\
‡ௐௐௐௐ+D]DUGV
‡ௐௐௐௐ)RRGௐ6DIHO\
‡ௐௐௐௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐDQGௐ$VVHWௐ0DQDJHPHQW
‡ௐௐௐௐ)RRWZHDU%HQHILWௐ0DQDJHPHQW
‡ௐௐௐௐ/RFNRXW7DJRXW
‡ௐௐௐௐ0DFKLQHௐ*XDUGLQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ0HGLFDOௐ)LUVW$LG
‡ௐௐௐௐ2QOLQHௐ6DIHW\ௐ0DQDJHU
‡ௐௐௐௐ626ௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ
6RPHௐVHUYLFHVௐUHTXLUHௐTXDOLI\LQJௐSXUFKDVHௐ$GGLWLRQDOO\ௐGXHௐWRௐYDULRXVௐVWDWXWRU\ௐDQGௐ UHJXODWRU\ௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐDXWKRUL]DWLRQௐWRௐVHOOௐWKLVௐVHUYLFHௐWRௐVRPHௐ*RYHUQPHQWௐ FXVWRPHUVௐUHTXLUHVௐ*UDLQJHUௐOHJDOௐDQGௐFRPSOLDQFHௐUHYLHZ 3OHDVHௐVHHௐDWWDFKPHQWௐGHWDLOLQJௐ*UDLQJHU¶Vௐ9DOXHௐ$GGௐDQGௐ)HH%DVHGௐ6HUYLFHVௐLQௐ $GGLWLRQDOௐ'RFXPHQWVௐ=LSௐ
6RXUFLQJௐ
*UDLQJHU¶Vௐ6RXUFLQJௐ7HDPௐSURFXUHVௐ)DFLOLW\ௐ052ௐ,QGXVWULDOௐDQGௐ%XLOGLQJ5HODWHGௐ 6XSSOLHVௐDQGௐ(TXLSPHQWௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐQRWௐIRXQGௐLQௐWKHௐ*UDLQJHUௐ*HQHUDOௐ&DWDORJௐௐ 7KHௐ7HDPௐOHYHUDJHVௐ*UDLQJHU¶VௐEX\LQJௐSRZHUௐWRௐSURYLGHVௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLWKௐDௐWRWDOௐ FRVWௐVROXWLRQௐIRUௐLQIUHTXHQWO\ௐRUGHUHGௐLWHPVௐYLDௐTXLFNௐDFFHVVௐWRௐRYHUௐௐ VXSSOLHUVௐௐ
6RXUFHGௐSURGXFWVௐIRUௐ)DFLOLW\ௐ052ௐLQFOXGH

&86720ௐ.,77,1*ௐ&$3$%,/,7,(6
7KURXJKௐDௐFRPELQDWLRQௐRIௐVXSSOLHUௐSDUWQHUVௐDQGௐ6RXUFLQJௐFDSDELOLWLHVௐ*UDLQJHUௐ1RUWKௐ $PHULFDௐSURYLGHVௐDJHQFLHVௐDQGௐGHSDUWPHQWVௐZLWKௐFXVWRPL]HGௐVXSSO\ௐNLWVௐWRௐDVVLVWௐ ZLWKௐFULWLFDOௐRUௐHVVHQWLDOௐGHSDUWPHQWDOௐQHHGVௐPDVVௐFDVXDOW\ௐRUௐGLVDVWHUௐUHVSRQVHVௐௐ ([DPSOHVௐLQFOXGHௐVKHOWHUௐNLWVௐWRௐSUHSDUHௐIRUௐGLVDVWHUVௐDQGௐGHSOR\PHQWௐNLWVௐIRUௐILUVWௐ UHVSRQGHUVௐLQௐSUHSDUDWLRQௐIRUௐDQௐHYHQWௐ*UDLQJHUௐFDQௐDOVRௐSURYLGHௐNLWWLQJௐIRUௐQRQ GLVDVWHUௐFLUFXPVWDQFHV
*UDLQJHUௐ.LWௐ'HSOR\PHQWௐ9DOXH
&RXQW\ௐ
1<
ௐ5RDGௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ'HSDUWPHQWௐௐ6SULQJௐ

ௐௐ7RௐPLWLJDWHௐLQMXULHVௐDQGௐ
ORVWௐWLPHௐ*UDLQJHUௐZRUNHGௐZLWKௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUௐWRௐDVVHPEOHௐRYHUௐௐ SHUVRQDOௐ33(ௐNLWVௐIRUௐLWVௐFUHZௐPHPEHUVௐௐௐ*UDLQJHUௐLGHQWLILHGௐDQGௐVHFXUHGௐSURGXFWௐ VDPSOHVௐZLWKௐYDU\LQJௐIHDWXUHVௐDQGௐSULFHௐSRLQWVௐIRUௐWKHௐ&RXQW\¶VௐHYDOXDWLRQௐDQGௐ VHOHFWLRQௐ7KHௐ*UDLQJHUௐ%UDQFKௐDVVHPEOHGௐWKHௐQHFHVVDU\ௐERRWVௐKHOPHWVௐDQGௐRWKHUௐ LWHPVௐLQYHQWRULHGௐWKHௐSURGXFWVௐFUHDWHGௐLQGLYLGXDOௐNLWVௐLQVLGHௐDௐFOHDUௐEDJௐODEHOHGௐ WKHௐEDJVௐZLWKௐFUHZௐPHPEHUௐQDPHVௐDQGௐGHOLYHUHGௐWRௐHDFKௐRIௐIRXUௐJDUDJHV 86ௐ3DQGHPLFௐ$VVLVWDQFHௐ
ௐ*UDLQJHUௐDQGௐDௐVXSSOLHUௐSDUWQHUௐVRXUFHGௐSURGXFWௐ
JOREDOO\ௐDLUௐIUHLJKWHGௐLQௐFRPSRQHQWVௐDVVHPEOHGௐDQGௐIXOILOOHGௐUHTXHVWVௐIRUௐSDQGHPLFௐ NLWVௐWRௐHDFKௐRIௐWKHௐORZHUௐௐVWDWHVௐௐ7KHௐௐPLOOLRQௐNLWVௐZHUHௐGLVWULEXWHGௐWRௐ6WDWHVௐ &RXQWLHVௐDQGௐORFDOௐJRYHUQPHQWV
9DFFLQDWLRQௐ6XSSRUWௐ
ௐ:RUNLQJௐZLWKௐDௐVXSSOLHUௐSDUWQHUௐ*UDLQJHUௐGHSOR\HGௐGULYHௐ WKURXJKௐWHVWLQJௐDQGௐYDFFLQDWLRQௐVWDWLRQVௐIRUௐPXOWLSOHௐVWDWHVௐDQGௐFRXQWLHVௐWKURXJKRXWௐ WKHௐSDQGHPLFௐ7KHௐVWUXFWXUHVௐLQFOXGHGௐௐௐDௐODQHௐLQIODWDEOHௐGULYHௐWKURXJKௐDQWHௐURRPௐ DQGௐDௐ[ௐFRQQHFWHGௐVWUXFWXUHௐWRௐKRXVHௐVXSSRUWௐVWDIIௐDQGௐYDFFLQHௐIUHH]HUVௐ7KHௐ XQLWVௐZHUHௐSDFNDJHGௐLQௐWUDLOHUVௐDQGௐSDOOHWௐER[HVௐEDVHGௐRQௐFXVWRPHUௐSUHIHUHQFHௐ $IJKDQLVWDQௐ5HIXJHHௐ6XSSRUWௐ±ௐ
ௐ7RௐKHOSௐVXSSRUWௐ$IJKDQௐUHIXJHHௐUHOLHIௐHIIRUWVௐ
*UDLQJHUௐDQGௐVXSSOLHUௐSDUWQHUVௐTXLFNO\ௐVHFXUHGௐDQGௐDVVHPEOHGௐDௐK\JLHQHௐNLWௐZLWKௐ SURGXFWVௐLQFOXGLQJௐEODQNHWVௐWRZHOVௐDQGௐZDVKFORWKVௐ$WௐLWVௐSHDNௐௐK\JLHQHௐNLWVௐ ZHUHௐSURYLGHGௐWRௐFXVWRPHUV
 :LWKLQௐWKLVௐ5)3ௐFDWHJRU\ௐWKHUHௐPD\ௐEHௐ
VXEFDWHJRULHVௐRIௐVROXWLRQVௐ/LVWௐVXEFDWHJRU\ௐ
WLWOHVௐWKDWௐEHVWௐGHVFULEHௐ\RXUௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐ
VHUYLFHV
7KHௐIROORZLQJௐLVௐDௐVXPPDU\ௐRIௐFXUUHQWௐPDMRUௐVXEFDWHJRULHVௐLQௐ*UDLQJHUௐ1RUWKௐ $PHULFD¶Vௐ)DFLOLW\ௐ052ௐ,QGXVWULDOௐDQGௐ%XLOGLQJ5HODWHGௐ6XSSOLHVௐDQGௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ SRUWIROLRௐ,QௐSXUVXLQJௐLQQRYDWLYHௐDQGௐFRVWHIIHFWLYHௐSURGXFWVௐ*UDLQJHUௐIUHTXHQWO\ௐ UHVWUXFWXUHVௐSURGXFWௐFDWHJRULHVௐIRUௐFODULW\ௐDQGௐSURGXFWௐDOLJQPHQWௐௐ *UDLQJHUௐ1RUWKௐ$PHULFDௐ052ௐ6XEFDWHJRULHVௐLQFOXGH
ௐௐ
Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


379
‡ௐௐௐௐ6DIHW\ௐ ௐ6HFXULW\
ௐ$UFௐ)ODVKௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ$VEHVWRVௐ$EDWHPHQWௐ&RQILQHGௐ6SDFHௐ (TXLSPHQWௐ(PHUJHQF\ௐ(\Hௐ:DVKௐDQGௐ6KRZHUௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ(PHUJHQF\ௐ 3UHSDUHGQHVVௐ(UJRQRPLFVௐ(\Hௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ)DFHௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ)DOOௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ )LUHILJKWLQJௐ&ORWKLQJௐDQGௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ)LUHௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ)LUVWௐ$LGௐ ௐ:RXQGௐ&DUHௐ )ORRUௐ0DWVௐ)RRWZHDUௐ ௐ)RRWZHDUௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ*DVௐ'HWHFWLRQௐ+DQGௐ ௐ$UPௐ 3URWHFWLRQௐ+HDGௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ+HDULQJௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ/RFNRXWௐ7DJRXWௐ0HGLFDOௐ6XSSOLHVௐ ௐ (TXLSPHQWௐ1RLVHௐ&RQWUROௐ3RUWDEOHௐ&RROHUVௐDQGௐ%HYHUDJHVௐ3URWHFWLYHௐ&ORWKLQJௐ 5HVSLUDWRU\ௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ6DIHW\ௐ$ODUPVௐDQGௐ:DUQLQJVௐ6DIHW\ௐ6WRUDJHௐ6LJQVௐ ௐ )DFLOLW\ௐ,GHQWLILFDWLRQௐ3URGXFWVௐ6RUEHQWVௐ6SLOOௐ&RQWUROௐDQGௐ6SLOOௐ&RQWDLQPHQWௐ7UDIILFௐ 6DIHW\ௐ7UDLQLQJௐ:DWHUௐ6DIHW\ௐ:RUNZHDUௐ$FFHVVௐ%DUULHUVௐDQGௐ&URZGௐ&RQWUROௐ 'HWHFWRUVௐ6FDQQHUVௐ ௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ'RRUௐDQGௐ'RRUௐ)UDPHVௐ.H\ௐ&RQWUROௐ ௐ ,GHQWLILFDWLRQௐ/RFNVௐ0DLOER[HVௐ3ROLFHௐ ௐ(07ௐ8QLIRUPVௐ6DIHVௐ6HFXULW\ௐ$ODUPVௐDQGௐ :DUQLQJVௐ6HFXULW\ௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ6HFXULW\ௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐDQGௐ/DZௐ (QIRUFHPHQWௐ6HFXULW\ௐ6HDOVௐ6HOIௐ'HIHQVHௐ7ZRௐ:D\ௐ5DGLRVௐDQGௐ3ROLFHௐ6FDQQHUV ‡ௐௐௐௐ/LJKWLQJௐ ௐ(OHFWULFDO
ௐௐ%DOODVWVௐ ௐ'ULYHUVௐ(PHUJHQF\ௐ ௐ([LWௐ/LJKWLQJௐ
)ODVKOLJKWVௐ+DQGௐ ௐ3RUWDEOHௐ/DPSVௐ-REௐ6LWHௐ/LJKWLQJௐ/DPSௐ ௐ/LJKWௐ%XOEௐ'LVSRVDOௐ ௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ/LJKWௐ%XOEVௐ ௐ/DPSVௐ/LJKWLQJௐ&RQWUROVௐ/LJKWLQJௐ)L[WXUHVௐ ௐ5HWURILWௐ .LWVௐ/LJKWLQJௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ2XWGRRUௐ/LJKWLQJௐ7DVNௐ/LJKWVௐ&RQGXLWௐ)LWWLQJVௐ ௐ 6WUXWௐ&KDQQHOௐ)UDPLQJௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ%R[HVௐ ௐ(QFORVXUHVௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ6XSSOLHVௐ([WHQVLRQௐ &RUGVௐ3RZHUௐ6WULSVௐ ௐ&RUGௐ5HHOVௐ)XVHVௐ&LUFXLWௐ%UHDNHUVௐ ௐ6DIHW\ௐ6ZLWFKHVௐ *URXQGLQJௐ5RGVௐ%UDLGVௐDQGௐ&RQQHFWRUVௐ,QGXVWULDOௐ&RQWUROVௐ$XWRPDWLRQௐDQGௐ 0DFKLQHௐ6DIHW\ௐ0RWRUௐ&RQWUROVௐ6RODUௐDQGௐ7HPSRUDU\ௐ3RZHUௐ7UDQVIRUPHUVௐ836ௐ ௐ 3RZHUௐ6XSSOLHVௐ9RLFHௐDQGௐ'DWDௐ:LUHௐDQGௐ&DEOHௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ:LUHௐ&DEOHௐ ௐ &RUGVHWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ(OHFWURQLFVௐ$SSOLDQFHVௐ ௐ%DWWHULHV
ௐௐ$SSOLDQFHVௐ%DWWHULHVௐ ௐ%DWWHU\ௐ&KDUJHUVௐ
&RPPXQLFDWLRQVௐ(OHFWURQLFௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ ௐ$SSOLDQFHௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ(OHFWURQLFVௐ ,QWHUFRPVௐ ௐ6SHDNHUV
‡ௐௐௐௐ7RROVௐ ௐ7HVWௐ,QVWUXPHQWV
ௐௐ+DQGௐ7RROVௐ0HDVXULQJௐ ௐ/D\RXWௐ7RROVௐ3RZHUௐ7RROVௐ
6RFNHWVௐ ௐ%LWVௐ7RROௐ%DODQFHUVௐ5HWUDFWRUVௐDQGௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ7RROௐ6WRUDJHௐ7RROௐ 7HWKHULQJௐ ௐ'URSSHG2EMHFWௐ6DIHW\ௐ$LUௐ0RYHPHQWௐ$VSKDOWௐ7HVWLQJௐ$XWRPRWLYHௐ 7HVWLQJௐ&RPEXVWLRQௐ7HVWLQJௐ&RQFUHWHௐ7HVWLQJௐ'DWDௐ5HFRUGLQJௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ3RZHUௐ 7HVWLQJௐ(OHFWURQLF%HQFKௐ7HVWLQJௐ,QGRRUௐ$LUௐ4XDOLW\ௐ1RQHOHFWULFDOௐ3URSHUWLHVௐ7HVWLQJௐ 3DYHPHQWௐ4XDOLW\ௐ3UHVVXUHௐ ௐ9DFXXPௐ0HDVXUHPHQWௐ3URFHVVௐ0RQLWRULQJௐ 5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐIRUௐ&RQVWUXFWLRQௐDQGௐ3DYHPHQWௐ7HVWLQJௐ7HPSHUDWXUHௐDQGௐ (QYLURQPHQWDOௐ0HDVXUHPHQW
‡ௐௐௐௐ&OHDQLQJௐ ௐ-DQLWRULDO
ௐௐ&OHDQLQJௐ ௐ-DQLWRULDOௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ ௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ &OHDQLQJௐ&KHPLFDOVௐ&OHDQLQJௐ6XSSOLHVௐ)ORRUௐ&OHDQLQJௐ0DFKLQHVௐ)RRWZHDUௐ 6FUXEEHUVௐDQGௐ6DQLWL]HUVௐ+DQGௐDQGௐ3HUVRQDOௐ&DUHௐ2GRUௐ&RQWUROௐ&KHPLFDOVௐ ௐ 6XSSOLHVௐ3DSHUௐ3URGXFWௐ ௐ'LVSHQVHUVௐ:DVWHௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ ௐ7UDVKௐ6XSSOLHV ‡ௐௐௐௐ+9$&ௐ ௐ5HIULJHUDWLRQ
ௐௐ$&ௐ5HIULJHUDWLRQௐ ௐ6XSSOLHVௐ$LUௐ&RQGLWLRQHUVௐ ௐ
$FFHVVRULHVௐ$LUௐ)LOWHUVௐ$LUௐ7UHDWPHQWௐ&HQWUDOௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ&RROLQJௐ)DQVௐ)DQௐ %ODGHVௐ ௐ3URSHOOHUVௐ+9$&ௐ ௐ5HIULJHUDWLRQௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ+9$&ௐ&RQWUROVௐ ௐ 7KHUPRVWDWVௐ+9$&ௐ7HVWௐ,QVWUXPHQWVௐ+HDWHUVௐ5HIULJHUDWLRQௐ7HVWௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ 9HQWLODWLRQௐ(TXLSPHQW
‡ௐௐௐௐ0HWDOZRUNLQJௐ ௐ)DEULFDWLRQௐ
0DFKLQLQJௐ$EUDVLYHVௐ ௐ:HOGLQJ

ௐௐ&ODPSLQJௐ
:RUNKROGLQJௐ ௐ3RVLWLRQLQJௐ&XWWLQJௐ)OXLGVௐ ௐ&RRODQWௐ6\VWHPVௐ'ULOOLQJௐ ௐ+ROHPDNLQJௐ ,QGH[DEOHௐ&XWWLQJௐ7RROVௐ0DFKLQHௐ ௐ7RROௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ0DFKLQHU\ௐ0LOOLQJௐ3UHFLVLRQௐ 0HDVXULQJௐ7KUHDGLQJௐ7RROௐ%ODQNVௐ7RROKROGLQJௐ ௐ7RROLQJௐ7XUQLQJௐ%RULQJௐ ௐ *URRYLQJௐ$EUDVLYHௐ%ODVWLQJௐ$EUDVLYHௐ%UXVKHVௐDQGௐ:KHHOௐ.LWVௐ$EUDVLYHௐ'UHVVLQJௐ 3URGXFWVௐ$EUDVLYHௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ$EUDVLYHௐ5ROOVௐ ௐ.LWVௐ$EUDVLYHௐ 6KDUSHQLQJௐ6WRQHVௐ&XW2IIௐDQGௐ*ULQGLQJௐ:KHHOVௐ'HEXUULQJௐ)ODSௐ:KHHOVௐ0RXQWHGௐ 3RLQWVௐ ௐ.LWVௐ3ROLVKLQJௐ6DQGLQJௐ%HOWVௐ ௐ.LWVௐ6DQGLQJௐ'LVFVௐDQGௐ.LWVௐ6DQGLQJௐ +DQGௐ3DGVௐDQGௐ6SRQJHVௐ6DQGSDSHUௐ ௐ.LWVௐ6SHFLDOW\ௐ$EUDVLYHVௐ ௐ.LWVௐ6XUIDFHௐ &RQGLWLRQLQJௐ:KHHOVௐ7XPEOHUVௐ ௐ0HGLDௐ$LUௐ&DUERQௐ$UFௐ&XWWLQJௐ ௐ*RXJLQJௐ$UFௐ :HOGLQJௐ)LOOHUௐ0HWDOVௐ)XPHௐ([WUDFWRUVௐ ௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ*DVௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ3ODVPDௐ &XWWLQJௐ3ODVWLFௐ:HOGLQJௐ6ROGHULQJௐ6SRWௐ:HOGLQJௐ6WXGௐ:HOGLQJௐ:HOGௐ&OHDQLQJௐ :HOGLQJௐ&DEOHௐ*URXQGVௐDQGௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ:HOGLQJௐ&KHPLFDOVௐ:HOGLQJௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ 5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ:HOGLQJௐ6DIHW\ௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ:HOGLQJௐ6XSSOLHVௐ:HOGLQJௐ7DEOHVௐ ௐ $FFHVVRULHV
‡ௐௐௐௐ0RWRUVௐ ௐ3RZHUௐ7UDQVPLVVLRQ
ௐௐ$&ௐ0RWRUVௐ'&ௐ0RWRUVௐ0RWRUௐ&DSDFLWRUVௐ
0RWRUௐ'ULYHVௐ ௐ6SHHGௐ&RQWUROVௐ0RWRUௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ ௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ0RWRUௐ0RXQWLQJௐ ௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ0RWRUௐ0RXQWLQJௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ0RWRUௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ%HDULQJVௐ %HOWௐ ௐ&KDLQௐ*XLGHVௐ7HQVLRQHUVௐ ௐ7LJKWHQHUVௐ%HOWVௐ ௐ3XOOH\Vௐ%UDNHVௐ ௐ&OXWFKHVௐ %XVKLQJVௐ*HDULQJௐ*HDUPRWRUVௐ/LQHDUௐ0RWLRQௐ3RZHUௐ7UDQVPLVVLRQௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ 5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ5ROOHUௐ&KDLQVௐ ௐ6SURFNHWVௐ6KDIWௐ&RXSOLQJVௐ&ROODUVௐDQGௐ 8QLYHUVDOௐ-RLQWVௐ6SHHGௐ5HGXFHUVௐ9LEUDWRUV
Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


380
‡ௐௐௐௐ3QHXPDWLFV +\GUDXOLFV
ௐௐ+\GUDXOLF $FFXPXODWRUV +\GUDXOLF &\OLQGHUV 6HDOV
+\GUDXOLFௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ)LOWUDWLRQௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ)LWWLQJVௐ +\GUDXOLFௐ+RVHௐ6OHHYHVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ0RWRUVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ2LOௐ&RROHUVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ3RZHUௐ 7RROVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ3RZHUௐ8QLWVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ3XPSVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ5DPVௐ ௐ7RROVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ 7DQNVௐ+\GUDXOLFௐ9DOYHVௐ$LUௐ&RPSUHVVRUVௐ9DFXXPௐ3XPSVௐ ௐ%ORZHUVௐ&DEOHௐ5HHOVௐ &RPSUHVVHGௐ$LUௐ7UHDWPHQWௐ3QHXPDWLFௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ3QHXPDWLFௐ 0RWRUVௐ3QHXPDWLFௐ6\VWHPௐ&RPSRQHQWVௐ3QHXPDWLFௐ7RROVௐ3QHXPDWLFௐ7XEHௐ)LWWLQJVௐ 3QHXPDWLFௐ9DOYHVௐ9DFXXPௐ6\VWHPௐ&RPSRQHQWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ0DWHULDOௐ+DQGOLQJ
ௐௐ$FFHVVௐ/DGGHUVௐ3ODWIRUPVௐ ௐ6FDIIROGLQJௐ'RFNௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ /LIWLQJௐ3XOOLQJௐ ௐ3RVLWLRQLQJௐ/RDGௐ6HFXULQJௐ0DWHULDOௐ+DQGOLQJௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ 6FDOHVௐDQGௐ6FDOHௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ6WRUDJHௐ ௐ:RUNVSDFHௐ6WUXFWXUDOௐ)UDPLQJௐ6\VWHPVௐ 7UDQVSRUWLQJ
‡ௐௐௐௐ3DFNDJLQJௐ ௐ6KLSSLQJ
ௐௐ%DJVௐ(TXLSPHQWௐDQGௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ&DUWRQௐ6WDSOHVௐ ௐ
6WDSOHUVௐ(GJHௐ ௐ&RUQHUௐ3DFNDJLQJௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ0RYLQJௐ%ODQNHWVௐ ௐ&RYHUVௐ 3DFNDJHௐ/DEHOVௐ ௐ6KLSSLQJௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ3DFNDJLQJௐ7DEOHVௐ ௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ 3DFNDJLQJௐ7DSHVௐ'LVSHQVHUVௐ ௐ0DFKLQHVௐ3DOOHWVௐ ௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ3URWHFWLYHௐ 3DFNDJLQJௐ6KLSSLQJௐ ௐ0DLOURRPௐ6FDOHVௐ6KLSSLQJௐ%R[HVௐ3DGVௐDQGௐ7XEHVௐ 6KLSSLQJௐ0DLOHUVௐ ௐ(QYHORSHVௐ6KULQNௐ:UDSௐ)LOPVௐ ௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ6WUDSSLQJௐ6WUHWFKௐ :UDS
‡ௐௐௐௐ7DSHVௐ$GKHVLYHVௐ ௐ/XEULFDQWV
ௐௐ$GKHVLYHௐ ௐ6HDODQWௐ'LVSHQVLQJௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ
$GKHVLYHௐ ௐ6HDODQWௐ6XUIDFHௐ3UHSDUDWLRQௐ$GKHVLYHVௐ ௐ*OXHVௐ&DXONVௐ6HDODQWVௐ ௐ )LOOHUVௐ&RQFUHWHௐDQGௐ$VSKDOWௐ3RWWLQJௐ&RPSRXQGVௐ ௐ3URWHFWLYHௐ&RDWLQJVௐ3XWWLHVௐ 7DSHௐ7KUHDGORFNHUVௐDQGௐ*DVNHWௐ6HDODQWVௐ$QWL6HL]Hௐ&RPSRXQGVௐ)LWWLQJVௐDQGௐ+RVHௐ 6\VWHPVௐ*UHDVHௐ)HHGHUVௐDQGௐ3UHFLVLRQௐ0HWHULQJௐ3XPSVௐ*UHDVHௐ*XQVௐ*UHDVHVௐ /XEULFDQWௐ3XPSVௐ/XEULFDQWVௐ ௐ3HQHWUDWLQJௐ/XEULFDQWVௐ/XEULFDWLRQௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ 5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ/XEULFDWRUௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ0ROGௐ5HOHDVHௐ$JHQWVௐ2LOHUVௐ5HVHUYRLUVௐ DQGௐ6SUD\HUVௐ2LOVௐ6WRUDJHௐ ௐ'LVSHQVLQJௐ6\VWHPV
‡ௐௐௐௐ)OHHWௐ ௐ9HKLFOHௐ0DLQWHQDQFH
ௐௐ$XWRௐ%RG\ௐ5HSDLUௐ%UDNHVௐ7LUHVௐ ௐ:KHHOVௐ
0DLQWHQDQFHௐ)OHHWௐ ௐ9HKLFOHௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ6WRUDJHௐ/LIWLQJௐ 0RYLQJௐDQGௐ3URWHFWLRQௐ7RZLQJௐ ௐ7UDLOHUௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ9HKLFOHௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ9HKLFOHௐ &OHDQLQJௐ6XSSOLHVௐ9HKLFOHௐ'LDJQRVWLFVௐ ௐ,QVSHFWLRQௐ9HKLFOHௐ(OHFWULFDOௐ ௐ%DWWHU\ௐ 3RZHUௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ9HKLFOHௐ(QJLQHௐ5DGLDWRUௐ ௐ([KDXVWௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ9HKLFOHௐ +HDWLQJௐ ௐ&RROLQJௐ9HKLFOHௐ/LJKWLQJௐ9HKLFOHௐ/XEULFDQWVௐ9HKLFOHௐ6SHFLDOW\ௐ7RROVௐ 9HKLFOHௐ6WHHULQJௐ ௐ6XVSHQVLRQௐ9HKLFOHௐ:LQGVKLHOGௐ0DLQWHQDQFH ‡ௐௐௐௐ/DEௐ2IILFHௐ ௐ+RVSLWDOLW\ௐ6XSSOLHV
ௐௐ)ORRULQJௐ)RRGௐ6HUYLFHௐDQGௐ)RRGௐ
3URFHVVLQJௐ)XUQLWXUHௐ)XUQLWXUHௐ+RVSLWDOLW\ௐ ௐ)RRGௐ6HUYLFHௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ 3DUWVௐ+RVSLWDOLW\ௐ6SRUWVௐ ௐ5HFUHDWLRQDOௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ$XGLRௐ9LVXDOௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ %LQGHUVௐ ௐ&OLSERDUGVௐ%RDUGVௐ ௐ(DVHOVௐ%XVLQHVVௐ&DVHVௐ&DOHQGDUVௐ ௐ3ODQQHUVௐ &OLSVௐ3XVKௐ3LQVௐDQGௐ5XEEHUௐ%DQGVௐ&ORFNௐDQGௐ7LPHௐ&ORFNௐ6\VWHPVௐ&RPSXWHUௐ 6XSSOLHVௐ ௐ0HGLDௐ'RFXPHQWௐ&RYHUVௐ'LVSOD\VௐDQGௐ)UDPHVௐ)LOHௐ)ROGHUVௐDQGௐ %R[HVௐ)ODJVௐ)ODJௐ3ROHVௐDQGௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ,QNௐ6WDPSVௐ ௐ,QNௐ3DGVௐ,QNௐDQGௐ7RQHUௐ &DUWULGJHVௐ/DPLQDWLQJௐDQGௐ%LQGLQJௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ2IILFHௐ&OHDQHUVௐ2IILFHௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ 5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ2IILFHௐ0DFKLQHVௐ ௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ2IILFHௐ2UJDQL]HUVௐ2IILFHௐ3DSHUௐ ௐ1RWHERRNVௐ3DSHUௐ6KUHGGHUVௐ3DSHUௐ&XWWHUVௐDQGௐ3DSHUௐ)ROGLQJௐ0DFKLQHVௐ5HWDLOௐ 6XSSOLHVௐ6WDSOHUVௐ7DSHௐ'LVSHQVHUVௐDQGௐ+ROHௐ3XQFKHVௐ7UDQVSDUHQWௐ2IILFHௐ7DSHௐ :ULWLQJௐ ௐ&RUUHFWLRQௐ%RRNVௐ ௐ%RRNVௐ6XSSOLHVௐ&ODVVURRPௐ6XSSOLHVௐ'HFRUDWLRQௐ ,QFHQWLYHௐ7R\Vௐ$JULFXOWXUDOௐ7HVWLQJௐ&KURPDWRJUDSK\ௐ/DEௐ&KHPLFDOVௐ/DEௐ &RQVXPDEOHVௐ/DEௐ'LDJQRVWLFVௐ/DEௐ(GXFDWLRQௐ ௐ7UDLQLQJௐ/DEௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ/DEௐ )LOWUDWLRQௐ/DEௐ)XPHௐ+RRGVௐDQGௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ/DEௐ)XUQLWXUHௐ/DEௐ,QVWUXPHQWVௐ/DEௐ 2YHQVௐ+HDWLQJௐDQGௐ5HIULJHUDWLRQௐ/DEௐ6WRUDJHௐDQGௐ7UDQVSRUWௐ/DEௐ6XSSO\ௐ (TXLSPHQWௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ/DEௐ8WHQVLOVௐ/DEZDUHௐ0DWHULDOௐ7HVWLQJௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ 0LFURELRORJ\ௐDQGௐ0ROHFXODUௐ%LRORJ\ௐ6XSSOLHVௐ3DUWLFOHௐ6L]LQJௐ3K\VLFDOௐ7HVWௐ (TXLSPHQWௐDQGௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ6RLOௐ7HVWLQJௐ:DWHUௐ4XDOLW\ௐDQGௐ3XULILFDWLRQௐ:DWHUௐ 7HVWLQJௐ(TXLSPHQWௐDQGௐ0HWHUV
‡ௐௐௐௐ3LSHVௐ+RVHௐ7XEHௐ ௐ)LWWLQJV
ௐௐ+RVHௐ3URGXFWVௐ3LSHௐ3URGXFWVௐ7XEHௐ3URGXFWV
‡ௐௐௐௐ3OXPELQJௐ ௐ3XPSV
ௐௐ%DWKURRPௐ+DUGZDUHௐ%DWKWXEVௐ6KRZHUVௐ ௐ5HSDLUௐ3DUWVௐ &HLOLQJௐ7LOHVௐ ௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ'UDLQVௐ ௐ'UDLQDJHௐ'ULQNLQJௐ)RXQWDLQVௐ%RWWOHௐ)LOOHUVௐ ௐ :DWHUௐ'LVSHQVHUVௐ)DXFHWVௐ)L[WXUHVௐ*DUEDJHௐ'LVSRVDOVௐDQGௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ*DVௐDQGௐ :DWHUௐ/LQHௐ&RQQHFWRUVௐ*DVNHWVௐ,QVXODWLRQௐ/LTXLGௐ/HYHOௐ*DXJHVௐDQGௐ6LJKWௐ ,QGLFDWRUVௐ3LSHௐ7XELQJௐDQGௐ)LWWLQJVௐ3OXPELQJௐ+RVHVௐ3OXPELQJௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ3DUWVௐ 3OXPELQJௐ9DOYHVௐ6LQNVௐ:DVKௐ)RXQWDLQVௐ ௐ5HSDLUௐ3DUWVௐ7RLOHWVௐ8ULQDOVௐDQGௐ 5HSDLUௐ3DUWVௐ:DWHUௐ)LOWUDWLRQௐ ௐ3XULILFDWLRQௐ6\VWHPVௐ:DWHUௐ+HDWHUVௐ:DWHUௐ 6RIWHQHUVௐ ௐ6RIWHQLQJௐ6DOWௐ$HUDWLRQௐ&HQWULIXJDOௐ3XPSVௐ&KHPLFDOௐ3XPSVௐ &LUFXODWLQJௐ3XPSVௐ)ODQJHVௐ8QLRQVௐ ௐ&RQWUROVௐ&RQGHQVDWHௐ3XPSVௐ ௐ3DQௐ 6ZLWFKHVௐ&RQGHQVDWHௐ5HWXUQௐ ௐ%RLOHUௐ)HHGௐ6\VWHPVௐ&RRODQWௐ3XPSVௐ'LDSKUDJPௐ 3XPSVௐ'UXPௐ3XPSVௐ(OHFWURQLFVௐ&RROLQJௐ)LOWUDWLRQௐ)OH[LEOHௐ,PSHOOHUௐ3XPSVௐ)XHOௐ DQGௐ2LOௐ7UDQVIHUௐ3XPSVௐ0DFKLQHௐ7RROௐDQGௐ3DUWVௐ:DVKHUௐ3XPSVௐ0DULQHௐ3XPSVௐ 3OXQJHUௐ3URJUHVVLYHௐ&DYLW\ௐ ௐ5ROOHUௐ6SUD\ௐ3XPSVௐ3RROௐDQGௐ6SDௐ3XPSVௐ3XPSௐ $FFHVVRULHV 3XPSௐ&RQWUROV 3XPSௐ5HSODFHPHQW 3DUWV 5RWDU\ௐ3XPSV 6XPS 

Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


381
Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger
Sewage, & Utility Pumps, Test Pumps, Well Pumps & Systems. • Fasteners, Hardware, & Raw Materials: Anchors, Bolts, Fastener Assortments, Hardware, Hooks, Key Stock, Lanyards, Manuals, Measuring Equipment, Nails, Nuts, Pins, Retaining Rings, Rivets, Safety Lockwire, Screws, Shim and Shim Stock, Socket Screws and Set Screws, Spacers and Standoffs, Staples, Thread Insert, Threaded Rods & Studs, Washers, Braces and Brackets, Door Hardware, Door Hardware Replacement Parts, Drawer and Cabinet Hardware, Garage Door Openers, Hardware Supplies, Hook and Loop Fasteners, Hooks, Magnets and Magnetic Strips, Mounts and Vibration Control, O-Rings & O-Ring Kits, Rubber Edge Trim Seals, Rubber Edging, Springs, Tarps & Tarp Accessories, Wall and Hand Rail Hardware, Window Hardware, Alloy Steel, Aluminum, Assortments, Brass, Bronze, Carbon Steel, Cast Iron, Ceramic, Copper, Cork, Fabrics, Felt, Fiberglass, Foam, Graphite, Plastics, Rubber, Stainless Steel, Tin, Titanium, Tool Steel, Wire Cloth.
• Building & Ground Maintenance: Camping Equipment, Concrete Mixing & Preparation, Crop, Nursery, and Landscaping, Cutting & Pruning Tools, Electrical Generators, Engines, Fencing and Fencing Hardware, Forestry, Hoses and Sprinkler Systems, Insect and Pest Control, Lawn Mower Attachments, Lawn Mowers & Equipment, Outdoor Equipment Replacement Parts, Power Brushes, Yard Vacuums and Leaf Blowers, Pressure Washers and Steam Cleaners, Rakes and Cultivating Tools, Shovels, Tampers and Digging Tools, Snow and Ice Removal, Soil Treatment and Weed Control, Sprayers and Spreaders, Temporary Outdoor Structures, and Accessories, Water Diversion & Erosion Control, Wheelbarrows and Wheelbarrow Accessories, Automotive Paints and Coatings, Exterior Paints & Stains, Floor & Multi Surface Coatings, Interior Paints & Stains, Paint & Coating Applicators, Paint Booths & Accessories, Paint Mixers, Shakers, and Accessories, Paint Sprayers & Accessories, Paint Thinners, Removers, and Cleaners, Paint Trays & Buckets, Paint and Wallpaper Tools, Painting Equipment Replacement Parts, Rook & Leak Coatings, Specialized Paints & Coatings, Spray Paints & Primers, Striping & Marking Paints & Chalks, Surface Protection & Dust Barriers.

Table 148: Depth and 8readth of Offered Equipment Products and Services Indicate below if the listed types or classes of equipment, products, and services are offered within your proposal. Provide additional comments in the text box provided, as necessary.

Line
Item Category or Type Offered * Comments
71 Facility MRO Yes
No
North America Grainger provides a comprehensive
product and service offering addressing this category. * 72 Industrial supplies or building materials Yes
No
North America Grainger provides a comprehensive
product and service offering addressing this category. * 73 Electric, mechanical, fluid, or pneumatic power
transmission
Yes
No
North America Grainger provides a comprehensive
product and service offering addressing this category. * 74 Electrical service or lighting Yes
No
North America Grainger provides a comprehensive
product and service offering addressing this category. * 75 Plumbing or waterworks Yes
No
North America Grainger provides a comprehensive
product and service offering addressing this category.
76 Services related to the offering of the solutions
in Lines 71-75 above
Yes
No
North America Grainger provides a comprehensive
service offering addressing categories referenced in
Lines 71-75.

Exceptions to Terms, Conditions, or Specifications Form Only those Proposer Exceptions to Terms, Conditions, or Specifications that have been accepted by Sourcewell have been incorporated into the contract text.













 


382
Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger
Documents
Ensure your submission document(s) conforms to the following:

1. Documents in PDF format are preferred. Documents in Word, Excel, or compatible formats may also be provided.

2. Documents should NOT have a security password, as Sourcewell may not be able to open the file. It is your sole responsibility to ensure that the uploaded document(s) are not either defective, corrupted or blank and that the documents can be opened and viewed by Sourcewell.

3. Sourcewell may reject any response where any document(s) cannot be opened and viewed by Sourcewell.

4. If you need to upload more than one (1) document for a single item, you should combine the documents into one zipped file. If the zipped file contains more than one (1) document, ensure each document is named, in relation to the submission format item responding to. For example, if responding to the Marketing Plan category save the document as "Marketing Plan." Pricing - Pricing-091422.zip - Tuesday September 13, 2022 10:49:00 Financial Strength and Stability - Financial Strength.zip - Tuesday September 13, 2022 09:02:00 Marketing Plan/Samples - Marketing Plan.zip - Tuesday September 13, 2022 09:02:38 WMBE/MBE/SBE or Related Certificates (optional)
Warranty Information - Table 9_Q46 Sourcewell Grainger Warranty .pdf - Tuesday September 13, 2022 09:02:51 Standard Transaction Document Samples - Standard Transaction Documents.zip - Tuesday September 13, 2022 09:03:01 Upload Additional Document - Additional Documents.zip - Tuesday September 13, 2022 09:03:12 












 


383
$GGHQGD7HUPVDQG&RQGLWLRQV
352326(5$)),'$9,7$1'$6685$1&(2)&203/,$1&(
,FHUWLI\WKDW,DPWKHDXWKRUL]HGUHSUHVHQWDWLYHRIWKH3URSRVHUVXEPLWWLQJWKHIRUHJRLQJ3URSRVDOZLWKWKHOHJDODXWKRULW\WRELQGWKH 3URSRVHUWRWKLV$IILGDYLWDQG$VVXUDQFHRI&RPSOLDQFH

 7KH3URSRVHULVVXEPLWWLQJWKLV3URSRVDOXQGHULWVIXOODQGFRPSOHWHOHJDOQDPHDQGWKH3URSRVHUOHJDOO\H[LVWVLQJRRGVWDQGLQJLQ WKHMXULVGLFWLRQRILWVUHVLGHQFH
 7KH3URSRVHUZDUUDQWVWKDWWKHLQIRUPDWLRQSURYLGHGLQWKLV3URSRVDOLVWUXHFRUUHFWDQGUHOLDEOHIRUSXUSRVHVRIHYDOXDWLRQIRU FRQWUDFWDZDUG
 7KH3URSRVHULQFOXGLQJDQ\SHUVRQDVVLVWLQJZLWKWKHFUHDWLRQRIWKLV3URSRVDOKDVDUULYHGDWWKLV3URSRVDOLQGHSHQGHQWO\DQGWKH 3URSRVDOKDVEHHQFUHDWHGZLWKRXWFROOXGLQJZLWKDQ\RWKHUSHUVRQFRPSDQ\RUSDUWLHVWKDWKDYHRUZLOOVXEPLWDSURSRVDOXQGHU WKLVVROLFLWDWLRQ
DQGWKH3URSRVDOKDVLQDOOUHVSHFWVEHHQFUHDWHGIDLUO\ZLWKRXWDQ\IUDXGRUGLVKRQHVW\7KH3URSRVHUKDVQRW GLUHFWO\RULQGLUHFWO\HQWHUHGLQWRDQ\DJUHHPHQWRUDUUDQJHPHQWZLWKDQ\SHUVRQRUEXVLQHVVLQDQHIIRUWWRLQIOXHQFHDQ\SDUWRI WKLVVROLFLWDWLRQRURSHUDWLRQVRIDUHVXOWLQJFRQWUDFW DQGWKH3URSRVHUKDVQRWWDNHQDQ\DFWLRQLQUHVWUDLQWRIIUHHWUDGHRU FRPSHWLWLYHQHVVLQFRQQHFWLRQZLWKWKLVVROLFLWDWLRQ$GGLWLRQDOO\LI3URSRVHUKDVZRUNHGZLWKDFRQVXOWDQWRQWKH3URSRVDOWKH FRQVXOWDQW
DQLQGLYLGXDORUDFRPSDQ\
KDVQRWDVVLVWHGDQ\RWKHUHQWLW\WKDWKDVVXEPLWWHGRUZLOOVXEPLWDSURSRVDOIRUWKLV VROLFLWDWLRQ
 7RWKHEHVWRILWVNQRZOHGJHDQGEHOLHIDQGH[FHSWDVRWKHUZLVHGLVFORVHGLQWKH3URSRVDOWKHUHDUHQRUHOHYDQWIDFWVRU FLUFXPVWDQFHVZKLFKFRXOGJLYHULVHWRDQRUJDQL]DWLRQDOFRQIOLFWRILQWHUHVW$QRUJDQL]DWLRQDOFRQIOLFWRILQWHUHVWH[LVWVZKHQD YHQGRUKDVDQXQIDLUFRPSHWLWLYHDGYDQWDJHRUWKHYHQGRU¶VREMHFWLYLW\LQSHUIRUPLQJWKHFRQWUDFWLVRUPLJKWEHLPSDLUHG  7KHFRQWHQWVRIWKH3URSRVDOKDYHQRWEHHQFRPPXQLFDWHGE\WKH3URSRVHURULWVHPSOR\HHVRUDJHQWVWRDQ\SHUVRQQRWDQ HPSOR\HHRUOHJDOO\DXWKRUL]HGDJHQWRIWKH3URSRVHUDQGZLOOQRWEHFRPPXQLFDWHGWRDQ\VXFKSHUVRQVSULRUWR'XH'DWHRIWKLV VROLFLWDWLRQ
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

 7KH3URSRVHUZLOOFRPSO\ZLWKDOODSSOLFDEOHSURYLVLRQVRIIHGHUDOVWDWHDQGORFDOODZVUHJXODWLRQVUXOHVDQGRUGHUV  7KH3URSRVHUXQGHUVWDQGVWKDW6RXUFHZHOOZLOOUHMHFW5)3SURSRVDOVWKDWDUHPDUNHGFRQILGHQWLDO RUQRQSXEOLFHWF
HLWKHU
VXEVWDQWLDOO\RULQWKHLUHQWLUHW\8QGHU0LQQHVRWD6WDWXWHV6HFWLRQ VXEGLYLVLRQDOOSURSRVDOVDUHFRQVLGHUHGQRQSXEOLF GDWDXQWLOWKHHYDOXDWLRQLVFRPSOHWHDQGD&RQWUDFWLVDZDUGHG$WWKDWSRLQWSURSRVDOVEHFRPHSXEOLFGDWD0LQQHVRWD6WDWXWHV 6HFWLRQSHUPLWVRQO\FHUWDLQQDUURZO\GHILQHGGDWDWREHFRQVLGHUHGDWUDGHVHFUHWDQGWKXVQRQSXEOLFGDWDXQGHU 0LQQHVRWD
V'DWD3UDFWLFHV$FW
 3URSRVHULWVHPSOR\HHVDJHQWVDQGVXEFRQWUDFWRUVDUHQRW

 ,QFOXGHGRQWKH³6SHFLDOO\'HVLJQDWHG1DWLRQDOVDQG%ORFNHG3HUVRQV´OLVWPDLQWDLQHGE\WKH2IILFHRI)RUHLJQ$VVHWV&RQWURO RIWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV'HSDUWPHQWRIWKH7UHDVXU\IRXQGDW KWWSV
ZZZWUHDVXU\JRYRIDFGRZQORDGVVGQOLVWSGI

 ,QFOXGHGRQWKHJRYHUQPHQWZLGHH[FOXVLRQVOLVWVLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV6\VWHPIRU$ZDUG0DQDJHPHQWIRXQGDW

KWWSV
VDPJRY6$0
RU
 3UHVHQWO\GHEDUUHGVXVSHQGHGSURSRVHGIRUGHEDUPHQWGHFODUHGLQHOLJLEOHRUYROXQWDULO\H[FOXGHGIURPSURJUDPVRSHUDWHG Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


384
E\WKH6WDWHRI0LQQHVRWD
WKH8QLWHG6WDWHVIHGHUDOJRYHUQPHQWRUWKH&DQDGLDQJRYHUQPHQWDVDSSOLFDEOH RUDQ\
3DUWLFLSDWLQJ(QWLW\9HQGRUFHUWLILHVDQGZDUUDQWVWKDWQHLWKHULWQRULWVSULQFLSDOVKDYHEHHQFRQYLFWHGRIDFULPLQDORIIHQVH UHODWHGWRWKHVXEMHFWPDWWHURIWKLVVROLFLWDWLRQ
%\FKHFNLQJWKLVER[,DFNQRZOHGJHWKDW,DPERXQGE\WKHWHUPVRIWKH3URSRVHU¶V$IILGDYLWKDYHWKHOHJDODXWKRULW\WRVXEPLWWKLV 3URSRVDORQEHKDOIRIWKH3URSRVHUDQGWKDWWKLVHOHFWURQLFDFNQRZOHGJPHQWKDVWKHVDPHOHJDOHIIHFWYDOLGLW\DQGHQIRUFHDELOLW\DVLI, KDGKDQGVLJQHGWKH3URSRVDO7KLVVLJQDWXUHZLOOQRWEHGHQLHGVXFKOHJDOHIIHFWYDOLGLW\RUHQIRUFHDELOLW\VROHO\EHFDXVHDQHOHFWURQLF VLJQDWXUHRUHOHFWURQLFUHFRUGZDVXVHGLQLWVIRUPDWLRQ$OOLVRQ'DUOLQJ6HQLRU1DWLRQDO*RYHUQPHQW6DOHV0DQDJHU::*UDLQJHU ,QF
7KH3URSRVHUGHFODUHVWKDWWKHUHLVDQDFWXDORUSRWHQWLDO&RQIOLFWRI,QWHUHVWUHODWLQJWRWKHSUHSDUDWLRQRILWVVXEPLVVLRQDQGRUWKH 3URSRVHUIRUHVHHVDQDFWXDORUSRWHQWLDO&RQIOLFWRI,QWHUHVWLQSHUIRUPLQJWKHFRQWUDFWXDOREOLJDWLRQVFRQWHPSODWHGLQWKHELG <HV 1R
7KH%LGGHUDFNQRZOHGJHVDQGDJUHHVWKDWWKHDGGHQGXPDGGHQGDEHORZIRUPSDUWRIWKH%LG'RFXPHQW &KHFNWKHER[LQWKHFROXPQ,KDYHUHYLHZHGWKLVDGGHQGXPEHORZWRDFNQRZOHGJHHDFKRIWKHDGGHQGD )LOH1DPH
,KDYHUHYLHZHGWKH
EHORZDGGHQGXPDQG
DWWDFKPHQWV
LI

DSSOLFDEOH

3DJHV
$GGHQGXPBB)DFLOLW\B052B6XSSOLHVB5)3B

:HG$XJXVW
30 
$GGHQGXPBB)DFLOLW\B052B6XSSOLHVB5)3B

:HG$XJXVW
30 
$GGHQGXPBB)DFLOLW\B052B6XSSOLHVB5)3B

0RQ$XJXVW

$0 
$GGHQGXPBB)DFLOLW\B052B6XSSOLHVB5)3B

)UL-XO\

30 
$GGHQGXPBB)DFLOLW\B052B6XSSOLHVB5)3B

7KX-XO\
30 
Bid Number: RFP 091422 Vendor Name: W.W. Grainger













 


385
1 Pricing Offer – Grainger Facility MRO 091422-WWG
Grainger North America’s offer encompasses the entire US and Canada portfolios of maintenance, repair, and operating (MRO) supplies and services with a pricing model that is a comprehensive, robust, and competitive Sourcewell offer. The contract provides Members numerous cost savings opportunities:
• Category Discounts
• Facility MRO Supplies & Equipment Hot List
• Member Market Basket
• General Catalog Discounts
• Large Order and Volume Discounts
• Customer Specific Pricing (CSP)
• Access to all Grainger-Sourcewell Contract Awards and the Pricing Benefits of each CATEGORY DISCOUNTS: Our North American offer encompasses significant discounting across multiple MRO categories. These category discounts are applied to Grainger North America’s Contract Reference Price (CRP). CRP is market-based, stable and only subject to change three times per year.

When evaluating pricing, it is important to compare “final” product prices, as a larger discount percentage offered by a competitor who has not adopted market- based pricing may not yield a lower final product price.

Differences between the U.S. and Canadian supplier base vary across all product categories so not all Grainger US products, catalog or sourced, are available in Canada.

Grainger continues its efforts to enhance its online search and purchasing experience by incorporating new technology and functionality to its online offering. Accordingly, and at Grainger's sole discretion, product categorization may be modified from time to time to promote clarity and product alignment.

Additionally, there are products that, because of their volatile nature in context of supply, including pricing, demand, and availability, are not eligible for any, including general, category discount.

Category Discount Category Discount
Abrasives 7% Motors 19%
Adhesives, Sealants, &Tape 10% Outdoor Equipment 12%
Air Filters 40% Paint, Equipment, & Supplies 10%
Cleaning 22% Plumbing 20%
Electrical Supplies 23% Pneumatics 11%
Electronics, Appliances, Batteries 19% Pumps 7%
Fasteners 32% Power Tools 11%
Hand Tools 14% Power Transmission 19%
HVAC Supplies 17% Safety 19%
Lab Supplies 15% Security 15%
Lighting 22% Test Instruments 7%
Lubrication 10% Welding, Machining, Cutting 10%
Mat. Handling, Storage, Packaging 15% All other Categories 5% For Sourcewell Members, CRP is found on Grainger.com and Grainger.ca when Members log into their account. The CRP at the time of purchase will be the price to which any contract discounts will be applied. The offered category discounts are fixed through the life of the contract across the specified MRO categories.

FACILITY MRO SUPPLIES & EQUIPMENT HOT LIST: Grainger North America, through decades of serving government customers, has captured purchasing data reflecting current and relevant product needs to compile its Hot List offer. Grainger North America analyzed usage and procurement data of Facility MRO Supplies & Equipment-related products from its largest states, provinces, local government, education, and non-profit customers across North America and combined it with all Sourcewell Members’ prior 48 month purchasing analytics. Data points such as the number of times an item was purchased, when and how often, how many individual agencies purchased the item, including those items added into an inventory management solution, were scrutinized to prepare the Hot List. The 386
2 Hot List encompasses roughly 850 items specific to Sourcewell state, province, local, educational, and non-profit agency customers.

Grainger North America makes the Facility MRO Supplies & Equipment Hot List available to all US and Canada Sourcewell Members who complete the Grainger affiliation process to access the Sourcewell Facility MRO Supplies & Equipment #091422 contract. To keep the Facility MRO Supplies & Equipment Hot List meaningful throughout the life of this contract, Grainger North America will evaluate the product selection and update it each year to ensure relevant product mix. The net contract pricing is automatically available to you when you are logged into Grainger.com.

MEMBER MARKET BASKET: In addition to the Grainger Facility MRO Supplies & Equipment Hot List, we offer the ability for each affiliated Member to create a custom Market Basket for a mutually-agreed upon number of items.

GENERAL CATALOG DISCOUNT: All items in Grainger’s General Catalog are included within this Sourcewell offering. Grainger recognizes the operational importance to provide Members access to products beyond those covered by Defined Category Discounts, Hot List, Member Market Basket and products aligned to a specific category. Grainger North America provides a 5% discount off of CRP on these products except for items identified as volatile which are not eligible for a discount.

LARGE ORDER AND VOLUME DISCOUNTS: Grainger has years of experience working with Sourcewell Members on individual projects and discounted pricing. Grainger North America will continue to work with Sourcewell Members to leverage additional discounts for large, single orders, based on size and scope.

CUSTOMER SPECIFIC PRICING (CSP): Grainger North America recognizes the importance of providing Members with relevant pricing for specific products in special circumstances. Deeper discounted pricing can be sought in the form of Customer Specific Pricing (CSP) as it relates to specific opportunities.

Grainger North America reserves the right to adjust pricing to reflect market conditions, as provided in Section 4 (Sourcewell’s Vendor Price & Product Change Request Form, referenced in RFP #091422). These adjustments may include unforeseen significant increases in supplier’s costs resulting from changes in laws or regulations, impositions of tariffs, currency fluctuations, increases in commodity prices, or other changes in conditions not reasonably foreseeable to Grainger North America.

ACCESS TO ADDITIONAL GRAINGER-SOURCEWELL CONTRACT AWARD BENEFITS: Upon affiliating with the Sourcewell Facility MRO Supplies & Services Agreement, # 091422, a Sourcewell Member may also affiliate with any other Grainger-Sourcewell Agreement and access the benefits under that agreement, so long as each agreement remains valid. Upon expiration or termination of any other agreement, Grainger will extend the benefits provided in any successor agreement associated with the Member so long as that agreement remains valid.

A Member may contact Grainger at [email protected] or the local Grainger Account Manager, to learn how to adopt additional Grainger-Sourcewell awarded contracts and access value-added service and pricing benefits through your Grainger account.

For full details on the pricing elements of Sourcewell Facility MRO #091422, please visit: Grainger: Contract 091422-WWG | Sourcewell (sourcewell-mn.gov)
387
Visalia City Council
Staff Report
Visalia City Council
707 W. Acequia
Visalia, CA 93291
File #: 23-0367 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 9.

Agenda Item Wording:

Authorize City staff to submit comments in response to California Proposed Rule Making on Water Conservation Draft Regulations, Title 23 Article 21 - MAKING CONSERVATION A CALIFORNIA WAY

OF LIFE
Deadline for Action: 10/4/2023
Submitting Department: Administration
Contact Name and Phone Number: Rhett Anderson, 559-713-4530 Department Recommendation:

It is the staff recommendation that the City Council authorize staff to submit comments to the proposed rule making on Article 23, “Making Conservation A California Way Of Life.” The deadline to provide comments is October 17, the day after the next Council meeting. Suggested comments to Cal Cities, the lobbying association for cities, are requested by Oct. 11 to be considered in the Cal Cities comments.

The draft regulations are complex, and there has been limited time to assess, analyze and confer with other partners including California Water Service, which is the water purveyor in Visalia. Staff anticipates working on the comments up until the final days in order to provide accurate and comprehensive comments. The essence of the comments that are already on the list as some of Staff’s comments are included in the summary below:

Summary:

City staff has made efforts to work with California League of Cities (Cal Cities) and their lobbyists to identify conflicts that City staff have identified, and formally submit these concerns to the state legislature. Some of the primary issues Staff recommends be included in comments to Cal Cities and to the State include:

1. The current formula utilized by the State Water Resources Control Board do not account for any recycled water that is circulated within the system. The City of Visalia has an extensive water recycling program that should be considered when calculating total water consumption, as it is estimated that the City recycles over 40% of its total freshwater delivered.

2. Additional efforts made by the City to manage surface water and groundwater resources is not taken into consideration for volumetric considerations. The City of Visalia has poured extensive resources into water projects that have served the community in terms of groundwater recharge and floodwater management. Projects, and total additional water recharged in a given year are not accounted for by the state in calculating the water delivery objectives for the City of Visalia.

3. The City of Visalia is one of three partner agencies within the Mid Kaweah GSA (MKGSA). The Visalia City Council Page 1 of 4 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™388
File #: 23-0367 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 9.

GSA is tasked with managing the effects of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The MKGSA, and its respective members, are limited on the amount of groundwater extracted to achieve sustainability. For the first time in Tulare County history, have the residents of the county been limited on groundwater consumption. This unprecedented regulation has already put a considerable restraint on the agencies within the MKGSA. SGMA was also not a consideration when determining acceptable volume for water delivery. Staff feels as though it is appropriate to acknowledge that the restrictions of SGMA should be considered, as the City of Visalia has put forth significant effort to achieve groundwater sustainability as a result of SGMA, and that further constraints would be too significant for communities affected by both SGMA, and this respective proposed rulemaking.

4. That publicly water utilities providing water to municipalities be held responsible for being actively involved in the appropriate Ground Water Sustainability (GSA) process, and that their actions with the GSA’s be in the best interest of the majority of the residents they serve.

5. That the State hold publicly held water utilities responsible for enforcing actions that will result in meaningful change in water use in the cities/communities they serve. The utilities have all of the data and ability to implement and enforce change, but are too often reluctant to become engaged in a meaningful way that will enact change. Since the utilities can pass along fines to the ratepayers which makes the utilities less interested in utilizing the information they hold to envoke change. The publicly held water utilities should be required to use the data they have available to identify and hold water users that are exceeding the state water regulations accountable.

6. That publicly held water utilities also be required to separate the usage, and consequently any actions or fines, per community they serve, even if the service district includes several cities/communities. While some cities/communities may be more aggressive in passing ordinances that would encourage/require water conservation, not all cities/community in a service district may have the same practices. The organizations that are proactive should not be responsible for those communities that choose not to engage in meaningful conservation.

City staff is requesting to submit comments to Cal Cities no later than October 11th, 2023. This deadline was proposed by Cal Cities in order to formalize comments prior to the state deadline of October 17th. Comments would be tailored to the specific circumstances outlined above, and would state that there should be, at minimum, exemptions for the communities that make additional efforts to maximally utilize water resources, and that recycled water and additionally contributed water for the purposes of recharge should be accounted for in the total water delivery objective calculation. City Staff will also file individual comments on behalf of the City.

There is a public hearing on October 4th, 2023 which will be an opportunity for California residents and water system operators to voice their concerns with the SWRCB and its proposition. The Staff request authorization to make comments during the hearing if some comments would be meaningful. City comments will be refined after this public hearing to hone specific exemptions and concerns that the City would like to express. Once comments have been refined, they will be submitted to the Cal Cities group no later than October 11th, to be included in a packet of additional comments from other affected communities. All public comments are due no later than October 17, 2023, and staff is requesting authorization to file individual comments at that time.

Background Discussion:

Situated in a region prone to droughts and facing the challenges of a changing climate, California's Visalia City Council Page 2 of 4 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™389
File #: 23-0367 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 9.

Central Valley’s ability to wisely manage and conserve its water resources is of critical importance.

The state's vast and diverse ecosystems, agriculture, industries, and millions of residents all depend on a sustainable and reliable water supply. Effective water management not only ensures the availability of this precious resource for current and future generations but also plays a pivotal role in preserving the environment, supporting a robust economy, and addressing pressing global concerns like climate change and water scarcity. California's journey in water management and conservation serves as a model for the nation, illustrating the importance of responsible stewardship in the face of complex and interconnected challenges. In response to recent climate conditions experienced by the State, the State has proposed a new regulation that will require urban water service providers to meet water delivery objectives, as determined by the State.

The City of Visalia is a groundwater reliant city that has long stood by conservation principles and proactive management of water resources. The City is currently, and continually, striving in order to preserve natural resources, primarily water. Some of the management actions designed to preserve and/or recycle City municipal groundwater include limitations of outdoor irrigation of landscapes, regulations on permissible outdoor water use, and a state-of-the-art water reclamation facility installed by the City in order to process and recycle the wastewater accumulated in Visalia. This wastewater is traded with the Tulare Irrigation district in exchange for a 1:2 ratio for fresh surface water through the Central Valley Project system (CVP). These efforts combined with a stringent water code, demonstrates the City’s priority to conserve water resources.

The State of California has proposed that a way to manage urban water resources is to calculate an acceptable volume of water that should be delivered to an individual municipality, based on factors such as population size, historical deliveries, and land use types. These objectives would be monitored by the state based on reporting data provided by the local urban water supplier. The primary urban water supplier for the City of Visalia is California Water Service (Cal Water). Cal Water is by far the largest supplier of water utilities to Visalia residents, with the exception of a few very minor individual water utility companies, and individual residents who operate utilizing a private well.

The Combined services provided by Cal Water account for over 90% of the total water utilities delivered within the City of Visalia, and Goshen.
.

Fiscal Impact:

The City of Visalia would not be directly impacted by the new proposed regulations, however the proposal states that costs incurred as a result of the passing of the new proposed legislation will be placed solely onto the water service provider (Cal Water), and that the state anticipates costs incurred by the water service provider are expected to be passed onto the rate payers. This would mean that most likely, all additional costs incurred by Cal Water would eventually be recouped by Cal Water through rate adjustments. It is likely water rates for all users will go up, and that would include the City of Visalia which uses water in parks, buildings, and for other city uses.

Prior Council Action: Not Applicable
Other: None.

Alternatives: The Council may choose to not authorize City staff to submit comments on the proposed regulation.

Visalia City Council Page 3 of 4 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™390
File #: 23-0367 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 9.

Recommended Motion (and Alternative Motions if expected):

It is recommended that the City of Visalia Council move to authorize City staff to submit comments to Cal Cities, and to the State of California, to the proposed rulemaking to Article 23, “Making Conservation A California Way of Life”
Environmental Assessment Status: N/A
CEQA Review: N/A
Attachments: 1. Notice of Proposal, Title 23. Waters - MAKING CONSERVATION A CALIFORNIA

WAY OF LIFE
Visalia City Council Page 4 of 4 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™391
State Water Resources Control Board

NOTICE OF PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION
TITLE 23. Waters
DIVISION 3. State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards
CHAPTER 3.5 – Urban Water Use Efficiency and Conservation ARTICLE 1
SUBJECT: MAKING CONSERVATION A CALIFORNIA WAY OF LIFE

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING
The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board or Board) proposes to adopt the proposed regulation described below, after considering all comments, objections, and recommendations regarding the proposed action.

PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION
The State Water Board proposes to add California Code of Regulations, title 23, division 3, chapter 3.5, article 1, sections 965-975 and 978. Existing articles 1, 2, and 3 will be renumbered to articles 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The proposed new sections would establish a new foundation for long-term improvements in water conservation and drought planning to adapt to climate change and the resulting longer and more intense droughts in California. The proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life regulation (proposed regulation) would require Urban Retail Water Suppliers (suppliers) to calculate and adhere to water use objectives, implement Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII) performance measures, and submit annual progress reports.

PUBLIC HEARING
The State Water Board will conduct a public hearing on October 4, 2023. The public hearing will include an overview of the regulatory timeline and process, along with presentations led by urban retail water suppliers and other interested parties on the proposed regulation. At the hearing, any person may present oral or written comments relevant to the proposed action described in this notice, in addition to the written comment opportunity described below. Board staff will provide an overview of the proposed regulation and key provisions, followed by an opportunity for the public to comment. While a quorum of the State Water Board may be present, the Board will not take formal action at the public hearing.

The meeting will be held at the Joe Serna Jr. CalEPA Building, 1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, with the option to participate remotely. 392
- 2 -
Notices will be sent to those who subscribe to the “Water Conservation Regulations” GovDelivery topic list. Information about the public hearing will be posted on the webpage:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/conservation_portal/regs/water _efficiency_legislation.html

LANGUAGE SERVICES
To request translation of documents, interpretation services, or to submit a language access complaint, please submit your request by September 22, 2023, using one of the following options:

1. Complete online request at: bit.ly/LanguageAccessForm

2. Call (916) 341-5254

3. Email [email protected]

SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION REQUEST
To request special accommodations or language needs, please contact the Clerk to the Board at (916) 341-5611 as soon as possible, but no later than 10 business days before the scheduled Board hearing.

Para solicitar comodidades especiales o necesidades de otro idioma, por favor llame a la oficina del Consejo al (916) 341-5611 lo más pronto posible, pero no menos de 10 días de trabajo antes del día programado para la audiencia del Consejo.

WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD AND SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS
[Gov. Code, § 11346.4(a), § 11346.5(a)(15)]
Any interested person may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action to the Clerk to the State Water Board. Any written comments pertaining to the proposed regulation, regardless of the method of transmittal, must be received by the Clerk by October 17, 2023, which is hereby designated as the close of the written comment period. Comments received after this date will not be considered timely. Written comments may be submitted via any of the following methods:

1. By email to: [email protected]. The State Water Board requests but does not require that email transmission of comments, particularly those with attachments, contain the regulation package identifier “Comment Letter—Proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life Regulation” in the subject line to facilitate timely identification and review of the comment.

2. By fax transmission to: (916) 341-5620. The State Water Board requests but does not require that faxed comments contain the subject line “Comment Letter—Proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life Regulation.”

3. By mail to: Clerk to the Board, Courtney Tyler, State Water Resources Control Board, P.O. Box 100, Sacramento, CA 95812-0100.

4. Hand-delivered to: Clerk to the Board, Courtney Tyler, State Water Resources Control Board, 1001 I Street, 24th Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814. 393
- 3 -
The State Water Board requests but does not require that written comments be sent by mail or that hand-delivered be submitted in triplicate.

The State Water Board requests, but does not require, that, if reports or articles in excess of 25 pages are submitted in conjunction with the comments, the commenter provide a summary of the report or article and describe the reason for which the report or article is being submitted or its relevance to the proposed regulation.

All comments, including email or fax transmissions, should include the author’s name and U.S. Postal Service mailing address in order for the State Water Board to provide copies of any notices that may be required in future.

Due to the limitations of the email system, emails larger than 15 megabytes (MB) may be rejected and will not be delivered and received by the State Water Board. Therefore, emails larger than 15 MB should be submitted under separate emails or via another form of delivery.

Please note that under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, § 7920.000 et seq.), your written and oral comments, attachments, and associated contact information (e.g., your address, phone, email, etc.) become part of the public record and can be released to the public upon request.

If you would like to request a copy of the public comment letters received by the Board for this item, send an email to [email protected] and identify that you are requesting copies of public comments for the proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life Regulation.

To be added to the mailing list for this rulemaking and to receive notification of updates for this rulemaking, you may subscribe to the GovDelivery list for “Water Conservation Regulations” here by selecting "General Interests," then selecting “Water Conservation Regulations.”

AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE
The State Water Board proposes to adopt regulations implementing, interpreting, and making specific Water Code sections 275, 10609, 10609.2, 10609.4, 10609.6, 10609.8, 10609.9, 10609.10, 10609.12, 10609.14, 10609.16, 10609.20, and 10609.22.

Authority: Sections 275, 1058, 10609.2, 10609.10, 10609.20, and 10609.28, Water Code.

References: Article X, Section 2, California Constitution; Sections 3080, 4080, 4100, and 4185, Civil Code; Sections 8558 and 51201, Government Code; Sections 116275 and 116530, Health and Safety Code; Sections 102, 104, 105, 350, 1122, 1123, 1124, 1846, 1846.5, 10608.12, 10608.20, 10608.34, 10609.2, 10609.4, 10609.6, 10609.8, 10609.9, 10609.10, 10609.12, 10609.20, 10609.24, 10609.26, 10609.27, 10609.28, 10611.3, 10617, 10632, and 10728, Water Code.
394
- 4 -

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Pursuant to section 10609.34 of the Water Code, the proposed regulation is exempt under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15308 (Class 8 exemption). The proposed action does not involve the relaxation of existing water conservation or water use standards.

INFORMATIVE DIGEST
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(3)]
Summary of Existing State Law and Regulations
In 2018, the California State Legislature enacted Senate Bill (SB) 606 and Assembly Bill (AB) 1668 (together, 2018 conservation legislation) to establish a new foundation for long-term improvements in water conservation and drought planning to adapt to climate change and the longer and more intense droughts that are likely to result in California.

Water Code section 10609.2 directs the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board or Board) to adopt long-term standards for the efficient use of water, variances for unique uses that can have a material effect on urban water use, and guidelines and methodologies pertaining to the calculation of an urban water use objective (objective). Water Code section 10609.10, subdivision (d) directs the Board to adopt performance measures for Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII) water use. Water Code sections 10609.22 and 10609.24 direct each Urban Retail Water Supplier (supplier) to annually calculate its objective and provide a report pertaining to the objective and implementation of the CII performance measures. The Board’s proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life regulation (proposed regulation) would establish methodologies and guidelines to calculate the objectives; standards for efficient residential outdoor water use and efficient use of water on CII landscapes with Dedicated Irrigation Meters (DIMs); CII performance measures; and annual reporting requirements.

Water Code section 10609.2, subdivision (d) directs that the proposed regulation exceeds the targets established by SB X7-7.

Water Code section 10609, subdivision (c)(3) directs that the “long-term standards and urban water use objectives should acknowledge the shade, air quality, and heat-island reduction benefits provided to communities by trees through the support of waterefficient irrigation practices that keep trees healthy.” Water Code section 10609, subdivision (c)(2) directs that the “long-term standards and urban water use objectives should advance the state’s goals to mitigate and adapt to climate change.”
Comparable Federal Statute and Regulations
[Gov. Code § 11346.5(a)(3)(B)]
There are no federal regulations or statutes that address the specific subject addressed by the proposed regulation.
395
- 5 -
Effect of the proposed rulemaking
[Gov. Code § 11346.5(a)(3)(A)]
The proposed regulation creates a new framework for managing urban water use by California’s largest water suppliers. It would establish unique efficiency goals for each supplier based on local conditions, while leaving flexibility to implement locally appropriate solutions. In addition to establishing long-term standards for the efficient use of water throughout California’s urban areas and a framework that incorporates local conditions and provides flexibility to suppliers to make locally appropriate implementation choices, the proposed regulation is expected to save a significant amount of water.

A recent assessment of urban water supplies found that adopting proven technologies and practices could reduce urban water use in California by 2.0 million to 3.1 million acre-feet per year (AFY), or by 30 to 48 percent (Cooley et al., 2022). The proposed regulation would help California begin to realize that potential; by 2035, it is expected to reduce statewide urban water use by approximately 15 percent from 2020 levels. The Board estimates that the proposed regulation would save approximately 235,000 acrefeet of water in 2025 (compared to the assumed 2025 baseline water use) and increased amounts in subsequent years, reaching almost 440,000 acre-feet of water in 2040 (compared to the assumed 2040 baseline water use). In this way, the proposed regulation would help to realize the California Water Supply Strategy goal of building upon the conservation achievements of the last two decades to reduce annual water demand in towns and cities by at least half a million acre-feet by 2030.

The proposed regulation would help realize the water savings outlined in the water supply strategy. It is also expected to create indirect benefits beyond water savings.

While not the primary goal of the proposed regulation, implementation of the framework is likely to result in suppliers making investments and programmatic changes that encourage individuals, businesses, and local governments to change how they use water. Such changes have the potential to advance the State Water Board’s mission of preserving, enhancing, and restoring the quality of water resources and the statutory directive to advance California’s climate change mitigation and adaptation goals. The proposed regulation can also support statewide policies to accelerate nature-based solutions, divert organic waste from landfills, build healthy soils, and advance equity.

Policy Statement Overview
[Gov. Code § 11346.5(a)(3)(C)]
The proposed regulation is designed to establish a new foundation for long-term improvements in water conservation and drought planning to adapt to climate change and the longer and more intense droughts that are likely to result in California. The effect of the proposed regulation is the establishment of long-term standards for the efficient use of water and performance measures for commercial, industrial, and institutional water use. Additionally, it will establish a method to estimate the aggregate amount of water that would have been delivered the previous year by an urban retail water supplier if all that water had been used efficiently. This estimated aggregate water use is the urban retail water supplier’s urban water use objective. The objective is based 396
- 6 -
on the water use efficiency standards and local service area characteristics for that year. By comparing the amount of water used in the previous year with the urban water use objective, local urban water suppliers will be in a better position to help eliminate unnecessary use of water; that is, water used in excess of that needed to accomplish the intended beneficial use.

Specific Benefits Anticipated from the Proposed Regulatory Action [Gov. Code § 11346.5(a)(3)(C)]
Protecting Human Health and Water Resources
· In addition to saving water, the proposed regulation may also bring about changes to urban landscapes that protect water quality by reducing dry-weather and wet-weather runoff.
· The proposed regulation would incentivize changes to urban landscapes, including, in some cases, the transition to climate-ready landscapes, which, for the purposes of the proposed regulation are landscapes that save water, reduce waste, nurture soil, sequester carbon, conserve energy and reduce urban heat, protect air and water quality, and create habitat for native plants and pollinators.

Because climate-ready landscapes are more efficiently irrigated and make better use of precipitation, the proposed regulation could reduce wet-weather runoff, preventing water pollution and protecting water resources. · By reducing urban water demand, the proposed regulation could help to preserve in-stream flows and water availability.

Supporting Practices that Keep Trees Healthy
· The proposed regulation incentivizes efforts to maintain and increase the urban tree canopy in California. It includes a provision for the planting of new, climateready trees and an alternative compliance pathway for suppliers that demonstrate their support of practices that keep trees healthy. By encouraging suppliers to invest in water conservation and tree care, the proposed regulation could not only save water but also support water-efficient irrigation practices that keep trees healthy.

Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change
· Climate change is driving aridification and changing precipitation patterns.

Aridification – hotter and drier conditions over longer periods – could diminish our existing water supply by up to 10 by 2040 (California Natural Resources Agency, 2022). Although a naturally occurring feature of California’s climate, drought conditions have become more frequent and more intense. A combination of hotter temperatures and low precipitation years – especially when snowpack and snowmelt runoff are low - creates drier conditions. California has been getting drier since 1895. In California and across the southwestern United States, 2000 to 2021 were the driest 22-year period over the past 1,000 years, part of what 397
- 7 -
scientists call an emerging “megadrought” era (OEHHA, 2022). At the same time, changing precipitation patterns – more rain instead of snow and an increase in the duration, frequency, and intensity of “atmospheric river” storms – may lead to greater flooding risks and reservoirs having to release more water early in the spring to fulfill flood control functions, meaning less of the precipitation we do get can be captured and stored. Toward the end of the century, warming temperatures in California could result in a 30 percent loss of snowpack and a 25 percent increase in rain, leading to a higher volume of water rushing from headwaters and washing out across the state (Huang et al., 2020). In other words, we will likely be grappling with floods and drought simultaneously, causing impacts to water storage and availability.
· The proposed regulation will help us adapt to aridification and changing precipitation patterns. Finding and fixing leaks along with replacing older fixtures and appliances with efficient models will save water indoors and out. Saving water indoors, especially, saves energy, which can reduce the emission of greenhouse gases and other co-emitted air pollutants, improving air quality. If, as a result of work undertaken by suppliers to meet their objectives, households were to replace inefficient clothes washers with more efficient models, embedded statewide energy savings would reach approximately 1,860 GWh of electricity and 36.5 million MMBtu of natural gas by 2040; this equates to $49 million in direct energy cost savings in 2025 and increased energy cost savings thereafter, reaching approximately $100 million in 2040.
· Significant water savings can also be realized by transitioning away from high water-using landscapes such as turf to “climate-ready” landscapes. Climateready landscapes require much less water because they are planted with lower water-using vegetation that is irrigated much more efficiently. Because they are composed of deeply rooted vegetation and their soils enriched with mulch and compost, climate-ready landscapes are better at retaining rainwater. According to one study, such landscapes retain 80 percent of the rain (Kent, 2017). By slowing, spreading, and sinking rainwater, climate-ready landscapes help keep soils hydrated, which reduces irrigation needs. Climate-ready landscapes also lessen the impact of extreme wet weather events, helping to reduce flooding in urbanized areas.

Accelerating Nature-based Solutions, Diverting Organic Waste from Landfills, and Building Healthy Soils
· Implementation of the proposed regulation is likely to result in suppliers making investments and programmatic changes that encourage individuals, businesses, and local governments to change how they use water. Such changes have the potential to support statewide policies to accelerate nature-based solutions, divert organic waste from landfills, and build healthy soils. 398
- 8 -
Advancing equity
· The proposed regulation aims to support Governor Newsom’s California’s Water Supply Strategy’s call on state agencies to respond to the hydrological challenges posed by climate change in a way that advances equity and supports disadvantaged communities (Water Supply Strategy, 2022). The proposed regulation incentivizes suppliers to make investments that not only save water but also advance equity. Specifically, the proposed regulation may, in the long-run, mitigate rate increases; it may also encourage suppliers to assess rate structures and invest in programs and partnerships that reduce urban heat.

EVALUATION OF INCONSISTENCY OR INCOMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING STATE

REGULATIONS
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(3)(D)]
The State Water Board reviewed its existing general regulations and regulations specific to water use efficiency and conservation to evaluate whether the proposed regulation is inconsistent or incompatible with existing state regulations. The State Water Board determined that no other state regulation addressed the same subject matter and that this proposal, if adopted, would not be inconsistent or incompatible with existing state regulations.

MANDATED BY FEDERAL LAW OR REGULATIONS
[Gov. Code, § 11346.2(c)]
Adoption of this regulation is not mandated by federal law or regulations.

OTHER STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(4)]
Safe, Clean, Affordable Water
[Wat. Code, § 106.3]
Water Code section 106.3 states that it is the policy of the state that every human has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes. In preparing the proposed regulation, the State Water Board determined the proposed regulation is consistent with this statewide policy. While the proposed regulation may, in some cases, result in increased costs to those served by a water system, that potential cost is expected to render water neither unaffordable nor inaccessible.

Urban Water Use Objectives and Water Use Reporting
[Wat. Code, § 10609.2]
Water Code section 10609.2 states that the Board, in coordination with the department, shall adopt long-term standards for the efficient use of water, and that the standards shall be adopted for (1) Outdoor residential water use; (2) Outdoor irrigation of landscape areas with dedicated irrigation meters in connection with CII water use; (3) A volume for water loss. Additionally, when adopting the standards, the Board shall consider the policies of Chapter 9 of Division 6, Part 2.55 of the Water Code and the proposed efficiency standards’ effects on local wastewater management, developed 399
- 9 -
and natural parklands, and urban tree health. The Board also is required to set the longterm standards at a level designed so that the water use objectives, together with other demands excluded from the long-term standards such as CII indoor water use and CII outdoor water use not connected to a dedicated landscape meter, would exceed the statewide conservation targets required pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 10608.16). Finally, section 10609.2 states that the Board, in coordination with the department, shall adopt by regulation variances recommended by the department pursuant to Section 10609.14 and guidelines and methodologies pertaining to the calculation of an urban retail water supplier’s urban water use objective recommended by the department pursuant to Section 10609.16.
[Wat. Code, § 10609.10]
Water Code section 10609.10 states that the Board, in coordination with the department, shall adopt performance measures for CII water use.

Pre-Notice Meeting with Affected Parties [Gov. Code, §11346.45(a)] Government Code section 11346.45, subdivision (a) requires that, prior to publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking, the agency proposing the regulation must involve parties who would be subject to the proposed regulation in public discussions, when the proposed regulation involves complex proposals or a large number of proposals that cannot be easily reviewed during the comment period. The State Water Board provided suppliers and other interested parties opportunities to be involved in public discussions about the proposed regulation in 12 workshops on the following topics:
· On December 3 and 4, 2021, State Water Board staff hosted two workshops describing the methods being used to analyze how the proposed efficiency standards could affect trees, parklands, and local wastewater management. · On May 11, 2022, State Water Board staff hosted a workshop summarizing the results of the analysis undertaken to understand how the residential indoor and outdoor standards may affect the wastewater sector.
· On August 12, 2022, State Water Board staff hosted a workshop summarizing the results of the analysis undertaken to understand how the standards may affect trees and parklands.
· On February 23 and 28, 2023 and March 6, 8, and 10, 2023, State Water Board staff hosted workshops to provide an overview of the draft regulatory framework and sought the input of interested parties. Parties provided feedback to help staff understand and evaluate how the framework could affect various organizations, communities, and California. Staff also heard about whether or how various organizations could support efforts to make conservation a way of life. · On March 22, 2023, State Water Board staff hosted a pre-rulemaking workshop during a public Board meeting. During this workshop, staff presented the proposed regulatory framework.
400
- 10 -
· On May 17 and 18, 2023, State Water Board staff hosted two workshops with small suppliers (those with less than 10,000 connections) to better understand how the draft regulatory framework could specifically affect small water suppliers.

LOCAL MANDATE
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(5)]
The proposed regulation would not impose a mandate on local agencies or school districts that requires state reimbursement. The proposed regulation will not be a requirement unique to local government and will apply equally to public and private water systems.

Local agencies currently incur costs in their operation of urban water systems. The costs imposed by the proposed regulation are not the result of a “new program or higher level of service” within the meaning of Article XIIIB, section 6 of the California Constitution because the proposed regulation applies generally to all individuals and entities that operate urban water systems in California and does not impose unique requirements on local governments (County of Los Angeles vs. State of California et al, 43 Cal App 3d 46 (1987)). In addition, suppliers can pass on the cost of regulation implementation through increasing service fees. Therefore, no state reimbursement of these costs is required (Gov. Code, §17556, subd. (d)).

FISCAL IMPACT
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(6)]
Cost to Local Agencies and School Districts Requiring Reimbursement None. Any costs incurred by local agencies or school districts as a result of the proposed regulation are not reimbursable by the State pursuant to Article XIIIB, section 6 of the California Constitution. Urban retail water suppliers are expected to fully make up for the costs incurred as a result of the proposed regulation by adjusting their rates to customers over time. Government Code §17556, subdivision (d), identifies the types of actions that are not reimbursable state mandates: “the local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the mandated program or increased level of service. This subdivision applies regardless of whether the authority to levy charges, fees, or assessments was enacted or adopted prior to or after the date on which the statute or executive order was enacted or issued.”
Other Non-discretionary Cost or Savings Imposed Upon Local Agencies Suppliers operated by local governments: Most suppliers are operated by local governments, usually a city, county, or district, and these suppliers serve almost 81 percent of the total population in the state. Like privately-owned suppliers, some publicly-owned suppliers will likely incur costs to meet their water use objectives. Like privately-owned suppliers, publicly-owned suppliers on the one hand will spend less to acquire water and less on stormwater-related corrective measures, but, on the other hand, will potentially lose revenue due to the water use reductions. Ultimately, the Board expects that suppliers will fully make up for their lost revenues by adjusting their rates to customers over time. Publicly-owned suppliers would incur aggregate costs of 401
- 11 -
approximately $8.45 billion and accrue benefits of approximately $9.09 billion from 2025 to 2040.

Local wastewater management agencies: Water Code section 10609.2 requires that the State Water Board evaluate how the proposed efficiency standards may affect local wastewater management. Wastewater collection, treatment, and reuse agencies may experience increased costs, as well as potential benefits, when the influent volumes lessen or become more concentrated. Local wastewater management agencies would incur costs of $2.5 billion; benefits for these agencies could not be quantified.

Urban forestry and landscape management agencies: Water Code section 10609.2 requires that the State Water Board evaluate how the proposed efficiency standards may affect urban tree health as well as natural and developed parklands. Potentially affected areas may develop or update urban forestry management plans to prioritize spending on new trees. To meet their objectives, 149 suppliers may have to facilitate savings in outdoor water use. The urban forests within the service areas of these suppliers could be at risk if the required savings are not thoughtfully achieved. If, however, the required water savings are achieved by, for example. increasing the efficiency of irrigation systems and/or by converting turf into climate-ready landscapes, the risk would be minimized. In such areas, likely mitigation actions would include improved public education programs for irrigation management, development of urban forestry management plans and updated tree inventories, and new investments in irrigation technologies adapted to tree watering needs. Local wastewater management agencies would incur costs of approximately $100 million; benefits for these agencies could not be quantified.

Local institutional water users: Suppliers, both privately- and publicly-owned, and wastewater management agencies may choose to pass on some or all of their increased costs and benefits to their end-customers. Some of their end-customers are local governments, i.e., local institutional water users. The average water cost for an affected CII property might decrease by approximately $168 per month in the 2025-2040 period (compared to the assumed future baseline). The average wastewater cost might increase by approximately $6 per month in the same period (compared to the assumed future baseline). Combined, water and wastewater costs would decline on average by $1,944 a year (compared to the assumed future baseline). Local institutional water users will not incur the cost of purchasing from their suppliers the water that they save. More specifically, local institutional water users, as well as other CII customers, will not use as much water as they would in the absence of the proposed regulation.

These water savings are a direct result of the CII performance measures that CII customers, including local institutional water users, implement. All else equal, water savings mean lower water bills (compared to the assumed future baseline).

Local sales tax: Suppliers and households will spend more on residential water use efficiency programs and CII performance measures. Wastewater management agencies and urban forestry and landscape management agencies will also incur expenses because of the proposed regulation. Much of that spending includes purchases of several types of goods, including, for example, landscape material, high-efficiency toilets and washers, valves, and water leak monitoring equipment. Sales tax will generally apply to such purchases. The proposed regulation therefore is expected to 402
- 12 -
have an impact on sales tax revenues. Local sales tax revenues will be greater in the first years of the proposed regulation as this is when much of the water use efficiency measures are assumed to be implemented. Aggregate local sales tax revenues are estimated to increase (compared to the assumed future baseline) by almost $21 million in 2025, and between $500,000 and $3.6 million per year in the following years.

Local inspection and permit fees: As Dedicated Irrigation Meters (DIMs), DIM tie-ins, and backflow devices are installed, suppliers will pay fees to local governments for the appropriate permits and backflow inspections. Local governments thus will experience an increase in revenues from such fees. The aggregate increase in revenue from inspection and permit fees across all local governments will amount to approximately $2.9 million per year between 2025 and 2030. The additional local staff for these inspections and permitting processes would cost approximately $1.8 million per year, including overhead, between 2025 and 2030 to local governments.

Local property taxes: Together, wastewater management agencies would incur costs of $385 million per year between 2025 and 2030, and $78 million per year afterward. The Board assumed that such costs would be passed on to customers. Wastewater management agencies may pass service charges to customers in different ways, including, for example, through wastewater service bills and property taxes. Wastewater charges are not a property tax and are not related to the assessed value of a property.

However, these charges are sometimes included in property tax statements to save on administrative costs. If the estimated wastewater costs were passed on entirely via property tax statements, aggregate revenues across all counties in California would increase (compared to the assumed future baseline) by as much as $385 million in 2025, and $78 million per year in the following years.

Costs or Savings Imposed Upon State Agencies
State Water Resources Control Board: None. The State Water Board does not anticipate an increase in resource needs because of the proposed regulation.

State institutional water users: Suppliers are expected to pass on costs and benefits of the proposed regulation to customers, some of which are state institutional water users.

The cost pass-through calculation for state institutional water users is the same as the one performed for local institutional water users, and, therefore, relies on the same assumptions and has the same limitations. The average water cost for an affected CII property might decrease by approximately $168 per month in the 2025-2040 period (compared to the assumed future baseline). The average wastewater cost might increase by approximately $6 per month in the same period (compared to the assumed future baseline). Combined, water and wastewater costs would decline on average by $1,944 per year (compared to the assumed future baseline). Collectively, state institutional water users would not incur the cost of purchasing from their suppliers the water that they would save as a result of the proposed regulation. That is, state institutional water users, as well as other CII customers, will not use as much water as they would in the absence of the proposed regulation. These water savings are a direct result of the CII performance measures that CII customers, including state institutional water users, implement. All else equal, water savings mean lower water bills (compared to the assumed future baseline).
403
- 13 -
State sales tax: As explained for local sales tax, much of the spending by suppliers, households, wastewater management agencies, and urban forestry and landscape management agencies includes purchases of several types of goods; sales tax will generally apply to such purchases. The proposed regulation therefore is expected to have an impact on the state’s sales tax revenue. State sales tax revenues will be greater in the first years of the proposed regulation as this is when much of the water use efficiency measures are expected to be implemented. State sales tax revenues are estimated to increase (compared to the assumed future baseline) by almost $162 million in 2025, and between $4 million and $28 million per year in the following years.

Costs or Savings in Federal Funding to the State
None. The State Water Board has determined that the proposed regulation will not create additional costs or savings in federal funding to the state.

HOUSING COSTS
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(12)]
The State Water Board does not expect that the regulation will have an impact on housing costs.

SIGNIFICANT STATEWIDE ADVERSE ECONOMIC IMPACT DIRECTLY AFFECTING

BUSINESS, INCLUDING ABILITY TO COMPETE
[Gov. Code, § 11346.3(a), § 11346.5(a)(7), § 11346.5(a)(8)] Types of Businesses Affected
Urban retail water suppliers can be either publicly-owned (e.g., municipal agencies, special-purpose and irrigation districts, municipal water districts, and counties) or privately-owned (e.g., investor-owned utilities and nonprofit mutual water companies).

The proposed regulation would apply to 405 urban retail water suppliers in the state, 337 of which are publicly-owned. For the purpose of the economic impact assessment, the Board assumed that “businesses” refer to the remaining 68 regulated privatelyowned suppliers. Suppliers are generally local monopolies; households and CII customers usually do not have a choice between their water service supplier and another one. Therefore, suppliers are typically not subject to competition in the short term (see Creation of New Businesses or Elimination of Existing Businesses within California section and Competitive Advantages or Disadvantages for California Businesses section below).

Projected Compliance Requirements
Water Code section 10609 et seq. required the Department of Water Resources to provide recommendations on and the State Water Board to adopt standards for the efficient use of water, variances for unique uses that can have a material effect on water use, performance measures for commercial, industrial, and institutional water use, and guidelines and methodologies that identify how each urban retail water supplier will calculate an urban water use objective. The proposed regulation would require suppliers 404
- 14 -
to comply with urban water use objectives, implement the adopted CII performance measures, and submit annual progress reports.

Urban water use objective: A supplier’s urban water use objective is a retrospective estimate of aggregate, efficient water use for the previous year, based on adopted water use efficiency standards and local service area characteristics for that year. A supplier’s water use objective equals the sum of standard-based budgets for residential indoor use, residential outdoor use, CII landscapes with DIMs, which are submeters that supply water for only outdoor irrigation, and real water losses. When applicable, the urban water use objectives will also include variances (for example, for water use associated with livestock), provisions (for example, for existing pools, spas and similar water features or for the planting of new, climate-ready trees) and a bonus incentive for potable recycled water use.

Performance measures: CII performance measures are actions to be taken by urban retail water suppliers that would result in increased water use efficiency by CII water users. They will not affect industrial process water. Under the proposed regulation, there are three CII performance measures: (1) suppliers will be required to install DIMs on or employ in-lieu technologies for the landscapes of CII customers that a) do not have a DIM and b) the supplier estimates to have used more than 500,000 gallons of water; (2) suppliers will be required to classify their CII customers according to the broad classification categories used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s ENERGYSTAR Portfolio Manager tool; (3) suppliers will be required to offer best management practices (BMPs) to CII customers that meet specific criteria.

Ability to Compete
[Gov. Code, §11346.5(a)(7)(C)]
The State Water Board has made an initial determination that the adoption of this regulation may have a significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business. The State Water Board has considered proposed alternatives that would lessen any adverse economic impact on business and invites you to submit proposals.

Submissions may include the following considerations:
(i) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to businesses. (ii) Consolidation or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements for businesses.
(iii) The use of performance standards rather than prescriptive standards. (iv) Exemption or partial exemption from the regulatory requirements for businesses.

The State Water Board has made an initial determination that the adoption of this regulation will not directly affect the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states.
405
- 15 -

RESULTS OF THE STANDARDIZED REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS (SRIA) [Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(10), § 11346.3(c)]
Statement of Results
The State Water Board determined that the economic impact of the proposed regulation would likely exceed $50 million in a 12-month period so the regulation should be considered a Major Regulation as defined by California Code of Regulations, title 1, section 2000, subdivision (g). The State Water Board prepared a SRIA as required by Government Code section 11346.3, subdivision (c).

The proposed regulation would save approximately 235,000 acre-feet of water in 2025 (compared to the assumed 2025 baseline water use) and increased amounts in subsequent years, reaching almost 440,000 acre-feet of water saved in 2040 (compared to the assumed 2040 baseline water use). The total cumulative amount of water savings in the 2025-2040 period would be approximately 6.3 million acre-feet.

Most of the estimated water savings (approximately 80 percent) would come from the assumed residential water use efficiency measures, and the remainder (approximately 20 percent) from CII performance measures.

In the 2025-2040 period, quantified benefits of the proposed regulation are estimated to exceed the quantified costs. Assuming a discount rate of 3 percent, the State Water Board estimates present discounted values of $16.0 billion for the quantified benefits and $13.5 billion for the quantified costs.

Most of the estimated benefits originate from reduced water purchases or reduced water production (compared to the assumed future baseline) by the affected suppliers.

The estimated benefits also originate from reduced water use (compared to the assumed future baseline) by residential customers (reduced water use by CII customers, although also a benefit, could not be quantified).

Most of the estimated costs originate from the implementation of residential water use efficiency measures, approximately $5.8 billion from 2025 to 2040 or 43 percent of total estimated costs, and revenues that would be lost by suppliers (and, to a lesser extent, no wastewater management agencies), approximately $4.7 billion or 35 percent. The estimated cost of wastewater infrastructure improvements and other related infrastructure projects during that period is approximately $1.6 billion or 12 percent of total estimated costs.

Creation or Elimination of Jobs within California
The total number of jobs within the state is estimated to increase by approximately 18,000 in 2025. Increases in jobs statewide will range from 5,000 to 11,000 per year in the following years. The top industries experiencing increased employment are architectural, engineering, and related services; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture production (including compost and mulch operations); and valve and fittings other than plumbing – mostly because of the increase in the demand for turf conversion to climateready landscapes. 406
- 16 -
Creation of New Businesses or Elimination of Existing Businesses within California
The main businesses affected by the proposed regulation are suppliers. Because these are generally local monopolies, households and CII customers usually do not have a choice between their water service supplier and another one. Thus, the proposed regulation is not expected to cause the entry of new suppliers or the exit of existing ones.

Based on increased expenditures by suppliers on residential water use efficiency measures and CII measures, and also on increased expenditures by urban forestry and landscape management agencies, and wastewater management agencies, the top industries experiencing increased sales growth rates include greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture production (including compost and mulch operations); major household appliance manufacturing; valve and fittings other than plumbing; architectural, engineering, and related services; and watch, clock, and other measuring and controlling device manufacturing. Sales growth can be met by increases in the size of existing firms or the creation of new firms in these industries. For traditionally local and small scale, labor-intensive firms such as landscapers or nurseries, sales growth will probably encourage new small businesses. On the other hand, existing manufacturers of major household appliances and plumbing fixtures may expand production.

Competitive Advantages or Disadvantages for California Businesses The proposed regulation would not put in-state firms at a disadvantage. As noted, before, households and CII customers purchase water from their local water supplier, and they generally do not have a choice between their water service supplier and an out-of-state enterprise. Landscape services are labor-intensive and will likely be provided by existing California-based businesses. Products needed for residential and CII water conservation, such as laundry equipment and valve and fittings manufacturing, tend to be provided by sectors that already compete across state lines.

Thus, the proposed regulation is not expected to affect the relative interstate competitiveness of California as a location for those industries.

Increase or Decrease in Investment in California
The increased production by various businesses, due to increased spending by suppliers, households, urban forestry and landscape management agencies, and local wastewater management agencies, should be met through increased production by instate companies. Landscape services will grow, and given that these are laborintensive, it seems unlikely that out-of-state companies will displace local landscaping companies. Production and manufacturing in other growth industries, including greenhouse and nursery production, valve and fittings manufacturing, household laundry equipment, and plumbing fixture manufacturing, will experience growth as well, which should attract in-state producers. The growth of these firms will require investment in capital equipment and raw materials.
407
- 17 -
Additionally, as discussed above, local wastewater management agencies are expected to invest in wastewater infrastructure improvements, such as pipe replacement in wastewater collection systems, and other related infrastructure projects, amounting to approximately $1.6 billion from 2025 to 2040. These investments in wastewater-related infrastructure will in turn increase production and manufacturing in other industries including fabricated pipe and pipe fitting manufacturing, and pump and pumping equipment manufacturing, which, again, should attract in-state manufacturers. The growth of these firms will require further investment in capital equipment and raw materials.

Incentives for Innovation
Spending by suppliers is expected to spur innovation in certain areas. Given the noticeable increase in spending on landscape conservation programs, the Board anticipates that the industry will respond by developing new technologies and products, for example, new irrigation systems and products, new climate-ready landscapes, improved composting and mulch operations and processes, and by improving on existing installation processes. Many households will seek new low-cost climate-ready landscape strategies, and entrepreneurs who can supply products and services accordingly will grow. Additionally, leak detection equipment and infrastructure are growing and developing, and the increased spending by suppliers will hasten those developments.

Benefits of the Regulation
As explained before, one of the benefits of the proposed regulation that can be quantified is the water savings to suppliers and their customers. As a result of the proposed regulation, suppliers will spend less to acquire water, and similarly, customers will spend less on their water bills. The benefits to suppliers from the CII performance measures also include avoided stormwater-related expenses. Upgrading to more efficient fixtures and appliances leads to both water savings and energy savings. In particular, because more efficient washers use less water than inefficient ones, less water needs to be heated, and less energy is used.

The proposed regulation is expected to yield benefits that are not possible to quantify given the existing data. Compliance with the proposed regulation likely will:

1. Reduce the overall pressure on the limited water resources that many sectors in California compete for and reduce the need to cut water use—in any sector—when there is a drought.

2. Free up suppliers’ water for their future use.

3. Improve water quality, improve soils, and sequester more carbon.

4. Improve safety, such as reductions in over-irrigation, mosquito breeding pools and slip hazards.

5. Reduce some landscape maintenance costs.

6. Reduce state costs of disposing of organic materials that should not go to landfills by increasing demand for mulch.

7. Protect biodiversity and support ecosystems.
408
- 18 -
Department of Finance Comments and State Water Board Responses The SRIA was submitted to the Department of Finance (DOF) on March 13, 2023.

DOF provided comments to the State Water Board on April 12, 2023. DOF generally concurred with the State Water Board’s methodology in the SRIA and made three comments. The three comments, and the State Water Board’s response to those comments, are as follows:

Comment 1: The version of the SRIA that DOF reviewed assumes that the estimated impacts will be not biased by the omission of water use data for the suppliers that did not provide the requested data, which account for about 11 percent of the affected population. However, if those water districts’ water usage is significantly different, the estimated costs may be higher or lower. The SRIA must provide an analysis that shows the omitted suppliers have generally similar water usage patterns to the suppliers that provided data. For example, the SRIA can show that the omitted districts are generally consistent with the state average on publicly available characteristics that are correlated with water use.

Response to Comment 1: An analysis of omitted suppliers was added to the updated SRIA (see SRIA Appendix H). Twenty suppliers without available data had been omitted. The omitted suppliers are on average smaller (fewer than 10,000 connections) than the suppliers included in the least-cost analysis and represent less than 2 percent of all potentially affected connections. The omission of the suppliers, however, should not materially affect the findings in the SRIA. Using data on the number of connections for the 20 suppliers to extrapolate per-connection-year assumptions, present discounted values for residential cost and benefit were calculated. Residential cost and benefit would be approximately $260 million and $341 million, respectively, across all 20 suppliers and for the entire 2025-2040 period. These amounts represent approximately

2.5 percent of the combined residential cost and benefit estimated for all suppliers for which data were sufficiently available.

Comment 2: The version of the SRIA that DOF reviewed assumes that customers will apply an average use throttling (e.g., opening a faucet partially, rather than all the way) of 67 percent on their faucets and waterheads. If, instead, customers averaged 80 percent or 40 percent then the costs would change accordingly. The SRIA must provide evidence that the 67 percent assumption is the most accurate or provide a sensitivity analysis to show how the impacts may vary based on average throttling.

Response to Comment 2: An explanation of the 67 percent throttling assumption and supporting evidence was added to the updated SRIA (see SRIA Appendix D). Throttling assumptions were obtained from existing research on residential end use. More specifically, measured average flow rate for showerheads, bathroom faucets, and kitchen faucets was gathered from the residential end use studies’ various data collection periods. This included data from: 1996 to 1998, 2005 to 2010, and 2010 to 2013. To calculate throttling rates, the measured average flow rate was then compared to the respective fixture standard during the data collection period. The calculated throttling rate ranged from 50 percent to 86 percent, with an average of 67 percent.

Comment 3: The version of the SRIA that DOF reviewed assumes that California energy costs from 2025 to 2040 will be equal to projected U.S. energy costs over the 409
- 19 -
same period despite acknowledging that historically energy prices have been more costly in the state than nationwide. The SRIA should either adjust the projected energy costs to account for this historical difference or justify the energy cost assumptions.

Response to Comment 3: The assumed projected U.S. energy costs were replaced in the SRIA with projected California energy costs obtained from the California Energy Commission, and the analysis was updated accordingly (see Energy Savings section of the SRIA). More specifically, annual energy price forecasts for natural gas and electricity for the 2025-2035 period were obtained from California Energy Commission’s Energy Demand Forecasts (CEC 2021 and 2022 Integrated Energy Policy Reports).

The estimated annual energy cost savings for residential customers of both privatelyowned suppliers and publicly-owned suppliers were updated accordingly. Under the assumed California energy costs, the replacement inefficient clothes washers with more efficient clothes washers across suppliers’ service areas would result in approximately $49 million in energy savings in 2025 and increased energy cost savings thereafter, reaching approximately $100 million in 2040.

COST IMPACTS ON REPRESENTATIVE PRIVATE PERSON OR BUSINESS [Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(9); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 4(a) and(b)] Typical Business
To assess the direct cost impact on the typical regulated business (all regulated businesses are privately-owned suppliers), the Board analyzed the 67 privately-owned suppliers for which data were available. Combined, they serve approximately six million people statewide. For this analysis, a typical business is defined as a hypothetical privately-owned supplier with the average size and average attributes. The typical supplier thus defined has 22,000 service connections and serves approximately 92,000 people. The typical supplier would incur a direct cost of approximately $7.5 million in 2025. In subsequent years, the typical supplier would incur direct costs ranging between $1 million and $5 million.

Individual
The proposed regulation applies to urban retail water suppliers only. Customers who elect to participate in rebate and incentives programs their suppliers may offer will incur upfront costs associated with the implementation of the residential water use efficiency measures. If an average of 38.9 million individuals are assumed to reside in the service areas of all suppliers in the 2025-2040 period, then, before rebates, the upfront expenses incurred by customers with the residential water use efficiency measures are approximately $102.6 per person on average in 2025, and range between $1.3 and $7.7 per person on average, per year, in the following years.

BUSINESS REPORT
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(11), § 11346.3(d)]
As a result of the proposed regulation, urban retail water suppliers likely will have to develop water reduction strategies, including rebate and other incentives programs, and submit annual progress reports. It was assumed that there will be ongoing administrative compliance costs of reporting. The annual reporting costs per supplier, 410
- 20 -
whether privately-owned or publicly-owned, was estimated to be approximately $5,000, and is based on the annual cost of one eight-hour day each month for a typical engineer (the median California wage for a mechanical engineer is $53.99 per hour as reported by the Employment Development Department). These work-hour estimates for the reporting costs were obtained based on outreach with suppliers across California and a review of conservation programs statewide. The State Water Boad has concluded that it is necessary for the health, safety, or welfare of the people of the state that the regulation apply to businesses.

SMALL BUSINESS
[Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 4(a)]
Urban retail water suppliers are water companies (utilities) providing drinking water to the public and, pursuant to Government Code section 11342.610, are not small businesses.

CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(13)]
The Board must determine that no reasonable alternative it considered or that has otherwise been identified and brought to its attention would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action, or would be more cost effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

The Board invites interested persons to present statements or arguments with respect to alternatives at the public hearing or during the written comment period.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD
The State Water Board considered two alternatives to the proposed regulation. The two alternatives were evaluated for costs and benefits, economic impacts, and cost-effectiveness relative to the proposed regulation, and both alternatives were rejected. A fuller discussion of Alternatives Considered by the Board can be found on pages 28-29 in the Initial Statement of Reasons.

FORMS OR DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
[Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 20(c)(3)]
None.
411
- 21 -

STATE WATER BOARD CONTACT PERSONS
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(14)]
Requests for copies of the proposed regulatory text, the Initial Statement of Reasons, subsequent modifications of the proposed regulatory text, if any, or other inquiries concerning the proposed action may be directed to:

Charlotte Ely
Environmental Program Manager
State Water Resources Control Board
Email address: [email protected]
Karina Herrera
Senior Environmental Scientist
State Water Resources Control Board
Email address: [email protected]
In the event Charlotte Ely and Karina Herrera are not available to respond to requests or inquiries, please contact:

Paola Gonzalez
Environmental Scientist
State Water Resources Control Board
Email address: [email protected]
Climate and Conservation inbox
[email protected]
Please identify the regulation by using the State Water Board regulation package identifier, “Proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life Regulation” in any inquiries or written comments.

AVAILABILITY OF INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS, TEXT OF PROPOSED

REGULATION AND THE RULEMAKING FILE
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(16)]
The State Water Board has prepared and has available for public review an initial statement of reasons for the proposed regulation, all the information upon which the proposed regulation is based, the text of the proposed regulation, and all other required forms, statements, and reports. In order to request that copies of these documents or alternative formats of these documents be mailed or emailed to you, please write to or email the Contact Persons. Upon specific request, these documents will be made available in Braille, large print, or CD.
412
- 22 -

AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(16)]
After holding the hearing and considering relevant comments received in a timely manner, the State Water Board may adopt the proposed regulation substantially as described in this notice. If the State Water Board makes modifications that are substantially related to the originally proposed text, the State Board will make the modified text – with changes clearly indicated – available to the public for at least 15 days before the State Water Board adopts the modified regulation. Any such modifications will also be posted on the State Water Board Web site. Please send requests for copies of any modified regulation to the attention of the contact persons provided above (“Contact Persons”). The State Water Board will accept written comments on the modified regulation for 15 days after the date on which they were made available.

AVAILABILITY OF FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS
[Gov. Code, § 11346.5(a)(19)]
The State Water Board will prepare a final statement of reasons pursuant to Government Code section 11346.9 after final adoption of the regulation, and when ready will make the final statement of reasons available. A copy of the Final Statement of Reasons may be obtained from the contact persons or the State Water Board program webpage, listed in the next section.

AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET
[Gov. Code, § 11346.4(a)(6); § 11346.5(a)(20)]
Copies of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the regulation may be found on the Rulemaking to Make Conservation a California Way of Life | California State Water Resources Control Board page.

August 18, 2023
Date Courtney Tyler
Clerk to the Board
413
Visalia City Council
Staff Report
Visalia City Council
707 W. Acequia
Visalia, CA 93291
File #: 23-0268 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.

Agenda Item Wording:

First reading of Ordinance 2023-05 of proposed revisions and amendments of Visalia Municipal Code Chapter 8.28, Solid Waste Collection and Disposal. Revisions and amendments incorporate Senate Bill (SB) 1383 regulations related to state recycling requirements.

Deadline for Action: 10/2/2023
Submitting Department: Public Works
Contact Name and Phone Number: Jason Serpa, Public Works Manager, [email protected], 713-4533 Nick Bartsch, Public Works Director, [email protected], 713-4186 Department Recommendation:

Staff recommends that Council adopt the amended and revised Chapter 8.28 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal to bring the municipal code current with state regulations required in SB 1383.

Background Discussion:

City staff has been working to ensure the City is in compliance with the regulations set forth in Senate Bill (SB) 1383. Although the new regulations are challenging to many jurisdictions, City staff has worked closely with California’s Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) and the City Attorney’s Office, to update Chapter 8.28 of the City’s Municipal Code, Solid Waste Collection and Disposal. This work was to enable the City to have updated and enforceable ordinances in place for the regulations that CalRecycle has required.

The purpose of SB 1383 is to reduce the amount of organic waste that makes its way to landfills.

When buried in landfills, organic wastes (including paper, cardboard, food scraps, food soiled paper, yard trimmings, and other organic-based wastes) emit 20% of the state’s methane, a climate super pollutant 84 times more potent than carbon dioxide. This organic waste makes up half of what Californians send to the landfill and reducing that can have a direct impact to our climate, especially in the San Joaquin Valley.

The final rulemaking for SB 1383 was completed by CalRecycle on November 3, 2020, with the final text of the regulations published in February 2021. Since then, cities have been working with CalRecycle to interpret the regulations and help publish CalRecycle model tools that can be utilized for accuracy and correctness.

Fortunately for the City of Visalia, solid waste programs and policies already in place contribute to the community being well on the way towards compliance with SB 1383. In June of 2018, City Council adopted City Ordinance 2018-03, which revised much of the Solid Waste Ordinance, and adopted mandatory organics waste collection, a key component of SB 1383. In April of 2022, Council adopted Ordinance 2022-05 which updated the mandatory recycling sections to the more stringent thresholds Visalia City Council Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/27/2023
powered by Legistar™414
File #: 23-0268 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.

Ordinance 2022-05 which updated the mandatory recycling sections to the more stringent thresholds set forth by CalRecycle. Furthermore, in September of 2022, Council adopted Ordinance 2022-07 which updated the requirements for edible food generators and the organizations that participate in food recovery.

To aid this effort, CalRecycle staff have identified and helped in further formulating language needed to conform to CalRecycle standards. The changes recommended by CalRecycle staff are interpreted directly from the State regulations and are intended to help the City update the local ordinance for compliance.

Ordinance Revision and Update Focus
The update to Chapter 8.28 of the City ordinance is focused on revisions and updates to SB 1383 regulations only. Some sub-sections have been deleted, as they no longer apply per the new regulations, and thresholds have been updated as they have phased out over the years.

Education Period for Non-Compliance
SB 1383 regulations give jurisdictions the option to conduct a two-year education period from January 1, 2022 - December 31, 2023. This period included all of the actions the jurisdiction is required to take, but allowed for the jurisdiction to simply provide educational materials to inform a customer of the requirements when they are not in compliance, rather than to issue a penalty. Staff recommends this approach for these new updates. However, staff will continue with enforcement actions on the other SB 1383 related items like contamination of organic waste, since the City has had organics service since 2014 when food scraps were initially permitted in our green waste residential receptacles.

Even though CalRecycle applies a “Good Faith Effort” when determining a jurisdiction’s compliance with the SB 1383 requirements, it is important to note that there are repercussions if the City does not comply. If CalRecycle determines that a jurisdiction’s ordinance is inconsistent or does not meet the requirements of the regulations, CalRecycle will notify the jurisdiction and provide an explanation of the deficiencies. The jurisdiction then has 180 calendar days to correct. If CalRecycle finds a jurisdiction in violation of the regulations beyond the correction period, there may be penalties.

These penalties can range from $500 - $10,000 per day dependent on the type of violation.

Fiscal Impact:

None
Prior Council Action: June 18, 2018 - Adoption of Ordinance 2018-03. This revised Visalia Municipal Code Section 8.28 to comply with State Assembly Bills AB341 and AB1826 to the requirements at that time. April 4, 2022 - Adoption of Ordinance 2022-05. This revised the recycling requirements of who must subscribe to a higher standard threshold. September 19,2022 - Adoption of Ordinance 2023-07. This updated the ordinance pertaining to edible food generators and food recovery organizations.

Other: N/A
Alternatives: Alternatives: Alternative is to not approve and adopt Ordinance 2023-05 and the associated amendments and revisions to the Visalia Municipal Code chapter 8.28, Solid Waste Visalia City Council Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/27/2023
powered by Legistar™415
File #: 23-0268 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 1.
associated amendments and revisions to the Visalia Municipal Code chapter 8.28, Solid Waste Collection and Disposal. This may require enforcement action by CalRecycle that may include fines, as described above.

Recommended Motion (and Alternative Motions if expected):

I move to approve and adopt Ordinance 2023-05 and the associated amendments and revisions to the Visalia Municipal Code chapter 8.28, Solid Waste Collection and Disposal.

Environmental Assessment Status: N/A
CEQA Review: N/A
Attachments: Draft Ordinance 2023-05 Ordinance 2018-03 Adoption Ordinance 2022-05 Adoption Ordinance 2022-07 Adoption
Visalia City Council Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/27/2023
powered by Legistar™416
1 ORDINANCE NO. 2023-05

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING SECTIONS 8.28.150 and 8.28.160 OF THE VISALIA MUNICIPAL CODE

PERTAINING TO GARBAGE, RECYCLING, AND ORGANICS COLLECTION SERVICES BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA:

SECTION 1 – Preamble and Findings. Consistent with its control over municipal affairs and the powers vested in the City of Visalia through the California Constitution, the City of Visalia is authorized to secure and promote the public health, comfort, safety, and welfare of its citizenry.

The City Council of the City of Visalia hereby makes the following findings:

A. State Senate Bill (SB) 1383 requires that jurisdictions enforce on other entities, the requirement for generators to participate in organic waste collection programs.

B. The current City Municipal Code provisions in Chapter 8.28 contain outdated or missing information in sections that do not meet these new mandated recycling and organics collection measures.

SECTION 2 – Revisions to Municipal Code Chapter 8.28. Sections 8.28.150 and 8.28.160 of the Visalia Municipal Code deal with the City’s requirements as it pertains to Commercial and Multi-Family Recycling and Organics Recycling. These sections are hereby amended with the following section changes and additions listed below. Additions are listed in red italics and deletions are in strikethrough for reference:

8.28.150 Commercial and Multi-Family Recycling Requirements.

A. Each generator of commercial solid waste or multi-family dwellings of 5 or more units, referred to herein as a "Commercial generator", shall be responsible for ensuring and demonstrating its compliance with the requirements of this section. Nothing in this section shall preclude any person from self-hauling recyclable materials generated by that person to a recycling facility.

B. Commercial Generator Self-haul. A commercial generator may transport recyclable materials generated at its business or property to a recycling facility only if the commercial generator completes its activity by utilizing a vehicle owned by either the commercial generator or generator's employee. This self-haul exemption does not include contracting with a third party to transport the recyclable materials except as permitted herein. A self-hauler must retain on-site a self-hauling form certifying that all self-hauling activities will be completed in accordance with this section or any other applicable law or regulation. The self-hauling form shall be made available to the Public Works Director or designee upon request. At a minimum, the Commercial generator shall provide the following information on the self-hauling form:

1. The name, address and telephone number of the Commercial generator's representative that will be signing the self-hauling form.

2. A list of the types of recyclable materials that are being transported.

3. For each type of recyclable material, the amount that is being taken from the Commercial generator's business or property to a recycling facility on a quarterly basis.

4. The name and address of the recycling facility.
417
2 5. A written statement, signed by the Commercial generator or representative, certifying that the generator is in compliance with the requirements of this Section. a. The Public Works Director or designee may restrict or prohibit self-hauling by a Commercial generator if it is determined that after providing notice and an opportunity for a hearing, the Commercial generator's self-hauling activities violate the provisions of this section or any other applicable law or regulation.

C. On-site Practices.

1. Each Commercial generator shall use separate and readily identifiable containers to collect and store recyclable materials and shall designate areas to collect and/or store recyclable materials in all areas where disposal containers are provided for customers.

2. Each Commercial generator shall prominently post and maintain one or more signs in maintenance or work areas or common areas where recyclable materials are collected and/or stored that specify the materials to be recycled and how to recycle such material.

3. Each Commercial generator shall notify and instruct employees or tenants in writing of applicable recycling requirements within 14 days of occupancy, including outreach and training on what materials are required to be recycled and how to recycle such material. A copy of such instruction or training materials shall be provided to the Public Works Director or designee upon request.

4. Each commercial generator shall prohibit their employees or tenants from placing recyclable material in a container not designated to receive that type of recyclables.

D. All recyclable materials shall be placed for collection in city provided or approved covered containers. No container shall be loaded beyond its capacity. It shall be the Commercial generator's responsibility to keep the containers used for the storage and collection of recyclable material generated on the premises in a clean and sanitary condition. No material or containers shall be kept or handled in such a manner as to become a nuisance. No recyclable material shall be allowed to become odoriferous or a producer of vermin. Lids on containers shall remain closed at all times while stored or placed for collection. The Public Works Director is specifically authorized to promulgate rules and regulations regarding any and all recyclable material containers including organic containers and as related to the recyclable materials to be placed therein, the placement and maximum weight of high-density materials for collection and the proper use of containers.

E. Required Collection of Recyclable Materials. Each commercial generator shall arrange for the collection of recyclable material through one of the following methods:

1. Utilize the recycling services of city; or

2. Enter into a written service agreement with a franchised permittee or enter into a written service agreement with recycling business that pays the commercial generator for recyclable materials collected and is exempt from city franchise requirements. Should the commercial generator choose to enter into an agreement with a franchised permittee, the commercial generator shall be responsible for verifying that the franchised permittee holds a valid business license with the city and is a permitted franchise hauler within the City limits; or

3. Self haul recyclable materials generated on site; complete and retain on-site a self-hauling form certifying that all self-hauling activities will be completed in accordance with this ordinance or any other applicable law or regulation. A copy of such form shall be available to the Public Works Director upon request.
418
3 4. Each commercial generator entering into a written service agreement with a franchised permittee or self-hauling recyclable materials shall ensure all recyclable materials are source separated.

5. Recycling service agreements and all other recycling documents shall be available for inspection by the Public Works Director or designee at the principal location of the Commercial generator's business, Commercial facility, special event, or non-residential property during normal business hours.

6. Each commercial generator shall ensure that recyclable materials generated at the Commercial generator's site will be taken only to a recycling or composting facility or make other arrangements to ensure that the materials are recycled or composted and not delivered to a landfill for disposal. Commercial generators shall not dispose of, or arrange for disposal of recyclable materials by placement in a landfill except in an emergency situation, or when no viable markets or recycling facilities are available, as determined by the Public Works Director. Further, all Commercial generators are encouraged to consider recycling additional materials, whether or not they have been specifically designated by the Public Works Director.

F. Commercial and multi-family recycling exemption. The following shall be exempt from the requirements of this section:

1. The State of California, a special district or other local public agency other than the City, as defined, or any employee thereof, when collecting or transporting recyclable materials produced by operation or system of the entities described above.

2. Municipal corporations and governmental agencies other than City using their own vehicles and employees engaged in the collection, transportation or disposal of recyclable materials within the boundaries of the City.

3. A Commercial generator shall be exempt from the requirements in this section if the business, commercial facility or non-residential property:
a. generates less than 2 cubic yards of commercial solid waste per week. This exemption does not apply to special events unless the Commercial generator demonstrates to the Public Works Director that the event will produce less than the threshold amount; or b. demonstrates to the Public Works Director that there is no collection service or other system available for such materials; or
a. c. demonstrates to the Public Works Director that there are no recyclable materials being generated by any activities in the Commercial generator's business, commercial facility, or non-residential property; or
b. d. demonstrates, through a site visit required by the Public Works Director, that either:
i. There is inadequate storage space for automatic lift Containers, bins or roll-off boxes for recyclable materials on site and that it is infeasible for the commercial generator to share automatic lift Containers, bins or roll-off bins for recyclable materials with another Commercial generator or an adjoining property; or
ii. Compliance with this section will result in a violation of zoning codes or City regulations for minimum parking spaces.
iii. If, after reviewing the site, the Public Works Director determines that it is feasible for recycling Containers to be placed either on-site or shared with an adjoining business or property, 419
4 then the Commercial generator will not be exempted from these requirements and will be responsible for full compliance with this section.
e. demonstrates to the Public Works Director that there are no viable markets or recycling facilities available, as determined by the Public Works Director or designee.

G. If the Commercial generator seeks an exemption, an application for such exemption shall be submitted in writing to the Public Works Director. After reviewing the exemption request, and after an on-site review, if applicable, the Public Works Director may either approve or disapprove the exemption request.

H. A violation of this section shall constitute an infraction.

8.28.160 Mandatory Commercial and Multi-Family Organic Recycling Requirements.

Each generator of commercial solid waste or multi-family dwellings of 5 or more units, referred to herein as a "Commercial generator" shall be responsible for ensuring and demonstrating its compliance with the requirements of this section. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude any person from self-hauling organic waste generated by that person to an organic waste or compost facility.

Commercial generator self-haul. A generator may transport organic waste generated at its business or property to an organic waste recycling facility only if the Commercial generator completes its activity by utilizing a vehicle owned by either the generator or generator's employee.

This self-haul exemption does not include contracting with a third party to transport the organic waste. A self-hauler must retain on-site a self-hauling form certifying that all self-hauling activities will be completed in accordance with this section or any other applicable law or regulation. The self-hauling form shall be made available to the Public Works Director or designee upon request.

At a minimum, the Commercial generator shall provide the following information on the selfhauling form:

A. The name, address and telephone number of the Commercial generator's representative that will be signing the self-hauling form.

1. A list of the types of organic waste that are being transported.

2. For each type of organic waste, the amount that is being taken from the Commercial generator's business or property to an organic waste facility on a quarterly basis.

3. The name and address of the recycling facility.

4. A written statement, signed by the Commercial generator or representative, certifying that the generator is in compliance with the requirements of this Section.

B. The Public Works Director may restrict or prohibit self-hauling by a Commercial generator if the Public Works Director determines, after providing notice and an opportunity for a hearing, that the Commercial generator's self-hauling activities violate the provisions of this section or any other applicable law or regulation.

C. On-site Practices.

1. Each Commercial generator shall use containers to collect and store organic waste and shall designate areas to collect and/or store organic waste in all areas where disposal containers are provided for customers.
420
5 2. Each Commercial generator shall prominently post and maintain one or more signs in maintenance or work areas or common areas where organic waste are collected and/or stored that specify the materials to be recycled and how to recycle such material.

3. Each Commercial generator shall notify and instruct employees or tenants in writing of applicable recycling requirements within 14 days of occupancy, including outreach and training on what materials are required to be recycled and how to recycle such material. A copy of such instruction or training materials shall be provided to the Public Works Director or designee upon request.

4. Each commercial generator shall prohibit their employees or tenants from placing organic waste in a container not designated to receive organic waste.

D. All organic waste shall be placed for collection in City provided or approved covered containers. No container shall be loaded beyond 2/3 full to prevent spillage during servicing. It shall be the Commercial generator's responsibility to keep the containers used for the storage and collection of organic waste generated on the premises in a clean and sanitary condition. No material or containers shall be kept or handled in such a manner as to become a nuisance. No organic waste shall be allowed to become odoriferous or a producer of vermin. Lids on containers shall remain closed at all times while stored or placed for collection. The Public Works Director is specifically authorized to promulgate rules and regulations regarding any and all organic waste containers including as related to the organic waste to be placed therein, the placement and maximum weight of high-density materials for Collection and the proper use of Containers.

E. Required collection of organic waste.

1. Each commercial generator shall arrange for the collection of organic waste through one of the following methods:
a. Utilize the recycling services of city; or
b. Enter into a written service agreement with a franchised permittee. Should the Commercial generator choose to enter into an agreement with a franchised permittee, the Commercial generator shall be responsible for verifying that the franchised permittee holds a valid business license with the City and is in compliance with this ordinance; or c. Complete and retain on-site a self-hauling form certifying that all self-hauling activities will be completed in accordance with this ordinance or any other applicable law or regulation. A copy of such form shall be provided and made available to the Public Works Director upon request.

2. Each commercial generator entering into a written service agreement with a franchised permittee or self-hauling organic waste shall ensure all organic waste is source separated and contamination kept to a minimum.

3. Any recycling service agreement and other recycling documents shall be available for inspection by the Public Works Director or designee at the principal location of the Commercial generator's business, commercial facility, special event, or non-residential property during normal business hours.

4. Each Commercial generator shall ensure that organic waste generated at the Commercial generator's site will be taken only to a recycling or composting facility or make other arrangements to ensure that the materials are recycled or composted and not delivered to a landfill for disposal.

Commercial generators shall not dispose of, or arrange for disposal of organic waste by placement in a landfill except in an emergency situation, or when no viable markets or recycling 421
6 facilities are available, as determined by the Public Works Director. Further, all Commercial generators are encouraged to consider recycling additional materials, whether or not they have been specifically designated by the Public Works Director.

F. Commercial and Multi-Family Organic Waste Recycling Exemption. The following shall be exempt from the requirements of this section:

1. The State of California, a special district or other local public agency other than the City, as defined, or any employee thereof, when collecting or transporting organic waste produced by operation or system of the entities described above.

2. Municipal corporations and governmental agencies other than City using their own vehicles and employees engaged in the Collection, transportation or disposal of organic waste within the boundaries of the City.

3. Prior to January 1, 2019, a business, Commercial facility or non-residential property generating less than 2 cubic yards of organic waste per week. This exemption does not apply to special events unless the Commercial generator demonstrates to the Public Works Director that the event will produce less than the threshold amount.

4. On or after January 1, 2019, a business, Commercial facility or non-residential property generating less than 2 cubic yards of total refuse per week. This exemption does not apply to special events unless the Commercial generator demonstrates to the Public Works Director that the event will produce less than the threshold amount.

3. 5. A Commercial generator may not be required to source separate organic waste if:
a. the Commercial generator demonstrates to the Public Works Director that there is no collection service or other system available for such materials; or a. b. the Commercial generator demonstrates to the Public Works Director there is no organic waste being generated by any activities in the Commercial generator's business, commercial facility, or non-residential property; or c. there are no viable markets or recycling facilities available, as determined by the Public Works Director.
b. d. it is determined through a site visit conducted by the Public Works Director or designee, that either:
i. There is inadequate storage space for automatic lift containers, bins or roll-off bins for organic waste on site and that it is infeasible for the Commercial generator to share automatic lift containers, bins or roll-off bins for organic waste with a Commercial generator or an adjoining property; or
ii. Compliance with this section will result in a violation of zoning codes or city regulations for minimum parking spaces.
iii. If, after reviewing the site, the City Manager determines that it is feasible for recycling containers to be placed either on-site or shared with an adjoining business or property, then the Commercial generator will not be exempted from these requirements and will be responsible for full compliance with this section.

G. If the Commercial generator seeks an exemption, an application for such exemption shall be submitted on a form prescribed by the City Manager. After reviewing the exemption request, and after an on-site review, if applicable, the Public Works Director may either approve or disapprove the exemption request.
422
7 H. A violation of this section shall constitute an infraction.

SECTION 3 – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from the date of adoption.

SECTION 4 – Severance. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstances, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivision, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Visalia hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable.

PASSED AND ADOPTED: OCTOBER 16, 2023 BRIAN POOCHIGIAN, MAYOR ATTEST: _____________________________

LESLIE CAVIGLIA, CITY CLERK APPROVED BY CITY ATTORNEY
______________________________

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF TULARE ) ss.

CITY OF VISALIA )
I, Leslie Caviglia, City Clerk of the City of Visalia, certify the foregoing is the full and true Ordinance 2023-05 passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Visalia at a regular meeting held on OCTOBER 16, 2023 and certify a summary of this ordinance has been published in the Visalia Times Delta.

Dated: LESLIE CAVIGLIA, CITY CLERK
_____________________________
By Michelle Nicholson, Chief Deputy City Clerk
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
Visalia City Council
Staff Report
Visalia City Council
707 W. Acequia
Visalia, CA 93291
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

Agenda Item Wording:

Public hearing and consideration of the following actions:

1. Certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse Number 2021050418): A request to certify the Environmental Impact Report for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan project, of which the components include but are not limited to the adoption and buildout of a specific plan, development agreement, general plan amendment, tentative subdivision map, and tentative parcel map. The EIR has determined that all project impacts were either less than significant or could be mitigated to a less than significant level with the exception of the following impacts that are considered significant and unavoidable: Aesthetics (project and cumulative level); Agriculture & Forestry Resources (project and cumulative level); Air Quality (project and cumulative level); Hydrology & Water Quality (cumulative level only); Transportation (project and cumulative level); and Utilities & Service Systems (cumulative level only). The EIR follows a Notice of Availability period wherein the Draft EIR was duly noticed and conducted for the Project from May 4 to June 19, 2023.

The City of Visalia is the lead agency for the preparation of the EIR in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Resolution No. 2023-48, required).

2. Initiation of Proceedings for Annexation No. 2021-05: A request to annex approximately 468.3 acres and adjacent right-of-way, located within the City of Visalia Urban Development Boundary Tiers II and III, into the Visalia city limits. The annexation request includes authorizing the detachment from County Service Area No. 1 in accordance with State and County requirements and authorizing the City Manager to sign and enter into a Pre-Annexation Agreement (Resolution No. 2023-79, required). (APN: 077-100-108 only)

3. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance for adoption of Specific Plan No. 2021-13 and entering into of a Development Agreement: A request to establish a new specific plan (Carleton Acres Specific Plan) consisting of approximately 507 acres, including districts for low, medium, and high density residential, commercial mixed use, neighborhood commercial, parks / open space, and public institutional. Full buildout of the plan will accommodate for approximately 3,262 dwelling units, approximately 205,000 square feet of leasable commercial area, 17 acres of parks / trails / recreational facilities, 17 acres for a drainage basin, and a future elementary school site, to be developed across Urban Development Boundary Tiers I, II, and III. A development agreement has been prepared with the specific plan in accordance with General Plan Policy LU-P-22 to address development terms for the project, including development within the Urban Growth Boundary Tier III (Ordinance No. 2023-10, required).

4. General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14: A request to amend the location and acreage of General Plan land use designations within 507 acres, resulting in the redistribution of Residential Low, Medium, and High Density, Parks / Recreation, Commercial Neighborhood, and Public Institutional designations, and the establishment of a Commercial Mixed Use designation (Resolution No. 2023- 50, required).

Visalia City Council Page 1 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™450
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

Project Applicant: West Star Construction Inc.

Project Location: The proposed Project is located on approximately 507 acres, generally bound by West Riggin Avenue to the south, North Akers Street to the east, North Shirk Road to the west and Avenue 320 (West Kibler Avenue) to the north (APN 077-100-108 and 077-100-105.) Deadline for Action: 10/2/2023
Submitting Department: Community Development
Contact Name and Phone Number:

Brandon Smith, Principal Planner, (559) 713-4636, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>;
Paul Bernal, Community Development Director, (559) 713-4025, [email protected] Department Recommendation:

The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council initiate annexation proceedings for the project by taking the following actions, consistent with the staff recommendation made to Planning Commission on September 11, 2023:

1. Certify the project’s Final Environmental Impact Report, which includes the adoption of the project’s findings of fact, statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation and monitoring reporting program.

2. Initiate proceedings for Annexation No. 2021-05 with the Tulare County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), including authorizing the detachment of the property from County Service Area No. 1 in accordance with State and County requirements; and authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Pre-Annexation Agreement between the City of Visalia and property owners.

3. Approve General Plan Amendment No. 2021-15.

4. Introduce first reading of Ordinance No. 2023-10 approving Specific Plan No. 2021-13, which includes the entering into of a Development Agreement.

If approved by the City Council, staff will bring back the second reading of Ordinance No. 2023-10 at a later City Council meeting and file the annexation application with LAFCO.

The entitlements are supported by both Planning Commission and staff based on the project’s consistency with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Specifically, Annexation No. 2021-05 will facilitate a new community on a 468-acre site in a manner that is consistent with the General Plan land use designations that exist within the project site, and annexes property that spans between Urban Development Boundary Growth Tiers II and III as allowed under General Plan Land Use Policy LU-P-22.

Furthermore, staff recommends approval of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan, based on the project’s consistency with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, and Housing Accountability Act (Government Code section 65589.5).

Background Discussion:

Project applicant West Star Construction has filed entitlement applications to facilitate the subdivision and development of a 468-acre parcel and a 29-acre parcel that are under common ownership, Visalia City Council Page 2 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™451
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
and development of a 468-acre parcel and a 29-acre parcel that are under common ownership, totaling 507 acres (includes roads and waterways). The 468-acre parcel is currently outside of the City limits. The project site is currently vacant and has been utilized for agriculture use.

The entire project, described more fully in the Carleton Acres Specific Plan document (included as Attachment 5), consists of a new community containing up to 3,262 dwelling unit, up to 205,000 square feet of leasable commercial area, 17 acres of parks / trails / recreational facilities, 17 acres for a drainage basin, and a future elementary school site, to be developed across Urban Development Boundary Tiers I, II, and III. The concept master plan is included as Attachment 6.

The property is planned to be developed with a mixture of residential product types, including singlefamily residences on City standard-size lots. A tentative subdivision map (i.e., Carleton Acres Phase 1 Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5590) was also submitted by the applicant to subdivide 100 acres in Growth Tier II into 375 lots in the area designated for Low Density Residential, to be developed over five sub-phases roughly 75 units each, and was approved by the Planning Commission (see Attachment 7). No specific development has been proposed yet on any of the Medium or High Density Residential land which will accommodate multi-family residential development.

The property is also planned to be developed with two separate commercial sites totaling 35 acres, including a 29-acre site within Tier II that is anticipated to include a Costco warehouse store. A tentative parcel map (i.e., Tentative Parcel Map No. 2023-04) was also submitted by the applicant to subdivide the 29 acres into eight parcels, and was approved by the Planning Commission (see Attachment 7). A conditional use permit (CUP) is required for the Costco warehouse store, gas station, and car wash; however, no application has been filed yet for these uses. If Costco perfects their site plan and files a CUP application, it would be considered at a public hearing held by the Planning Commission at a future date once their site plan is complete.

The request for development across the two growth tiers is being made in accordance with General Plan Land Use Policy LU-P-22, which allows for City Council approval of master plans (or, in this case, a specific plan), following Planning Commission review and recommendation, for sites under a single ownership, which includes developmental land within multiple development tiers.

The individual entitlements are described as follows:

Annexation No. 2021-05 is a request to annex parcels totaling approximately 468 acres located outside the city limits and within Tulare County (see Attachment 8). Upon annexation, the Zoning designations for the project area will consist of the following, consistent with the underlying General Plan land use designations as proposed through the General Plan Amendment. · R-1-5 (Single-Family Residential 5,000 square foot minimum site area), · R-M-2 (Multi-Family Residential, one unit per 3,000 square feet site area), · R-M-3 (Multi-Family Residential, one unit per 1,200 square feet site area), · C-MU (Commercial Mixed Use),
· C-N (Neighborhood Commercial),
· Q-P (Quasi-Public).

The annexation can be supported on the basis that the proposal is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-P-21, which allows for the annexation and development of residential land to occur within the Tier II Urban Development Boundary consistent with the City’s Land Use Diagram. Furthermore, the annexation of the Tier III Urban Development Boundary portion is consistent with Land Use Policy Visalia City Council Page 3 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™452
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
annexation of the Tier III Urban Development Boundary portion is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-P-22, which allows for annexation before development is permitted in Tier III under Policy LU-P21. The policy explicitly allows for a project to annex and develop while the City is still limiting development approvals to land within the Tier II designation. The site can be serviced with all the requisite utility and infrastructure available to serve the site upon development.

General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14 is requested to redistribute land use designations that are located upon several sites that are under single ownership. Current and proposed land use designations are summarized as follows:

Land Use Designation Zoning Designation Existing ac. Proposed ac.

Low Density Residential R-1-5 designation 349.5 305.4
Medium Density Residential R-M-2 designation 75.8 No change High Density Residential R-M-3 designation 31.4 No change Commercial Mixed Use C-MU designation 0.0 28.7
Neighborhood Commercial C-N designation 11.4 6.4
Public Institutional QP designation 9.9 13.0
Basin QP designation 0.0 17.3
One parcel that is 29 acres in size is already within the City limits, part of Tier I, is entirely designated High Density Residential and is not affected by the General Plan Amendment.

Currently, the Tier II portion contains all 31.4 acres of the High Density Residential designation and approximately half (about 40 acres) of the Medium Density Residential (see General Plan Land Use Map). The changes in designation will achieve a more even distribution of the Low, Medium, and High Density Residential land use designations among the 468-acre parcel and between Tiers II and III (see concept plan, Attachment 6). The Neighborhood Commercial, currently in Tier II, will move to Tier III, and a new commercial designation (Commercial Mixed Use) will be established in Tier II. The Public Institutional designation is and will remain in Tier III.

Specific Plan No. 2021-04 establishes the Carleton Acres Specific Plan (“Plan”, see Attachment 5), which is applicable to the entire area within Tiers II and III plus an existing undeveloped parcel within Tier I.

The Plan establishes a master land use plan (see Attachment 6), together with the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14. The Plan further provides design and development standards for the property’s residential communities, providing some deviations to City development standards for rear yard setbacks. There are six residential product types or building configurations anticipated by the Plan for the single and multi-family designations, in addition to six allowable architectural themes permitted for the residences. The Plan does not serve as a Planned Residential Development in that there are no small lots or private streets currently proposed through the subdivision map, nor are there any specific home models proposed for use with the plan. Subsequent development of the multi-family designated parcels could establish private streets if developed through a tentative subdivision map and conditional use permit.

Throughout the Plan are policies and standards applicable to:
· commercial development (Section 4.4),
· single-family residential (Section 5.4.1),
Visalia City Council Page 4 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™453
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
· multi-family residential (Section 5.4.2),
· residential architecture (Sections 5.6.2 and 5.6.3), and · site elements, including landscaping, parking, and signage (Sections 6.8 and 6.9).

Design principles are also included for landscape (Section 6.2).

A key feature of the Specific Plan is a pedestrian trail and riparian buffer along the Modoc Ditch that is referred to in the Plan as the Modoc Greenway (see Section 6.5.2.3). This will be established alongside the existing segments of Modoc Ditch at Shannon Parkway and on Akers Street north of Shannon Parkway (see Figure 7.N for a Shannon Parkway cross section). The Greenway is comprised of a Class I bike trail and heavily landscaped bioswales serving as groundwater recharge swales, all maintained by the Landscape and Lighting District. Additional Class I trails are placed throughout the plan area to connect the various residential land use designations to schools, parks, and commercial areas. Parks and trails will have uniform features and amenities, such as landscaping, lighting features, and open space features. The Plan goes into more clear detail in Sections 6, 7, and 8 on the development’s circulation, infrastructure, administration and implementation.

Carleton Acres Phase 1 Tentative Subdivision Map and Tentative Parcel Map No. 2023-04 are not subject to City Council review and approval, since the Planning Commission is the final authority on tentative maps. However, in the context of this project, the maps are dependent upon City Council’s review and approval of the Specific Plan and the General Plan Amendment.

Background on Specific Plans:

Specific plans are a type of guiding and policy utilized in California jurisdictions. Whereas general plans provide context, land uses, objectives and goals for an entire jurisdiction (i.e., county-wide or city-wide), a specific plan covers part of an area covered by the general plan. When being written for a particular document, a specific plan can also include zoning regulations for the mix of land uses within it, including architectural standards if desired. Specific plans may be voluntarily initiated by one or more property owners, or may be required or recommended by a general plan document. In this instance, the Carleton Acres Specific Plan is being proposed based on Visalia General Plan Policy LU-P-22.

Specific plans are regulated by state law per Government Code Sections 65450 through 65457, and regulated by Visalia city law per Municipal Code Chapter 12.04 (see Related Plans and Policies for full text).

Development Agreement Regarding Expansion to Growth Tier III:

A Development Agreement has been prepared by staff to accompany the proposed project (see Attachment 10), based upon the proposal of a master-planned site that spans between Tiers II and III.

Specifically, Land Use Policy LU-P-22 allows for master-planned sites that are under a single ownership or unified control to be annexed and developed, subject to the City Council approval of a master plan (in this case, a specific plan) and a development agreement. The intent of the development agreement is to spell out “details regarding the overall development, density/intensity and phasing, infrastructure needs and financing, and what each party would do”. The development agreement, once entered into between the City and the landowner or developer, would enable the property to annex and develop within Tier III, subject to criteria, while the City is still limiting Visalia City Council Page 5 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™454
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
development approvals to land within the Tier II designation.

The project proponent, Hayes Ranch, LLC, has requested to allow the Carleton Acres Specific Plan development to begin growth in the Tier II area and to have continuous growth from south to north into the Tier III portion of the plan (see memo attached as Exhibit “G”). The memo cites how the property is in unified control and has been master-planned in an effort to facilitate better infrastructure and financial arrangements.

Staff’s draft Development Agreement recommends that certain criteria be met before the City will process any subdivision map entitlement in the Tier III area. The intent is to ensure that substantial progress and investment is made in the Tier II area, such that no portion of the Tier II area is being passed over prior to the Tier III area. The criteria are summarized as follows:

Prior to the processing of a Tier III tentative subdivision map:
· All phases and lots specified in the Carleton Acres Phase 1 Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5590 shall have final maps recorded with the Tulare County Recorder. · Permits for new dwelling units shall be issued for:
o At least 80% of lots located within the Carleton Acres Phase 1 Tentative Subdivision Map (i.e., 300 lots),
o At least 80% of units associated with the 5.5-acre Tier II Medium Density Residential area as indicated by Table 2-1 in the Specific Plan (i.e., 44 units), and o At least 80% of units associated with either the 3.6-acre Tier II Medium Density Residential area or the 9.7-acre Tier II High Density Residential areas as indicated by Table 2-1 in the Specific Plan (i.e., 29 units or 117 units respectively).

This cumulatively equates to construction in at least three of the four stand-alone land use districts in Tier II prior to approvals of any development in Tier III. This requirement does not involve the 29.3-acre R-M-3 zoned site located inside the City limits situated in Tier I. · Improvements for Circulation Element streets, pedestrians trail and landscaping, and other public areas shown in the Tier II area shall be completed. · A street (i.e., Sedona Avenue or Shannon Parkway) shall be constructed between Roeben and Ridgeview Middle School to provide circulation within the site, reducing reliance on arterial streets.

General Plan Consistency:

The entire site has been designated for residential land uses since the adoption of the Visalia General Plan in 2014.

Low Density Residential
Areas of the project designated as Low Density Residential are shown on the concept plan with a street pattern and lotting pattern, though only the area in Tier II is presently being subdivided. The Tier II portion will be developed at a density of 3.71 dwelling units per gross acre and 5.85 dwelling units per net acre. For the Tier III portion of the Low Density Residential, Specific Plan Table 2-1 anticipates that this portion is proposed to be 5 dwelling units per gross acre.

Land Use Policy LU-P-55 states: “this designation is intended to provide for single-family subdivisions.” Compatibility with the surrounding area is required by the General Plan in the decision to approve the proposed subdivision. Staff finds that the proposed tentative subdivision map is Visalia City Council Page 6 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™455
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
to approve the proposed subdivision. Staff finds that the proposed tentative subdivision map is compatible with existing residential development within the Low Density Residential land use designation situated south of Riggin Avenue and east of Akers Street.

Medium and High Density Residential
The areas of the Specific Plan designated as Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential are anticipated for future development upon annexation. At this time, no development plans have been submitted to the City for consideration. The Specific Plan affirms that future development within these areas will be developed with approximately 10 dwelling units per gross acre for Medium Density Residential properties and approximately 15 dwelling units per gross acre in the High Density Residential properties.

Land Use Policy LU-P-56 states: “[The Medium Density Residential] designation can accommodate a mix of housing types including small-lot single-family, townhouses, two- and four-plexes, and garden apartments on infill lots or new development areas within walking distance of neighborhood nodes and corridors. … Development standards will ensure that new development contributes positively to the larger community environment.”
Land Use Policy LU-P-57 states: “[The High Density Residential] designation is appropriate for some infill sites and new areas in close proximity to neighborhood centers and major transportation routes. ... Development standards will ensure that new development contributes positively to the creation of neighborhood nodes or districts.”
Specific Plan Section 5.5 calls out four multi-family product types or building configurations that can be utilized in the new community: cluster single-family; townhouses, duplexes and four-plexes, and apartment buildings. The Plan further provides a highly detailed set of architectural design guidelines (Section 5.6) that ensures high-quality character, which is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-P-52 that states “Facilitate high-quality building and site design for multi-family developments … by creating and adopting design guidelines to be used in the development review and approval process.”
The Specific Plan has been designed in a manner that plots all multi-family residential designations within one-half mile of the two commercial nodes located at the corners of Shirk/Riggin and Akers/Avenue 320. Furthermore, all designations contain frontage or adjoining proximity to arterial roadways.

Neighborhood Commercial
The existing 11.4-acre Neighborhood Commercial designation on the site is the sole commercial designation serving the entire one-mile block that constitutes most of the project area. The Plan proposes to move its location within the plan area and reduce its size to 6.4 acres.

With this change, the designation is still consistent with all aspects of Land Use Policy LU-P-67. The policy states that shopping centers in Neighborhood Commercial areas shall have a total size of 5 to 12 acres, be no closer than one mile from other General Plan-designated Neighborhood Commercial or Community Commercial locations and be integrated with surrounding neighborhood uses in terms of design, with negative impacts minimized. The nearest General Plan designation from the proposed Akers/ Avenue 320 site is one mile away at the future intersection of Linwood & Shannon Parkway.

Commercial Mixed Use / Costco Warehouse
The Plan proposes a new 28.7-acre Commercial Mixed Use designation at the intersection of Shirk & Visalia City Council Page 7 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™456
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

The Plan proposes a new 28.7-acre Commercial Mixed Use designation at the intersection of Shirk & Riggin to facilitate the development of an anticipated Costco Warehouse, gas station, car wash, and additional supporting commercial uses. The proposed change in land use and the conceptual development plan associated with the request is consistent with General Plan policies that pertain to Commercial Mixed Use. The land use designation is suitable for this location based on the site’s proximity to two arterial streets and the anticipated types of uses within the commercial site.

General Plan Policy LU-P-66, which in part states that the Commercial Mixed Use designation shall “allow for either horizontal or vertical mixed use development and a range of commercial, service, office, and residential uses”, does not provide any locational criteria.

Visalia’s existing Costco store is located at the intersection of Cameron & Stonebrook, which is designated as Regional Commercial on the General Plan land use and zoning maps. It would therefore be reasonable for the Regional Commercial land use and zoning designation to also be contemplated for the subject site.

A review of the City’s Land Use Element finds that either the Regional Commercial or Commercial Mixed Use designations could be considered for this site and use consistent with the Element’s policies. While the Land Use Element’s policies would not strictly prohibit placement of either designation at this corner, staff feels that a Commercial Mixed Use (C-MU) designation is better suited for the site and is still able to accommodate a Costco or another big box store. Being that the site would facilitate a second Costco store within Visalia, a case could be made that Costco is not a strictly regional land use in the context of Visalia. Unlike the Regional Commercial zone, the Commercial Mixed Use zone requires a conditional use permit for any single retail use exceeding 60,000 square feet.

Staff’s recommendation is based on C-MU designations that do tend to be freestanding at major intersections, whereas Regional Commercial is concentrated along corridors (i.e., Mooney, Cameron). The C-MU designation is also favorable since the concept plan proposed by the applicant, supported by the commercial tentative parcel map, shows a limited amount of smaller scale commercial pads along Riggin Avenue.

Staff further recognizes that the 28.7-acre C-MU designation is only being requested in order to accommodate a new Costco store at this location, and that staff’s support of a 28.7-acre designation is solely based upon the proposed Costco. As such, in the unanticipated circumstance that Costco decides not to build at this location, and if no alternative commercial tenant of similar size and compatibility is found to replace the Costco, staff would recommend through Draft Development Agreement Article 4 that a Specific Plan Amendment and General Plan Amendment be processed to reduce the gross acreage associated with the C-MU designation to approximately 10 acres or less.

Housing Accountability Act (Government Code section 66589.5) The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) requires local agencies to approve housing developments that are consistent with applicable general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards, including design review, if they were in effect at the time that the housing development application was deemed complete. A local agency cannot disapprove a project or lower its density unless it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety, and that there is no feasible way to mitigate or avoid the impact (Gov. Code Section 65589.5(j)(1)).

The project is considered to be consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and single-family residential development standards. The lots proposed for the Visalia City Council Page 8 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™457
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

Zoning Ordinance, and single-family residential development standards. The lots proposed for the Carleton Acres Phase 1 subdivision meet density standards for the Low Density Residential land use designation and will be compatible with surrounding developed residential areas. Furthermore, the subdivision will develop a network of local streets, improve adjacent arterial public roadways, and construct new collector public roadways, thereby facilitating increased street connectivity to accommodate future growth areas.

Traffic Impact Study:

A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) was prepared for the proposed project (ref.: Carleton Acres Specific Plan Traffic Study. Ruettgers & Schuler, March 2023). The purpose of the study is to analyze traffic conditions related to buildout of the Carleton Acres and its projected level of service (LOS) at opening year and at five-year increments, and the corresponding environmental impact as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A roadway capacity analysis was conducted for Riggin Avenue between Shirk and Akers Street.

The TIS concluded that various intersection improvements are needed at 5-year increments, corresponding with anticipated build-out conditions at 5-year intervals. Intersection improvements are summarized in Table 1a (Table 3.17-15 in the EIR) and queue length improvements are summarized in Tables 7a, 7b, and 7c (Table 3.17-11 in the EIR).

Roadway improvements are also required in the form of widening Riggin Avenue between Shirk Street and Akers Street with the initial Phase 1 improvements (identified as “2023” conditions in the TIS).

Mitigation measures have been included in the Environmental Impact Report to address the roadway deficiencies described above. Measure TRA-1 requires the payment of Transportation Impact Fees based on the City’s adopted fee schedule, in tandem with the issuance of building permits. Measure TRA-2 requires that the project be responsible for paying its pro-rata fair share cost percentages and/or constructing the recommended on-site improvements and site improvements identified in the tables specified above.

At full buildout of the Specific Plan (identified as “2046” conditions in the TIS), all study intersections are expected to operate with minimal delay (at or above LOS D) during peak hours, both with and without project traffic, or can be mitigated to operate at an acceptable LOS, excepting for five intersections:
• Rd 67 / Betty Dr (Goshen / County of Tulare)
• Dinuba Blvd / Riggin Ave
• Akers St / Ferguson Ave
• Demaree St / Goshen Ave
• Demaree St / Mineral King Ave
As a result, even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, the project EIR concludes that full buildout of the Specific Plan will result in significant and unavoidable impacts.

A Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis was also conducted using the Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG) Model by comparing the project’s expected VMT per capita to regional averages, and ensuring that the City meets or exceeds the significance threshold of 84% of the existing regional service population for mixed-use projects. The Tulare County Region VMT is 28.2% based on the TCAG model, meaning that the Visalia threshold is 23.7%. The TIS concluded that the project’s VMT per service population is 18.5%, which is less than the Visalia threshold. Therefore, the project’s impacts to VMT are concluded to be less than significant under CEQA.

Visalia City Council Page 9 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023
powered by Legistar™458
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

Riggin Avenue Widening
The project’s March 2023 TIS concluded that roadway improvements shall include widening Riggin Avenue from two lanes to four lanes between Shirk Street and Akers Street with the initial Phase 1 improvements.

A draft focused traffic study prepared in association with the Costco development (ref.: Visalia Costco Warehouse Focused Traffic Study. Kittelson & Associates, “Draft” August 2023) confirms the widening of Riggin to four travel lanes between Shirk and Akers is a suggested improvement with Phase 1.

Planning for the widening of Riggin has required extensive coordination efforts between the City, project applicant, property owner, and Southern California Edison based on multiple issues that include financial responsibility, utility pole relocation, and reimbursement.

Currently there are 15 utility poles along Riggin Avenue between Akers and Shirk Streets that will ultimately need to be relocated outside of the four planned travel lanes. Edison anticipates a June 2025 completion date for moving the utility poles, despite coordination efforts that have been ongoing for years. The project applicant has been actively working and submitting plans to Edison to coordinate street widening improvements and power pole relocation for the segment between Shirk and Roeben Streets.

The City’s interest to ensure the timely completion of the Riggin Avenue widening improvements along the entire project area frontage between Shirk and Akers Streets, particularly in anticipation of the addition of Costco, has resulted with the City partnering with the applicant to provide a coordinated approach toward construction and reimbursement of this major roadway. These terms are spelled out in the Draft Development Agreement’s Article 5 (refer to Attachment 10). The terms and responsibilities can be summarized as follows:
· Provided that Costco will be constructing on the 28-acre commercial site in the specific plan, the applicant (a.k.a. Developer) will facilitate the widening of Riggin to a four-lane divided road along the ¼-mile commercial frontage from Shirk Street to Denton Street, then transitioning to two lanes east of Denton Street.
· The City’s Capitol Improvement Project (CIP) division will facilitate the balance of the widening of Riggin Avenue from the transition described above easterly to Akers Street, anticipating that the City will be receiving Measure R Regional Funds and City Transportation Impact Fees to fund the widening. If the City’s CIP is delayed, then the Developer and City will discuss alternatives to complete widening this section, which remains a requirement.

The City will calculate the Developer’s proportional share of the project costs, and the Developer will then be responsible to reimburse the City for the actual design and relocation cost of the utility poles, and for the construction of the Riggin Avenue roadway segment. The Developer will reimburse the City incrementally upon the completion of certain developments within the Phase 1 portion of the project that they construct. · The City may consider establishing an Area of Benefit to further assist with the widening of Riggin Avenue along non-project frontages that are currently unimproved and associated with those adjacent property owners (i.e., south side of Roeben, west of Akers). · In the event that any land use is planned to be constructed and occupied prior to Costco’s Visalia City Council Page 10 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™459
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
· In the event that any land use is planned to be constructed and occupied prior to Costco’s occupancy, the Developer may continue to consult with the City regarding a phased widening of Riggin subject to the City’s acceptance of supporting analysis to demonstrate that such land uses will not require the full widening of Riggin Avenue.

The terms of the Development Agreement as presented are in “draft” form and would be finalized with the 2nd reading of the Ordinance adopting the Specific Plan. However, the Development Agreement as proposed here has been fully evaluated and revised to consider comments and concerns raised by the applicant.

Traffic Circulation and Street Improvements:

Street improvements to arterial, collector, and local roadways will be required within the specific plan area as development progresses. The full circulation plan for the entire project, including street cross sections, is shown in Specific Plan Section 7. Street improvements will be completed in phases, wherein the initial improvements related to the project will focus on the streets surrounding the singlefamily residential and mixed use commercial components in Growth Tier II. Phase 1 in the Specific Plan refers to areas in Growth Tiers I and II, while Phase 2 refers to area in Growth Tier III.

Phase 1
Arterial Streets. Shirk Street and Riggin Avenue are designated 110-foot wide arterial streets with four travel lanes at full buildout. Both roadways are currently improved as two-lane County roadways with only Riggin Avenue having frontage improvements on the south side. The commercial parcel map will provide irrevocable offers of dedication for these roadways. The initial development phase will improve these streets, resulting in a full width of Riggin between Shirk and Roeben Street and a 2/3 width of Shirk between Riggin and Shannon Parkway. The 2/3 buildout refers to two northbound and one southbound travel lane, wherein future development on the west side of Shirk will be responsible for completing the full improvements. Cross sections are shown on Specific Plan Figures

7.B through 7.E and in some cases incorporate bike lanes with a planter strip separation from vehicle travel lanes.

Collector Streets. Roeben Street and Shannon Parkway are designated 84-foot wide collector streets with two travel lanes at full buildout. Both roadways are currently unconstructed. The tentative subdivision map will provide dedication for the roadways to allow for 2/3 buildout along the Phase 1 frontages. In this context, the 2/3 buildout refers to full improvements on the development side plus an 18-foot median and travel lane in each direction. Future development on the east side of Roeben will be responsible for completing the full improvements. The north side of Shannon Parkway will be completed with Phase 2 of the Specific Plan. Cross sections are shown on Specific Plan Figures 7.J through 7.O and in some cases incorporate bike lanes with a planter strip separation from vehicle travel lanes.

As part of the pedestrian trail improvements, there will be a 12-foot wide pedestrian/bike path on the west side of Roeben west of the future high school. The cross section of Roeben shows the pedestrian/bike path being within the 84-foot right of way, with an additional 5-foot LL&D lot on the subdivision site.

Local Streets. Denton Street is a future 60-foot wide local street located on the east side of the Commercial Mixed Use site. The commercial parcel map will provide an irrevocable offer of dedication for Denton, and travel/parking lanes will be constructed with the commercial development connecting to Phase 1A of the single-family subdivision, with frontage improvements completed with Visalia City Council Page 11 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™460
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
adjoining development.

Sedona Avenue is a 60-foot wide local street that currently exists south of Ridge View Middle School and will ultimately extend westerly to Shirk Street. The applicant will be constructing Sedona west of Roeben with the single-family subdivision. The segment from Roeben east to the existing roundabout is intended to be built with adjoining development. Cross sections are shown on Specific Plan Figures 7.P and 7.Q.

As part of the pedestrian trail improvements, there will be a 12-foot wide pedestrian/bike path along Prescott Avenue, parallel to Riggin Avenue, providing connection between the commercial, multifamily, and school uses. Cross sections shown on Specific Plan Figures 7.R and 7.S show the pedestrian/bike path straddle between the right of way and a landscape & lighting lot.

Phase 2
Future development in the Tier III portion will include the extension of improvements along Shirk Street, Roeben Street, and Shannon Parkway.

Additional improvements along the frontages of arterial roadways Akers Street and Avenue 320 (Kibler) will be installed with development in a 2/3 buildout configuration. Cross sections are shown on Specific Plan Figures 7.F through 7.I.

Phase 2 improvements include the Modoc Greenway improvements to be located within L&LD lots on the opposite side of Modoc Ditch from Shannon Parkway and Akers Street (see Specific Plan Figures 7.I and 7.N).

Development Standards:

In most circumstances, Carleton Acres Specific Plan proposes to follow codified standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance regarding lot size, setbacks, and so on. The Plan does not propose the utilization of small lots or private streets with the single-family residential portions of the Plan, and no specific development details have been proposed for any multi-family residential portions of the Plan.

Subsequent development of the multi-family designated parcels could establish private streets if developed through a tentative subdivision map and conditional use permit.

The proposed setbacks and deviations to the City’s Zoning Ordinance standards are discussed here.

Single-family Residential. For single-family residential, the City’s Zoning Ordinance standards will be utilized, excepting for the rear yards.

In the tentative subdivision map, all lots will have lot depths ranging from approximately 105 feet to 115 feet, excepting lots located on knuckle street bulbs. These lots will also be required to utilize standard single-family residential setback standards but are permitted to have a 20-foot setback for front-loading garages.

Minimum
Lot Area
Front Side Street
Side
Rear
5,000 sq.
ft.
15-ft. to
habitable
space. 22
-ft. to
garage
5-ft. 10-ft. 60’ minimum lot width: 20-ft.; 7-ft. allowed if: · single story, · over 1,500 SF of useable open
space in the rear, · minimum lot depth of 112’
and space for accessory dwelling unit
50’ minimum lot width: 10-ft., with open space
requirements: · 12% minimum of site area to
Visalia City Council Page 12 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™461
File #: Minimum23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

Lot Area
Front Side Street
Side
Rear
5,000 sq.
ft.
15-ft. to
habitable
space. 22
-ft. to
garage
5-ft. 10-ft. 60’ minimum lot width: 20-ft.; 7-ft. allowed if: · single story, · over 1,500 SF of useable open
space in the rear, · minimum lot depth of 112’
and space for accessory dwelling unit
50’ minimum lot width: 10-ft., with open space
requirements: · 12% minimum of site area to
be open space in the rear, including setbacks
·
Rear yards. City standard rear yard setbacks are 25 feet with allowance for one-story structure to go to 20’ subject to open space requirements. The developer proposes allowing reduced setbacks as low as 7’ or 10’ due to the configuration of certain one-story residences that places open space equal or greater than the minimum rear yard setback area within a portion of the side/rear of the lot (an example is shown in the Figure 1 to the right).

Staff is granting this setback on the basis that all single-family zoned lots in the Specific Plan will be subject to this standard and that the site does not and will not directly abut other similarly zoned lots. Additionally, the open space that is traditionally contained within a rear yard setback area is still provided behind the residence.

Multi-family Residential. For multi-family residential, the City’s Zoning Ordinance standards will be utilized, excepting for the rear yards.

Minimum Lot Area Front Side Street
Side
Rear
R-M-2: One unit per 2,000 sq.
ft. R-M-3: One unit per 1,200
sq. ft.
15-ft. to habitable
space. 22-ft. to garage
5-ft. (0-ft if
attached)
10-ft. 10 to 25-
ft.*
Visalia City Council Page 13 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™462
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

Minimum Lot Area Front Side Street
Side
Rear
R-M-2: One unit per 2,000 sq.
ft. R-M-3: One unit per 1,200
sq. ft.
15-ft. to habitable
space. 22-ft. to garage
5-ft. (0-ft if
attached)
10-ft. 10 to 25-
ft.*
*Criteria
Exception if the rear yard is to be used for parking.

Exception if open space is provided elsewhere.

Planned Unit Development with individual lots allow 0’ setbacks, overall development shall follow the above setback requirements.
3-R Cluster Lot Private Yards: Each building shall have a private yard. The yard should be 200 SF minimum. One side having a minimum 7’ wide dimension.
· Rear yards. City standard rear yard setbacks are 15 feet in the R-M-3 zone and 25 feet in the R-M-2 zone. The developer proposes allowing reduced setbacks depending on the product type if certain conditions can be met, as further summarized in the tables on Specific Plan pages 77 through 80. Staff is granting these setbacks on the basis that all multi-family zoned areas in the Specific Plan will be subject to this standard. The variation in the rear yard setbacks still require that common open space setbacks be met in accordance with City standards.

Agricultural Preservation Ordinance Requirements:

The 468-acre parcel that is outside of the City limits is in the City’s Tier II and III urban development boundary and is designated as Prime Farmland as defined per the Tulare County Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. As a result, the development of this site is subject to the City’s recently adopted Agricultural Preservation Ordinance.

Annexation Information:

Detachment for Service Area No. 1:

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

Annexations submitted to LAFCO require that the City include a request to detach the annexed area from the County’s service area. Though detachments were previously an automatic process conducted as part of annexations, a 2009 law change now requires Cities to explicitly request detachment. The detachment is reflected in the draft Resolution (see Attachment 2).

Pre-Annexation Agreement:

The annexation will be subject to the terms of a Pre-Annexation Agreement which must be signed by the property owners requesting the annexation. The agreement is included within Attachment 2.

City Council District:

If the annexation area is approved, the parcel will be annexed into Voting District 3 per the Council Election Voting District Map. This is reflected in the draft Resolution (see Attachment 2).

Visalia City Council Page 14 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™463
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

Public Hearing & Review held by Planning Commission:

The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on September 11, 2023, to consider the project and requests for a tentative subdivision map and tentative parcel map on the project site. The affiliated staff report is provided as Attachment 13.

During the public hearing, comments were provided by representative of the project applicant as well as the project’s environmental consultant who led the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). No persons or surrounding property owners spoke during the public hearing.

In providing comments for the projects, the Commissioners felt that the project’s concept was well thought out and commended the applicant’s choice to provide a range of lot sizes throughout the subdivision. Commissioner Peck indicated that for future large-size multi-phased development projects alternatives should be considered for introducing and considering large projects possible over multiple meetings. Commissioner Peck did ask for clarification and clarity that the project’s number of units does not equate to the maximum number of units allowed in each designation. Staff further clarified that the Specific Plan would not restrict the number of units within each land use or zone district, and that if the number of units were to increase based on actual development beyond the estimate in the Specific Plan, then staff would then have to evaluate if any additional environmental review would be necessary.

Planning Commissioners made a motion for each individual entitlement, and each item passed on a 5-0 vote, resulting in approval of the tentative subdivision map and tentative parcel map as proposed and recommendations that the City Council certify the EIR, approve the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, and initiate the Annexation request.

Correspondence:

The Planning Division received one item of correspondence prior to the Planning Commission public hearing on Friday, September 8, 2023. The correspondence received from an interested citizen raises various environmental concerns regarding the project and questions regarding the availability of certain environmental studies. It should be noted that the correspondence was released after the preparation to the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report, and therefore the City is not under obligation to respond to the correspondence in the context of the EIR and CEQA. The e-mail received regarding these concerns is included as Attachment 14.

Fiscal Impact:

No impact to the City. Future development of the property will require the developer to pay development impact fees.

Prior Council Action: None.

Alternatives:

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

1. After opening and closing the public hearing, if the City Council seeks additional information, continue the agenda item to a City Council meeting on a specified date; or

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

3. Deny the entitlements.

Visalia City Council Page 15 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™464
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

Recommended Motion (and Alternative Motions if expected):

I move to approve Resolution No. 2023-48, certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan (State Clearinghouse Number 2021050418); and I move to approve Resolution No. 2023-49, to initiate proceedings for Annexation No. 2021-05, including authorization of the detachment of property from County Service Area No. 1 and for the City Manager to enter into a Pre-Annexation Agreement between the City of Visalia and the property owners; and
I move to approve Resolution No. 2023-50, to approve General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14; and I move to conduct the First reading of the approval of Ordinance No. 2023-10 for Specific Plan No. 2021-13 and the Development Agreement.

Environmental Assessment Status / CEQA Review:

A Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse Number 2021050418), incorporated herein by reference, has been prepared in association with the Carleton Acres Specific Plan project, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City Council is asked to review the overall content of the Final EIR, the responses to the comments received to date, and consider any further testimony received during the public hearing. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council will make a determination whether to certify the Final EIR and entitlements.

Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
The EIR has determined that all project impacts were either less than significant or could be mitigated to a less than significant level with the exception of the following impacts that are considered significant and unavoidable:
· Aesthetics - Degrade existing visual character (project and cumulative level) · Agriculture & Forestry Resources - Loss of farmland (project and cumulative level) · Air Quality - Conflict with Air Quality Plan / Exceed criteria pollutant thresholds (project and cumulative level)
· Hydrology & Water Quality - Water supply (cumulative level only) · Transportation - Conflict with Plan/Program (project and cumulative level) · Utilities & Service Systems - Water supply (cumulative level only) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15043, 15091 and 15092, the City, as the Lead Agency, may still approve a project for which the EIR identifies significant and unavoidable environmental impacts resulting from the project. This requires the adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations for each environmental impact that falls into the category of significant and unavoidable.

The decision to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be supported by factual documentation that supports the decision that:

1. There is no feasible way to lessen or avoid the significant impact; and,

2. Specifically identified expected benefits from the project outweigh the policy of reducing or Visalia City Council Page 16 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™465
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
avoiding significant environmental impacts of the project.

The findings and recommended conclusions for each of the six environmental analysis areas noted above are contained in the resolution recommending certification of the EIR.

Mitigation Measures
The EIR further disclosed mitigation measures that are incorporated into the project to reduce or avoid significant effects on the environment. The measures address the following resources:
· Two (2) mitigation measures pertaining to Agricultural for the loss of prime farmland and addressing conflicts between urban and agricultural uses. · Three (3) mitigation measures pertaining to Air Quality for impacts during construction and for evaluating potential health risk impacts within close distance of sensitive land uses. · Five (5) mitigation measures pertaining to Biological Resources for impacts of the project to special-status wildlife species (i.e., Sanford’s arrowhead, Swainson's Hawk, Burrowing Owl, nesting birds).
· Two (2) mitigation measures pertaining to Cultural Resources to reduce the impacts of the project on the potential of exposing historical or archaeological materials during construction. · Two (2) mitigation measures pertaining to Geology & Soils for the submittal of plans for storm water pollution and pollutant discharge and for geotechnical analysis. · Three (3) mitigation measures pertaining to Hazards & Hazardous Materials for the testing of potentially hazardous soil and groundwater and the identification of abandoned oil wells. · Four (4) mitigation measures pertaining to Noise to address noise-sensitive land uses, construction of block walls along arterial roadways, installation of specific blowers for Costco’s drive-through car wash, and bus movements along public roadways. · Three (3) mitigation measures pertaining to Transportation for the payment of transportation impact fees, paying pro-rata fair share cost percentages and/or constructing recommended on -site and site-adjacent improvements, and submitting a construction traffic control plan. · Four (4) mitigation measures pertaining to Tribal Cultural Resources to address site inspections by a tribal monitor and measures in the event that resources are discovered.

Project Alternatives
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires the consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project that could feasibly attain most of the objectives of the proposed Project. This Draft EIR analyzed the following alternatives:
· No Project Alternative: Under this Alternative, the Project would not be constructed and the site would remain in agricultural production.
· Alternate Locations Alternative: Under this Alternative, the Project would be developed on a different site of similar size and scale.
· Reduced (50%) Project Alternative: Under this Alternative, the Project would be reduced by Visalia City Council Page 17 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™466
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.
50% (overall site acreage, residential units, commercial acreage, and recreational facilities).

Public Review
Circulation of the Draft EIR followed a Notice of Availability period wherein the Draft EIR was duly noticed and conducted for the project for a 45-day public review and comment period from May 4 to June 19, 2023. The City of Visalia is the lead agency for the preparation of the EIR. Three comment letters were received during this public review period, from California Department of Fish & Wildlife, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, and Lozano Smith, Attorneys at Law on behalf of Visalia Unified School District. City staff and the consultant have prepared responses to the comments received (refer to the Final EIR, dated August 2023). The Draft Program EIR, including the technical appendices, all the comments received and the responses to these comments, constitute the Final EIR.

Attachments:

1. Resolution No. 2023-48 certifying the Final EIR.

2. Resolution No. 2023-49 initiating the Proceedings for Annexation No. 2021-05 and Detachment from County Service Area No. 1.

3. Resolution No. 2023-50 approving General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14.

4. Ordinance No. 2023-10 adopting Specific Plan No. 2021-13, and the Development Agreement.

5. Carleton Acres Specific Plan document

6. Plan Area Concept.

7. Carleton Acres Phase 1 Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5590.

8. Commercial Parcel Map.

9. Annexation Area.

10.Draft Development Agreement.

11.Memorandum regarding request for Tier 3 development.

12.Sewer Analysis.

13.Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 11, 2023.

14.Correspondence received.

15.Draft Environmental Impact Report.

16.Final Environmental Impact Report.

17.General Plan Land Use Map.

18.Zoning Map.

19.Aerial Map.

Visalia City Council Page 18 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™467
File #: 23-0358 Agenda Date: 10/2/2023 Agenda #: 2.

20.Location Map.

21.Carleton Acres Council PPT Presentation

22.CEQA Carleton Presentation

23.Consultant Carleton Presentation
Visalia City Council Page 19 of 19 Printed on 9/29/2023 powered by Legistar™468
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA CERTIFYING

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CARLETON ACRES SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT THAT INCLUDES SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2021-13, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2021-14, ANNEXATION NO. 2021-05, CARLETON ACRES PHASE 1 TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 5590, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2023-04; STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2021050418
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia has reviewed and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared on the Carleton Acres Specific Plan project that includes Specific Plan No. 2021-13, General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14, Annexation No. 2021-05, Carleton Acres Phase 1 Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5590, and Tentative Parcel Map No. 2023-04 (“Final EIR”); and,
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”) was released on May 4, 2023, for circulation for a period of 45 days; and,
WHEREAS, the Final EIR was released on September 1, 2023, and consists of the Draft EIR and the revisions of, and additions to, the Draft EIR; the written comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR; the written responses of the City of Visalia to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; errata to the foregoing; and other information added by the City of Visalia as specified in the record; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR analyzes and evaluates a series of actions for approval and development of a mixed use community consisting of residential, commercial, and public uses (the “Project”). The approval actions analyzed in the Final EIR include amendments to the Visalia General Plan, adoption of the Carleton Acres Specific Plan, annexation of certain property to the City of Visalia, and permits and approvals pursuant to the Visalia Zoning and other Ordinances for Phase 1 development including tentative subdivision map approval, tentative parcel map approval, conditional use permits, grading and building permits; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia, after ten (10) days published notice, held a public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project on September 11, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia, after ten (10) days published notice, held a public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project on October 2, 2023; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that, in connection with the approval of a project for which an EIR has been prepared which identifies one or more significant effects, the decision-making agency make certain findings regarding those effects.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA AS FOLLOWS:

1. THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT (A) the Final EIR for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental 469
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Quality Act (“CEQA”); (B) the Final EIR was presented to the City Council and the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the Project; and (C) the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Visalia, as Lead Agency for the Project.

2. THE CITY COUNCIL hereby finds, in connection with certification of the Final EIR, that:

A. Full and fair public hearings have been held on the Environmental Impact Report and the City Council having considered all comments received thereon, said Environmental Impact Report is hereby determined to be adequate and complete.

B. Information added to the EIR after public notice was given of the availability of the Draft EIR for public review is not significant new information and does not change the EIR in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the Project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect that the Project’s proponents have declined to implement. The information added to and made a part of the Final EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications to the Draft EIR. The EIR refinements and modifications do not involve substantial changes which will require major revisions of the Draft EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Draft EIR was completed, exists to show new impacts not considered in the Draft EIR or any substantial increase in the severity of any environmental impacts considered in the Draft EIR. Accordingly, the City Council hereby finds and determines that recirculation of the Final EIR for further public review and comment is not necessary or warranted.

3. THE CITY COUNCIL hereby makes the findings set forth in the following FACTS, FINDINGS, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS with respect to the significant effects on the environment and approval of the Project, with the stipulation that (a) all information in these findings is intended as a summary of the full administrative record supporting the Final EIR, which full administrative record is available for review through the City Planner, Community Development Department, at his office at 315 East Acequia Street, Visalia, 93291, and (b) any mitigation measures and/or alternatives that were suggested by the commenters on the Draft EIR and were not adopted as part of the Final EIR are hereby expressly rejected for the reasons stated in the findings and in the responses to comments set forth in the Final EIR and elsewhere on the record.

4. THE CITY COUNCIL hereby adopts the following FACTS, FINDINGS, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, and in doing so, hereby determines that the Final EIR prepared for the Project is adequate and complete pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, and certifies it. 470
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48

FACTS, FINDINGS, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS

1.0. Introduction
The City Council of the City of Visalia (City), in approving the proposed Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project (the Project or proposed Project), makes the Findings described herein and adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations presented at the end of the Findings. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #2021050418) was prepared by the City acting as lead agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Hereafter, unless specifically identified, the Notice of Preparation (NOP), Notice of Availability & Completion (NOA/NOC), Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR or Draft EIR), Appendices, Technical Studies, Final EIR containing Responses to Comments, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) will be referred to collectively herein as the “EIR”. These Findings are based on the entire record before the City Council, including the EIR. The City Council adopts the facts and analyses in the EIR, which are summarized below for convenience. The omission of some detail or aspect of the EIR does not mean that it has been rejected by the City.

2.0 Project Summary

2.1 Project Description
The Project Applicant is proposing a Specific Plan to develop approximately 507-acres of land into a mixed-use development. The Project will feature a variety of uses including single-family residential, multi-family housing, commercial, educational, and parks/trails facilities. The proposal features several different types of housing for a total of up to 3,262 residential units at buildout which is broken down as follows: Low Density Residential – maximum of 1,592 units; Medium Density Residential – 758 units; and High Density Residential – 912 units. The number of units is based on the density described in the Specific Plan, but the actual number of units may be less than 3,262.

The proposed Project also includes up to 35.1 acres of commercial development in two locations within the Project (for a total of approximately 205,000 square feet of gross leasable commercial area). The first commercial area consists of up to 28.7 acres of Mixed Use Commercial at the intersection of Riggin Avenue and Shirk Road. Anticipated uses at this location may include development such as a Costco, gas station, car wash, drug store, retail, restaurants (including drive-throughs), and similar uses. The second commercial area consists of up to 6.4 acres of Commercial Neighborhood at the northeast corner of the development. Anticipated uses at this location may include development such as retail, services and restaurants. The commercial facilities are located to provide efficient accessibility to residents of the Project and the surrounding areas.

Other proposed uses include a site for a potential future elementary school, land for a drainage basin, and approximately 17.3 acres of parks/trails/recreational facilities.

Various other infrastructure improvements (water, stormwater and wastewater infrastructure, roadway improvements, and related improvements) will be required by the Project. The Project is proposed to be built out in phases with approximately 1,182 residential units and 28.7 acres of Mixed Use Commercial in Phase 1 and approximately 2,080 residential units and 6.4 acres of Commercial Neighborhood in Phase 2. 471
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48

2.2 Project Location
The proposed Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project (referred to herein as the “Project” or “proposed Project”) is located on approximately 507-acres in the northern area of the City of Visalia, California and is generally bound by W. Riggin Avenue to the south, N. Akers Street to the east, N. Shirk Road to the west and Avenue 320 (W. Kibler Avenue) to the north. The site is comprised of two parcels: APN 077-100-088 and APN 077-100-105.

APN 077-100-088 consists of approximately 478 acres and is within an unincorporated area of Tulare County while APN 077- 100-105 consists of approximately 29.3 acres and is within the City limits of Visalia. The entire site is within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City of Visalia and the site has historically been used for agricultural purposes. However, the site has been designated by the City’s General Plan for residential, commercial, public/institutional and park/recreation uses.

2.3 Project Objectives
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b), the following are the City of Visalia’s Project objectives:
• To provide a mixed-use development at pricing appropriate for the market, in a growing area of the City of Visalia that satisfies the City of Visalia’s policies, regulations and expectations as defined in the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and other applicable plans, documents, and programs adopted by the City.
• To provide a variety of housing opportunities with a range of densities, styles, sizes and values that will be designed to satisfy existing and future demand for quality housing in the area.
• To provide a residential development that assists the City in meeting its General Plan and Housing Element requirements and objectives.
• To provide conveniently-located commercial development to serve north Visalia residents and the Carleton Acres development in a growing area of the City of Visalia.
• To provide a sense of community and walkability within the development through the use of street patterns, parks/open space areas, landscaping and other project amenities.

2.4 Actions Covered by the EIR
The City of Visalia will be the Lead Agency for the proposed Project, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Project will require the following approvals from the City of Visalia:

Specific Plan
• Certification of the Project EIR
• Approval of the Final Specific Plan
• Approval of a Master Tentative Tract Map
• Approval of a Development Agreement
472
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
• Approval of a General Plan Amendment
• Approval of Zone Changes
Individual Projects Within the Specific Plan
• Approval of a Lot Line Adjustment to reflect the various stages of the Project (ministerial)
• Approval of Tentative Tract Maps
• Amendments to the Specific Plan, if necessary
• Site Plan Review
• Issuance of Grading / Building Permits (ministerial)
• Public street dedication
• One or more Conditional Use Permits for anticipated uses including, but not limited to a Costco retail store, gas station and car wash
As mandated by CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(d), this section contains a list of agencies that are expected to use the EIR in their decision-making, and a list of the approvals for which the EIR may be used. These lists include information that is known to the Lead Agency. A range of responsible and trustee agencies may utilize the EIR in the review of subsequent implementation activities over which that may have responsibility. A responsible agency is a public agency which has discretionary review approval power over a project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15381). A trustee agency is a state agency that has jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of the state (CEQA Guidelines Section 15386).

The Project will require various permits and/or entitlements from regulatory agencies.

Consultation may be required and the City of Visalia will integrate CEQA review with these related environmental review requirements. These may include, but not be limited to the following:
• Tulare County LAFCO (annexation)
• San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District – approval of construction and/or operational air quality permits
• Regional Water Quality Control Board (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan)

3.0 Environmental Review Process Summary; Content of EIR and Record

3.1 Notice of Preparation
The City of Visalia circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed project from May 20, 2021 through June 21, 2021 to trustee and responsible agencies, the State Clearinghouse (SCH #2021050418), and the public. Following publication of the original NOP, changes were made to the proposed Project that consisted of an increase in commercial acreage (from 14.7 acres to 35.1 acres) and a reduction in residential units (from 3,368 units to 3,262 units). Therefore, the Project’s NOP was re-circulated from June 2, 2022 through July 5, 2022.
473
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Six agency comments on the NOP related to the EIR analysis were presented or submitted during the public review period (June 2 – July 5, 2022). These comment letters were identified and incorporated into the Draft EIR. In addition, pursuant to Section 15206 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the lead agency is required to conduct at least one scoping meeting for all projects of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance. The scoping meeting is for jurisdictional agencies and interested persons or groups to provide comments regarding (but not limited to) the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and environmental effects to be analyzed to be analyzed in the Draft EIR. The City of Visalia hosted a scoping meeting on June 14, 2022, which was during the 30-day public review period of the NOP.

3.2 Draft and Final EIR
Draft EIR
The Draft EIR was properly noticed and circulated for public review and comment for 45 days, from May 4, 2023 through June 19, 2023. The Notice of Availability was published in the Visalia Times Delta newspaper. The Draft EIR and Appendices were sent to the State Clearinghouse for distribution and notices were mailed to adjacent landowners, local agencies and other interested individuals.

Final EIR
The City received three comment letters on the Draft EIR. These letters and emails are reproduced in their entirety in Chapter Two of the Final EIR and responses are shown after each letter. The Final EIR allows the public and the City an opportunity to review revisions to the Draft EIR and the responses to comments received during the Draft EIR’s public review period. The Final EIR serves as the environmental document to inform the City of the environmental consequences of the proposed Project, either in whole or in part, or one of the alternatives to the Project discussed in the Draft EIR.

As required by Section 15090(a)(1)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency, in certifying a Final EIR, must make the following three determinations:

1. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA.

2. The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency, and the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the project.

3. The Final EIR reflects the Lead Agency’s independent judgement and analysis.

As required by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, a public agency cannot approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings (Findings of Fact) for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale to reach findings supported by substantial evidence in the record. The possible findings are as follows:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
474
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Additionally, pursuant to Section 15093(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, when a Lead Agency approves a project that would result in significant unavoidable impacts that are disclosed in the Final EIR, the agency must state in writing the reasons supporting the approval.

The Statement of Overriding Considerations must be supported by substantial evidence in the Lead Agency’s administrative record. The Findings of Fact (Section 15091) and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Section 15093(b)) have been provided to the City for consideration.

If the City approves the proposed Project, and as part of that action adopts mitigation measures, the City will also adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (see Public Resources Code Section 21081.6).

3.3 Content of the EIR
The Carleton Acres Specific Plan “EIR” is comprised of the following materials:
• The Final EIR including any attached appendices;
• The Draft EIR including attached appendices;
• The Notice of Preparation and comments received in response to the Notice of Preparation;
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (“MMRP”); • Comments received on the Draft EIR with responses to each of the comments made;
• The Notice of Completion and Availability of the Draft EIR for public review; and • Any other information added by the Lead Agency.
(All hereafter collectively referred to as the “EIR”).

Documents that shall accompany and be part of the EIR are:

1. Findings of Fact; and

2. Statement of Overriding Considerations.

The EIR, is hereby incorporated by reference into these findings without limitation. This incorporation is intended to address the scope and nature of mitigation measures, the basis for determining the significance of impacts, the comparative analysis of alternatives, and the reasons for approving the Project despite the potential for associated significant and unavoidable impacts.

3.4 Record of Proceedings
In accordance with CEQA Section 21167.6(e), the record of proceedings for the City’s decision on the Project includes, without limitation, the following documents:
475
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
• The NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the scoping period for the Project;
• All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the scoping comment period on the NOP;
• The Draft EIR for the Project;
• All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the comment period on the Draft EIR;
• Responses to agency comments on the Draft EIR (provided in the Final EIR); • The Final EIR for the Project;
• Documents cited or referenced in the Draft and Final EIRs; • The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project; • The Notice of Completion and Availability of the Draft EIR for public review; • All findings and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the Project and all documents cited or referred to therein, including these findings; • All reports, studies, memoranda, diagrams, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the Project prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to the City’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City’s action on the Project; • All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the Project up through final consideration of Project approval;
• All minutes and/or verbatim transcripts, as available, of all public meetings held by the
• City in connection with the Project;
• Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such public meetings, and any other information added by the City as Lead Agency; • Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e).

The official custodian of the documents comprising the record of proceedings is the City of Visalia office, located at 315 E. Acequia Avenue, Visalia, CA 93291. All files have been available to the Department and the public for review in considering these findings and whether to approve the Project.

3.5 Public Hearings
A duly noticed Scoping Meeting was held on June 14, 2022 and public hearings will be held at City Planning Commission and City Council meetings. 476
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48

4.0 Preliminary Findings

4.1 Lead Agency; Independent Judgment
The City of Visalia is the “Lead Agency” for the proposed Project and evaluated the EIR.

The City retained the independent consulting firm of Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc. to prepare the EIR for the Project. Crawford & Bowen prepared the EIR under the supervision, direction, and review of the City. The City has received and reviewed the EIR prior to certifying the EIR and prior to making any decision to approve or disapprove the Project. The City finds it has exercised independent judgment in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3) in directing the consultant in the preparation of the EIR, as well as reviewing, analyzing, and revising material prepared by the consultant.

The City finds that the EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The City finds that it has independently reviewed and analyzed the EIR for the proposed Project, that the Draft EIR was circulated for public review reflected its independent judgment, the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City, and that the EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City.

4.2 Public Review Provided
The City Council finds that the EIR provides objective information to assist the decisionmakers and the public at large in their consideration of the environmental consequences of the proposed Project. The public review period provided all interested jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit comments regarding the Draft EIR. The Final EIR was prepared after the review period and responds to comments made during the public review period.

4.3 Purpose of Errata and Corrections; Clerical Errors
Textual clarifications are sometimes needed to describe refinements suggested as part of the public participation process. The changes and modifications made to an EIR after the Draft EIR was circulated for public review and comment can be made under Public Resources Code section 21092.1 or CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 in the Final EIR.

4.4 Clerical Errors
The City recognizes that the EIR may contain clerical and/or typographical errors. The City reviewed the entirety of the EIR and bases its determination on the substance of the information it contains.

4.5 Evaluation and Response to Comments
The City evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the Draft EIR. In accordance with CEQA, the City prepared written responses describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The Final EIR provides an adequate, good-faith and reasoned response to the comments. The City reviewed the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add significant new information regarding environmental impacts to the Draft EIR. The City has based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date 477
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
of adoption of these Findings, concerning the environmental impacts identified and analyzed in the EIR.

4.6 Recirculation of Final EIR Not Required
The Final EIR presents the environmental information and analyses that have been prepared for the proposed Project, including comments received addressing the adequacy of the Draft EIR, and responses to those comments. The Final EIR, which includes the responses to comments, the Draft EIR, and the Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program, will be used by the Visalia Planning Commission and the City Council in the decision-making process for the proposed Project.

This Final EIR is an informational document intended to disclose to the decision makers of the City, and the public, the environmental consequences of approving and implementing the Project or one of the alternatives to the proposed Project, which are described in the Draft EIR. All written comments received during the public review period (May 4, 2023 through June 19, 2023) of the Draft EIR are addressed in the Final EIR The responses in the Final EIR clarify, correct, and/or amplify text in the Draft EIR.

Therefore, no significant revisions have been made which would require recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 (Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification). The Final EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Sections 21000- 21177).

4.7 MMRP; Mitigation Measures
CEQA requires the Lead Agency approving a project to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) or the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The mitigation measures included in the EIR as certified by the City as adopted by the City serves that function. The MMRP includes all of the mitigation measures and Project design features adopted by the City in connection with the approval of the proposed Project and has been designed to ensure compliance with such measures during implementation of the proposed Project. In accordance with CEQA, the MMRP provides the means to ensure that the mitigation measures are fully enforceable.

Unless specifically stated to the contrary in these findings, it is this City Council’s intent to adopt all mitigation measures recommended by the EIR that are applicable to the Project. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the Approvals or from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these Findings, that measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph. In addition, unless specifically stated to the contrary in these Findings, all Approvals repeating or rewording mitigation measures recommended in the EIR are intended to be substantially similar to the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR and are found to be equally effective in avoiding or lessening the identified environmental impact. In each instance, the Approvals contain the final wording for the mitigation measures.

In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Section 21081.6, the City hereby adopts the MMRP. The mitigation measures identified for the proposed Project were included in the Draft EIR and Final EIR to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment and has been designed to ensure compliance during Project 478
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
implementation. As revised, the final mitigation measures for the proposed Project are described in the MMRP. Each of the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP is incorporated into the proposed Project and made a condition of approval for permits, required by agreement, or other measures to ensure the MMRP is fully enforceable. The City finds that the impacts of the proposed Project have been mitigated to the extent feasible by the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP.

4.8 Substantial Evidence
The City finds and declares that substantial evidence for each and every finding made herein is contained in the EIR, which is incorporated herein by this reference, or is in the record of proceedings in the matter.

4.9 Entirety of Action
The City is certifying an EIR for, and is approving and adopting findings for, the entirety of the actions described in these Findings and in the EIR as comprising the proposed Project.

4.10 Effect of Public Comments
The City finds that none of the public comments to the Draft EIR or subsequent public comments or other evidence in the record, including any changes in the proposed Project in response to input from the community, include or constitute substantial evidence that would require recirculation of the EIR prior to certification of the EIR and that there is no substantial evidence elsewhere in the record of proceedings that would require substantial revision of the EIR prior to its certification, and that the EIR need not be recirculated prior to its certification.

4.11 Independent Review of Record
The City Council, after receiving a recommendation from the Planning Commission, certifies that the EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA. The City Council has independently reviewed the record and the EIR prior to certifying the EIR and approving the Project. By adopting these Findings, the City Council on behalf of the City confirms, ratifies, and adopts the findings and conclusions of the EIR as supplemented and modified by these Findings. The EIR and these Findings represent the independent judgment and analysis of the City and the City Council.

4.12 Adequacy of EIR to Support Approval of the Proposed Project The City certifies that the EIR is adequate to support all actions in connection with the approval of the proposed Project. The City Council certifies that the EIR is adequate to support approval of the proposed Project described in the EIR, each component and phase of the proposed Project described in the EIR, any variant of the Project described in the EIR, any minor modifications to the proposed Project or variants described in the EIR, as well as all components of the proposed Project. 479
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48

4.13 Project EIR Findings
In accordance with Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 and 15092, the City makes the specific findings required by CEQA with respect to each area of potential environmental impact as further set forth in this Section of these Findings. These Findings do not repeat the full discussions of environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and related explanations contained in the EIR. The City ratifies, adopts, and incorporates, as though fully set forth, the analysis, explanation, findings, responses to comments and conclusions of the EIR. The City adopts the reasoning of the EIR, staff reports, and presentations provided by City staff and the independent consulting firm of Crawford & Bowen Planning, Inc., as may be modified by these Findings.

5. Environmental Impacts and Findings
For Sections 2, 3, 4, and 5 listed above, refer to Attachment “A” of this Resolution No. 2023-48, contained herein by reference.

6. Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report

6.1 Findings
The City Council finds that it has reviewed and considered the EIR in evaluating the Project, that the EIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and that the EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The City Council declares that no new significant information as defined by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 has been received by the City Council after the circulation of the Draft EIR that would require recirculation. All of the information added to the Final EIR merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to an already adequate Draft EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(b). The City Council hereby certifies the EIR based on the following findings and conclusions.

CEQA Compliance
As the decision-making body for the Project, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Findings and supporting documentation. The City Council determines that the Findings contain a complete and accurate reporting of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the Project, as well as complete and accurate reporting of the unavoidable impacts and benefits of the Project as detailed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The City Council finds that the EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and that the City Council complied with CEQA’s procedural and substantive requirements.

Significant Unavoidable Impacts / Statement of Overriding Considerations The Project will have significant adverse impacts even following adoption of all feasible mitigation measures which are required by the City Council. As set forth in Section 5.5 of these Findings, the significant environmental impacts have been identified in the Final EIR and no feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce these impacts to a level of insignificance. The City Council has eliminated or substantially reduced environmental 480
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
impacts where feasible as described in the Findings, and the City Council determines that the remaining unavoidable significant adverse impacts are acceptable due to the reasons set forth in the preceding Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Conclusions
All potentially significant environmental impacts from implementation of the Project have been identified in the EIR and, with the implementation of the mitigation measures defined herein and set forth in the MMRP, will be mitigated to a less than significant level, except for the impacts identified in Section 5.5, above. Other reasonable alternatives to the Project that could feasibly achieve the basic objectives of the Project have been considered and rejected in favor of the Project. Environmental, economic, social, and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the Project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the Project or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the Project.

7.0 Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council hereby adopts, as conditions of approval of the Project, the MMRP. In the event of any inconsistencies between the mitigation measures as set forth herein and the MMRP, the MMRP shall control except to the extent that a mitigation measure contained herein is inadvertently omitted from the MMRP, in which case such mitigation measure shall be deemed as if it were included in the MMRP.
481
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
ATTACHMENT “A” of RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS

5.1 Introduction
City staff reports; the EIR; written and oral testimony at public meetings or hearings; these facts, findings, and statement of overriding considerations; and other information in the administrative record (as further defined above) serve as the basis for the City’s environmental determination.

Public Resources Code Section 21081 requires that the City Council make one of the following findings for each significant impact:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR;

2. Those changes or alterations are within the purview and jurisdiction of another public agency, and such changes have been, or can and should be adopted by that other agency; or

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR.

The same requirements for adopting these findings are also contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a). Public Resources Code Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, and environmental, social and technological factors." By this document, the City Council makes the findings required by Public Resources Code Section 21081 with regard to the proposed Project.

Additionally, Public Resources Code Section 21002 provides that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects." It also states, "in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." The three available findings under Section 21081 and Guideline Section 15091(a) allow an approving agency to specify, as to particular significant environmental impacts, whether the agency is (a) adopting mitigation measures recommended in an EIR; (b) identifying measures that lay outside its control but should be, or have been, adopted by another agency; or (c) identifying measures that are infeasible. For projects with EIRs that include numerous mitigation measures that are either infeasible or outside the approving agency's control, findings may be very lengthy, as they must explain, for example, why some measures are rejected as being infeasible. In contrast, where the approving agency chooses to adopt each and every mitigation measure recommended in an EIR, there would seem to be little point in repeated invoking, over many dozens of pages, the finding that "[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR." Guideline Section 15091(a).

Where significant impacts are not avoided or significantly lessened, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project's benefits rendered acceptable its unavoidable adverse environmental effects.

CEQA Guidelines §§15093, 15043(b).

The findings below are the City Council’s best efforts to set forth the evidentiary and policy bases for its decision to approve the proposed Project in a manner consistent with the requirements of CEQA. These findings are not merely informational but, rather, constitute a 482
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
binding set of obligations that come into effect with the City Council’s approval of the proposed Project. The City Council adopts these findings for the entirety of the actions described in these findings and in the Final EIR.

Having received, reviewed, and considered the Final EIR and other information in the record of proceedings, based on the substantial evidence the City Council hereby adopts the following findings in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

1. Findings regarding the environmental review process and the contents of the Final EIR.

2. Findings regarding the environmental impacts of the proposed Project and the mitigation measures (General Plan policies, etc.) for those impacts identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the Project.

3. Findings regarding alternatives and the reasons that such alternatives are rejected.

4. Statement of Overriding Considerations determining that the benefits of implementing the proposed Project outweigh the significant and unavoidable environmental impacts that will result and therefore justify approval of the proposed Project despite such impacts.

5. Findings regarding the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

The City Council of the City of Visalia certifies that these findings are based on its full appraisal and consideration of all viewpoints expressed in written correspondence and testimony regarding the proposed Project, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these findings, concerning the environmental issues identified and discussed in the Final EIR.

The City Council adopts the findings and the statement of overriding considerations for the approvals that are set forth below.

The detailed analysis of potentially significant environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures for the Project is presented in Chapter 3, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation of the Draft EIR. Responses to comments on the Draft EIR, along with copies of the comments, are provided in Chapter Two of the Final EIR.

The EIR evaluated 20 major environmental categories for potential impacts as outlined in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Of these 20 major environmental categories, this City Council concurs with the conclusions in the EIR that the issues and sub issues discussed in Subsection 5.2, Subsection 5.3, and Subsection 5.4, below are either no impacts, less than significant without mitigation, or can be mitigated below a level of significance. For the remaining potential environmental impacts that cannot feasibly be mitigated below a level of significance discussed in Subsection 5.5, overriding considerations exist that make these potential impacts acceptable to this City Council.

5.2 No Environmental Impacts
The City Council hereby finds, based upon substantial evidence in the record including the EIR and as discussed below, that the following potential environmental areas result in no impacts by the Project and no mitigation is necessary or required.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact 3.2-3: The Project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526, or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)), OR result in the loss of forest land or convert forest land to non-forest use.
483
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Facts and Findings: The Project is not zoned for forestland, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production and does not propose any zone changes related to forest or timberland.

No loss of forest land would occur, and no conflicts with forest land zoning would occur. As such, there are no impacts related to this topic.

Biological Resources
Impact 3.4-2: The Project will not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or have a substantial adverse effect on federally or state-protected wetlands (including, but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

Facts and Findings. The proposed Project site does not support any sensitive natural communities. No riparian habitat, wetlands or other sensitive natural community is present and the site does not overlap critical habitat. Therefore, the Project would have no impacts to sensitive natural communities.

Impact 3.4-4: The proposed Project will not 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.

Facts and Findings: No trees or biologically sensitive areas will be impacted and there is no adopted. Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communities Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan has been adopted in the area. There is no impact.

Geology And Soils
Impact 3.7-5: The Project site does not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water.

Facts and Findings: The proposed Project will connect to the City’s wastewater/sewer system (Please refer to Section 3.19 – Utilities for the discussion pertaining to Project-related wastewater and connection to the City’s sewer system). The Project does not include the construction, replacement, or disturbance of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, there is no impact.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 3.9-5: The Project is not located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area.

Facts and Findings: The nearest public airport is the Visalia Municipal Airport in Visalia, approximately 2.8 miles southwest of the Project site. The nearest private airport is the Swanson Ranch NR 2 Airport, approximately 8.6 miles to the northwest. There are no public or private airport land use plans that are applicable to the Project. 484
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Mineral Resources
Impact 3.12-1: The Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state OR a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan.

Facts and Findings: There are no known mineral resources within the proposed Project area and as such, no loss of availability to known mineral resources would occur as a result of proposed Project development. There would be no impacts.

Population and Housing
Impact 3.14-2: The Project will no displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The Project site is currently undeveloped and contains no housing or structures.

Thus, the proposed Project would not displace existing housing or people. There is no impact.

5.3 Less Than Significant Environmental Impacts
The City Council hereby finds, based on substantial evidence in the record including the EIR and as noted below, that the following potential environmental impacts of the Project are less than significant and therefore do not require the imposition of mitigation measures.

Aesthetics
Impact 3.1-1: The Project will not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

Facts and Findings: There are no established scenic vistas in the area. Thus, the impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.1-2: The Project will not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway.

Facts and Findings: There are no established scenic resources such as rock outcroppings or scenic highways in the Project area. Thus, the impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.1-4: The Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Facts and Findings: An incremental increase in the amount of daytime glare created can be expected, but substantial increases would not be likely. Nighttime lighting would increase with a greater number of lighting sources to the extent that significant impacts from nighttime glare increases would be expected. However, compliance with the City’s General Plan Policies as well as applicable ordinances related to lighting and glare will help ensure that impacts remain less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Air Quality
Impact 3.2-4: The Project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
485
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Fact and Findings: During construction, the various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on-site would create localized odors. These odors would be temporary and would not likely be noticeable for extended periods of time beyond the Project’s site boundaries. The potential for diesel odor impacts would therefore be less than significant. As a mixed-use development that includes residential development, the Project has the potential to place sensitive receptors near existing odor sources. As previously mentioned, residences may be located within 50 feet of both the feedlot to the west as well as the dairy to the north of the Project area. For all facilities outlined above, there are existing residential uses located closer to each facility than the proposed Specific Plan. The uses in the Specific Plan area vicinity would not cause substantial odor impacts to future residents occupying development built out under the proposed Specific Plan. The proposed Specific Plan would not place odor-sensitive receptors near an existing or planned source of odor affecting a substantial number of people. Therefore, operational odor impacts in terms of the planning area as an odor-sensitive receptor would be less than significant.

Energy
Impact 3.5-1: The Project will not result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation.

Facts and Findings: The Project would result in less than significant impacts, and it would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy due to Project design features that will comply with the City’s design guidelines and regulations that apply to the Project, such as Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the California Green Building Standards Code that apply to commercial and residential buildings. The installation of solar panels required by 2022 Title 24 standards is required for most residential development. Furthermore, various federal and state regulations, including the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Pavley Clean Car Standards, and Low Emission Vehicle Program, would serve to reduce the transportation fuel demand by the Project.

With the adherence to the increasingly stringent building and vehicle efficiency standards as well as implementation of the Project’s design features that would reduce energy consumption, the proposed Project would not result in the wasteful or inefficient use of energy. As such, the Project would not result in a significant environmental impact, due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.

Impact 3.5-2: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Facts and Findings: The Project would comply with all applicable goals and measures identified in the City of Visalia Climate Action Plan (CAP). The City of Visalia has adopted local plans that promote renewable energy and energy efficiency, many of which are summarized in the CAP.

The proposed Specific Plan includes residences, commercial development, and schools, and it is designed for ease of travel using alternative transportation methods such as biking or walking, facilitated by the presence of bike lanes and trails throughout the Project area. Thus, it is anticipated that construction of the proposed Specific Plan would not conflict with or obstruct policies of the City of Visalia General Plan and CAP aimed at reducing energy use or increasing the use of renewable energy. Compliance with the mandatory measures of Part 11, Chapter 4 and 5, of the State’s Title 24 energy efficiency standards for residential and nonresidential buildings would ensure that the proposed Specific Plan would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing energy use or increasing the use of renewable energy. Therefore, operational energy efficiency and renewable energy standards consistency impacts would be less than significant.
486
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
The Project was reviewed for consistency with local and State of California plans that aim to reduce GHG emissions in Chapter 3.8. These plans also serve as the applicable energy plans.

Buildings constructed to implement the Project will meet the latest efficiency standards. Vehicles and equipment are expected to become more energy efficient over time, as vehicle and equipment manufactured and/or sold in the regional will continue to be subject to Statewide regulations. The Project is consistent with applicable plans and policies discussed above and would not result in wasteful or inefficient use of nonrenewable energy sources; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Geology And Soils
Impact 3.7-1: The Project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
Facts and Findings: There are no faults in the Project area, therefore there is limited risk of ground rupture. Projects within the Specific Plan area must be designed in compliance with the Uniform Building Code and California Building Code, and must be inspected by City building inspectors during the construction phase. Also, non-single-family projects must be designed by an engineer or architect to resist any seismic-related impacts, including liquefaction, and must be designed for the appropriate soil type by an engineer to resist spreading, subsidence, or collapse.

The City of Visalia, as well as Project’s Specific Plan, requires the applicant to prepare and submit a design-level geotechnical study that complies with all applicable seismic design standards of the California Building Standards Code. The design-level analysis shall address site preparation measures and foundation design requirements of the project. The design-level analysis shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City of Visalia. Final design-level project plans shall be designed in accordance with the approved geotechnical analysis. There is a negligible risk of liquefaction occurring at the Project site during a design level seismic event.

Compliance with all applicable seismic design standards of the California Building Standards Code would ensure that design features would not present a hazard involving landslides.

Impact 3.7-4: The Project is not located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Facts and Findings: With foundation and structural design in accordance with the City of Visalia and current California Building Code standards, impacts from expansive soil on the proposed Project would be less than significant.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact 3.8-1: The Project would not generate direct or indirect greenhouse emissions that would result in a significant impact on the environment.

Facts and Findings: The proposed Project would achieve reductions beyond the ARB 2020 target, beyond the SJVAPCD requirements, and beyond the reduction identified in the City of Visalia CAP from adopted regulations and on-site design features for Project operation in 2028. 487
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
The Project is consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan and will contribute a reasonable fairshare contribution to achieving the 2030 target. The Project would comply with VMT targets adopted to comply with SB 375, would make continued progress towards 2030 GHG reduction goals, and is designed as a mixed-use development, the Project would not conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan goals. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

Impact 3.8-2: The Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

Facts and Findings: The Project would achieve reductions beyond levels identified in the City of Visalia CAP from adopted regulations and on-site design features, and when assessed at Project buildout and when assessed in a 2030 operational year scenario. As such, the Project would be consistent with the City of Visalia CAP. The Project would comply with all applicable rules and regulations, including Building Code standards. The Project design would also support goals and policies called out in the CAP and the City’s General Plan to reduce GHG emissions.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with any local plan, policy, or regulation adopted by the City of Visalia to reduce emissions of GHGs.

The Project would not significantly hinder or delay the State’s ability to meet the reduction targets contained in AB 32 or SB 32 or conflict with implementation of the Scoping Plan. The Project’s post-2020 emissions trajectory is expected to follow a declining trend, consistent with ARB’s 2030 and 2050 targets. The proposed Project would include a majority of the feasible operational mitigation measures listed in the 2022 Scoping Plan Appendix D as project design features. Accordingly, taking into account the proposed Project’s emissions, project design features, and the progress being made by the State towards reducing emissions in key sectors such as transportation, industry, and electricity, the Project would be consistent with State GHG plans and goals, and does not obstruct their attainment. Impacts are less than significant.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 3.9-3: The Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Facts and Findings: Ridgeview Middle School is within 0.25 miles of the proposed Project site.

There are no other schools within 0.25 miles, however, a new high school is planned immediately east of Ridgeview Middle School near the center area of the Carleton Acres Project area. In addition, a potential elementary school could also be located within the northern boundaries of the proposed Project. The SJVAPCD’s 2015 GAMAQI does not currently recommend analysis of TAC emissions from Project construction activities, but instead focuses on projects with operational emissions that would expose sensitive receptors over a typical lifetime of 70 years. The Project would not exceed SJVAPCD localized emission daily screening levels for any criteria pollutant, and the Project is not a significant source of TAC emissions during construction or operation. Residential and general commercial developments typically do not generate, store, or dispose of significant quantities of hazardous materials. Such uses also do not normally involve dangerous activities that could expose persons onsite or in the surrounding areas to large quantities of hazardous materials. Any impacts would be less than significant.

Impact 3.9-4: The Project would not be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

Facts and Findings: The proposed Project site is not located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (Geotracker and DTSC 488
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Envirostor databases). The EnviroStor Database identified Ridgeview Middle School, adjacent site to the southeast, as a Certified Closed School Cleanup Site. The site was certified closed on 04/04/2018 with no further actions required for the school cleanup. Ridgeview Middle School was constructed at the site in 2016. Based on the cleanup and status of the site, it is considered a low risk to the Project site. There are no hazardous materials sites that impact schools within ¼ mile of the Project site and the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. There are no hazardous materials sites that impact the Project. Therefore, the impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.9-6: The Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Facts and Findings: The Tulare County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) includes planning and response scenarios for emergency situations associated with natural and anthropogenic disasters. The Fire Department also houses the City’s Emergency Operations Center and lead emergency preparedness and planning for the City. In addition, the City Fire Department has specific procedures for hazardous materials emergency response. The proposed Project would also comply with the appropriate local and State requirements regarding emergency response plans and access. The Project would not inhibit the ability of local roadways to continue to accommodate emergency response and evacuation activities and as such, the Project would not interfere with the City’s adopted emergency response plan. Therefore, the Project will have a less than significant impact and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.9-7: The Project would not expose people or structures either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.

Facts and Findings: Wildfire hazard data for the City of Visalia is provided by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The majority of the City is considered to have either little or no threat, with very small portions having a moderate threat of wildfire. According to the City of Visalia 2030 General Plan Hazards and Safety Services Figure 8-4, neither the proposed Project nor its vicinity have a high wildfire threat. In addition, and as described in the Environmental Setting section, only a very small portion of land within Tulare County is designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone by the Local Responsibilities Area mapping program. There are no other factors of the proposed Project or the surrounding area that would exacerbate wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. For these reasons, the impact is considered less than significant.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact 3.10-2: The Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin (Less than significant at project level only, cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable. See Section 5.5).

Facts and Findings: The proposed Project would add demand for potable water to the Visalia District of the California Water Service Company (Cal Water) water system, which is reliant on groundwater to serve its customers. The residential and commercial developments of the Project combined are expected to demand less water than the demand estimated by the Visalia UWMP. Because the service area water demand forecasted by the Visalia District UWMP is higher than the estimated water demand with the proposed Project, it can be assumed that available water supplies will be able to meet the projected demand resulting from the Project.

Therefore, the Project will not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. The impact is determined to be less than significant. 489
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
The less than significant determination is for project level only, the cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable. See Section 5.5.

Impact 3.10-4: The Project would not result in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation.

Facts and Findings: The majority of the Project is designated Flood Insurance Rate Map Zone “X” (outside the 500-year flood zone) while small portions of the site along the northern and northwestern boundary are in Flood Zone “AE” which includes areas subject to risk from a 100- year flood. Urban development is allowed under both flood zones. The site has been designed with adequate storm drain capacity, and compliance with the requirements for SWPPP and BMPs will ensure that risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation is less than significant. The site is also located more than 75 miles from the nearest ocean that could cause a tsunami and there are no bodies of water near the Project site that would represent any impacts related to seiche zones. Therefore, the impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.10-5: After mitigation, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

Facts and Findings: The City of Visalia (through Cal Water) is part of the Mid-Kaweah Groundwater Sustainability Agency (MKGSA). The proposed Project, if approved, would come under the jurisdiction and purview of Cal Water which is subject to MKGSA’s Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). The GSP was submitted to the Department of Water Resources on January 31, 2020. Projects and management actions described in the Mid-Kaweah GSA GSP include: groundwater recharge projects and programs, surface reservoir projects, leveraged surface water exchange programs, a groundwater extraction measurement implementation program, a conceptual groundwater marketing program, and future urban and agricultural conservation. The Mid- Kaweah GSA GSP states that the GSA will work during the period from 2020 to 2025 to develop a pumping allocation program to achieve, along with neighboring GSAs, the Kaweah Subbasin’s sustainable yield by 2040. The Mid-Kaweah GSA plans to prioritize the projects/programs above to serve as the first means to achieve sustainability, but by 2026, it is anticipated that an allocation plan would be ready for implementation if necessary to achieve sustainability. Upon approval, the Project will be subject to the rules and requirements of MKGSA’s GSP. Therefore, the Project will not conflict with or obstruct a sustainable groundwater management plan.

Land Use and Planning
Impact 3.11-1: The Project would not physically divide and established community.

Facts and Findings: The proposed Project site has historically been used for agricultural purposes and there are no residences or businesses on the site. Areas to the west and east are planned for urban development and there are scattered rural residences and agricultural facilities to the north. There are no established communities that would be divided by the Project. The City of Visalia General Plan and Zoning Ordinance establish land use policies and regulations that are applicable to the proposed Project. Upon annexation, the Project will be subject to the land use plans, policies and regulations of these documents. Because the Project would not physically divide an established community, the impact is determined to be less than significant.

Impact 3.11-2: The Project would not ause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
490
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Facts and Findings: The site comprises two parcels: APN 077-100-088 and APN 077-100-105.

APN 077-100-088 consists of approximately 478 acres and is within an unincorporated area of Tulare County while APN 077- 100-105 consists of approximately 29.3 acres and is within the City limits of Visalia. The entire site is within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City of Visalia and the site has historically been used for agricultural purposes. However, the site has been designated by the City’s General Plan for residential, commercial, public/institutional and park/recreation uses. The proposed Project is an appropriate use for the site and, once annexed into the City, the Project will be consistent with the applicable objectives, goals and policies outlined in the City of Visalia General Plan.

Implementation of these policies and measures will ensure that impacts remain less than significant.

Noise
Impact 3.13-2: The Project would not lead to generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

Facts and Findings: The dominant sources of man-made vibration are sonic booms, blasting, pile driving, pavement breaking, demolition, diesel locomotives, and rail-car coupling. None of these sources are anticipated from the Project site. It is unlikely that vibration from construction activities could be detected at the closest sensitive land uses. After full Project build out, it is not expected that ongoing operational activities will result in any vibration impacts at nearby sensitive uses. Any impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3.13-3: The Project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and the Project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Facts and Findings: The Project is not located within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip. The Project site is not within any airport land use plans and the Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive airportrelated noise levels.

Therefore, there is a less than significant impact and no mitigation is required.

Population and Housing
Impact 3.14-1: The Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure).

Facts and Findings: Project implementation will have a direct, growth inducing impact on the area’s population and housing stock. The Project is proposed to be built out in two phases as identified in Table 2-1 (in Chapter Two – Project Description). Although the exact timing of construction and buildout will be determined by market conditions, the Project Applicant and the City, it is anticipated that the Project would be built out over an approximately 15-year period with approximately 100 low-density residential units per year on average with the remaining buildout to be determined by demand.

For purposes of evaluating the environmental impact of population growth in Visalia under CEQA, the question becomes whether or not the Project will induce population beyond what the City has or will plan for and/or can accommodate at full buildout of the Project. The assessment takes into account Project-related impacts to topics like traffic, water supply, public services (police, fire, etc.), sewer / storm drain capacity, and other related topics, as the City has prepared infrastructure Master Plans based on buildout of the City’s General Plan. As shown in Section 3.12 (Population and Housing) of the Draft EIR, the anticipated population and housing 491
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
unit increase associated with the proposed Project is within the growth projections of the City’s 2030 General Plan and the City’s Housing Element.

While other future residential developments are also likely to occur in the City, it is anticipated that the City can accommodate the Project and other residential developments in the City. The General Plan anticipated a population of up to 210,000 people with up to 69,079 residential units by 2030. Given the City’s current population (142,978 persons) and housing stock (49,513 units), the City could accommodate the proposed Project plus an additional 57,105 persons and 16,304 housing units according to the City’s General Plan.

Based on the City’s General Plan, infrastructure master planning documents, and the City’s Housing Element, it is determined that the proposed Project will not induce unplanned population growth beyond that which can be accommodated by the City. It has been determined that the City has adequate capacity to serve the Project and therefore, the Project will have a less than significant impact occurring from inducement of unplanned population.

Public Services
Impact 3.15-1: The Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other public facilities.

Facts and Findings: Upon approval and annexation into the City, the City would provide public services to the Project. Potential impacts to public services are discussed individually by topic below.

Fire Protection
Fire protection services would be required to serve the proposed Project. As previously described, the City of Visalia provides firefighting response services through the VFD. In order to maintain existing levels of fire protection, the VFD will need to increase its resources to serve the Project. Based on the City’s ratio of 0.48 responders per 1,000 residents, the proposed Project would require an additional 4.7 firefighters at full Project buildout. Based on the City’s 2021 population, the City is below the target of one firefighter per 1,000 residents. Thus the Project will require additional staffing to accommodate the Project. The proposed Project will be required to pay fire service impact fees from new development based on projected impacts from the development. This fee will be determined by the City prior to issuance of building permits.

The proposed Project does not trigger the need for a new fire station or expansion of existing facilities at this time.

Police Protection
Police protection services would be required to serve the proposed Project. As previously described, the VPD provides police services for the City. Based on the City’s ratio of 1.7 officers per 1,000 residents, the proposed Project would require an additional 16.6 officers at full buildout. the proposed Project will be required to pay police service impact fees from new development based on projected impacts from the development. This fee will be determined by the City prior to issuance of building permits. The proposed Project does not trigger the need for a new police station or expansion of existing facilities at this time.

Schools
The proposed Project includes development of residential housing, which will lead to an increase in the number of students enrolled within the VUSD. The City is currently planning a new high school that will be constructed adjacent to and west of the existing Ridgeview Middle School and would be surrounded by the proposed Project to the north, west and south. Funding for schools and school facilities impacts is outlined in Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995 et. seq., which governs the amount of fees that can be levied 492
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
against new development. These fees are used to construct new or expanded school facilities.

Payment of fees authorized by the statute is deemed “full and complete mitigation.” The proposed Project will be required to pay impact fees from new development based on the Developer Fee rates that are in place at the time payment is due. The Project will be required to pay its the school impact fee as a condition of approval. The impact fee amount will be the amount established by the School District and the State Allocation Board in place at the time of submittal of building permit applications. Thus, with payment of impact fees, the impact to schools and school facilities is less than significant.

Parks
In the Project area, the City of Visalia currently owns approximately 20 acres of land at the northwest corner of Akers Street and Riggin Avenue (adjacent to the Project). The 20 acres is planned for future parks/recreational use. As previously indicated in Section 3.14 – Population and Housing, the proposed Project is within the population growth assumptions of the City’s General Plan. Thus, the Project will not result in growth that would require additional park land beyond what was identified in the City’s General Plan.

The Project includes development of approximately 17.3 acres of parks/recreational facilities within the Project site. The Project will also be subject to payment of impact fees to support buildout of park land as identified in the City’s General Plan. The impact fee amount will be the amount established in the City’s adopted impact fee program in place at the time of submittal of building permit applications. Thus, with payment of impact fees, the impact to parks is less than significant.

Other Public Facilities
Development of the Project will increase the demand for other public services such as libraries, governmental services, emergency services and health services. However, the increase in demand will not in and of itself require construction of additional facilities. The anticipated population and housing unit increase associated with the proposed Project is within the growth projections of the City’s General Plan. Based on the City’s General Plan and infrastructure master planning documents, it is determined that the proposed Project will not induce unplanned population growth beyond that which can be accommodated by these other public services.

Therefore, with payment of impact fees, the proposed Project will have a less than significant impact on public services.

Recreation
Impact 3.16-1: the Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated OR include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

Facts and Findings: As discussed herein, the total park and recreational space requirements at full build out of the Project would total at least 49.6 acres for approximately 9,917 residents.

This ratio satisfies the City’s requirement of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents. The required parks / recreational acreage would be met through a combination of construction of 17.3 acres of parks / recreational facilities (including trails) and payment of park impact fees to the City of Visalia.

The impact fees would support future recreational facilities throughout the City that are consistent with the City’s planned recreational projects and therefore would not result in environmental impacts from construction. These future planned projects will assist the City in meeting its requirement of 5.0 acres of park/recreational space per 1,000 residents. Therefore, with payment of impact fees and construction of 17.3 acres park/recreational facilities on site, 493
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
the Project will provide sufficient park and recreational facilities per the City’s requirements and will not significantly increase the demand on existing parks and recreation facilities.

Transportation
Impact 3.17-2: The Project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

Facts and Findings: An analysis of project VMT (vehicle miles traveled) was conducted in accordance with the City of Visalia VMT Thresholds and Implementation Guidelines, adopted March 15, 2021 (VMT Guidelines). Since the Project’s VMT per service population is less than the significance threshold, the Project is not expected to result in a significant transportation impact under CEQA, therefore no mitigation is required. Based on the City’s guidelines and thresholds, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

Impact 3.17-3: The Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

Facts and Findings: The site has been designed with 13 points of ingress and egress. All proposed internal roadways will be constructed to meet local and State standards and requirements. No sharp roadway curves currently exist in the proposed Project area, nor would such curves be created by the proposed Project. No roadway design features associated with this proposed Project would result in an increase in hazards due to a design feature or be an incompatible use. The internal road system has been designed with traffic calming features such as curved roadways, mini-circles at some intersections and relatively short blocks of housing. There are no agricultural uses (such as farm equipment) associated with the Project.

Any impacts would be less than significant.

Utilities and Service Systems
Impact 3.19-1: The Project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.

Facts and Findings: The Project will require that utilities be extended to serve the proposed development, including water, wastewater, stormwater, electric power, natural gas and telecommunications facilities.

Wastewater/Sewer
As discussed herein, once annexed into the City, the Project site would be located within the service area of the City of Visalia WCF. Compliance with conditions or permit requirements established by the City as well as water discharge requirements outlined by the RWQCB would ensure that wastewater discharges coming from the proposed Project site and treated by the WCF system would not exceed applicable Central RWQCB wastewater treatment requirements.

The Project is within the population growth projections (and associated wastewater capacity availability) identified in the City’s existing infrastructure planning documents and is subject to payment of impact fees. No new off-site sewer infrastructure construction is required, as the Project will tie into existing sewer infrastructure and no expansion of the existing WWTP is necessary to accommodate the Project. The impact is determined to be less than significant.

Stormwater
The proposed Project would result in new impervious areas associated with site improvements and would therefore require new storm water drainage facilities. The proposed Project would install storm water drainage facilities, including a stormwater drainage basin, that would be in 494
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
compliance with the City of Visalia Development Standards. No new off-site stormwater infrastructure construction is required.

Water Supply
The Project will add demand for water to the City of Visalia (Cal Water) water system. The Project is expected to demand less water than the demand estimated by the Visalia UWMP.

Based on the Project’s SB 610 Water Supply Assessment (Appendix H), the City has sufficient water to serve the Project. However, the Project is subject to water use reduction methods and will be subject to water service impact fees. No new off-site water supply infrastructure construction is required, as the Project will tie into existing water supply infrastructure.

Electricity and Natural Gas
The Project will require connection to existing public electrical utilities and to Southern California Gas Company natural gas facilities. No new or additional off-site electrical or natural gas infrastructure construction is anticipated to be required.

Solid Waste
Since the proposed Project would be within the growth projections assumed by the City’s MSR, General Plan and other infrastructure planning documents, and because the Tulare County Solid Waste Division has indicated it has existing and future capacity, the Project would not result in a significant impact. The proposed Project would be required to comply with applicable State and local regulations. No new off-site solid waste infrastructure construction is required.

Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

Telecommunications
The proposed Project is within the service area of communication network providers and it is expected that they can serve the proposed Project. No new off-site telecommunications infrastructure construction is required.

Impact 3.19-2: The Project will have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years (Less than significant at project level only, cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable. See Section 5.5).

Facts and Findings: The proposed Project would add demand for potable water to the Visalia District of the California Water Service Company (Cal Water) water system, which is reliant on groundwater to serve its customers. The Project is expected to demand less water than the demand estimated by the Visalia UWMP. Because the service area water demand forecasted by the Visalia District UWMP is higher than the estimated water demand with the proposed Project, it can be assumed that available water supplies will be able to meet the projected demand resulting from the proposed Project. This included an evaluation of normal, dry and multiple dry year scenarios. The Project will be required to pay water impact fees. The impact is determined to be less than significant and no mitigation is required. The less than significant determination is for project level only, the cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable. See Section 5.5.

Impact 3.19-3: The Project will not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

Facts and Findings: Based on the WCP’s existing capacity, the WCP can adequately serve the proposed Project in addition to other growth/development in the City. In addition, the proposed Project’s anticipated number of additional residents is within the expected range of growth that was planned for and can be accommodated by the City. The City’s infrastructure planning documents (such as the Sewer Master Plan) rely, in part, on the growth projections 495
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
contained in the City’s General Plan. Based on this information, it is reasonable to assume that the Project is within the population growth projections (and associated wastewater capacity availability) identified in the City’s infrastructure planning documents. Although the City’s WCF has adequate capacity to serve the Project, the Project would be required to pay wastewater (sewer) impact fees prior to the issuance of a building permit, thereby offsetting the costs associated with acceptance of the Project wastewater. Thus, the impact is less than significant and no mitigation measures are required.

Impact 3.19-4: The Project will not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Facts and Findings: Solid waste collection service is provided by the City, while disposal services are provided through Tulare County via area landfills. The Tulare County Solid Waste Division indicated that the Visalia Landfill has sufficient capacity to accommodate solid waste disposal demands through year 204016. Since the proposed Project would be within the growth projections assumed by the City’s MSR, General Plan and other infrastructure planning documents, and because the Tulare County Solid Waste Division has indicated it has existing and future capacity, the Project would not result in a significant impact. In addition, the proposed Project would be required to comply with applicable State and local regulations, including regulations pertaining to disposal of recyclable materials. With adequate landfill capacity at existing landfills and compliance with regulations, a less than significant impact would occur.

Impact 3.19-5: The Project will comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

Facts and Findings: The proposed Project would be required to comply with all federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to the handling and disposal of solid waste and impacts would be less than significant.

Wildfire
Impact 3.20-1: The Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, OR expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary of ongoing impacts to the environment, or expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes, as the Project is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.

Facts and Findings: The proposed Project area is relatively flat, and there are no forested areas, extensive grasslands, or heavily wooded areas on or near the Project site. No roadway design features associated with the proposed Project would result in an impairment of an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. The City has reviewed the site layout and determined that the Project provides adequate emergency access. Impacts associated with Project development would be less than significant related to wildfires given the distance the proposed Project from the State Responsibility Area and the State’s Very High Fire Hazards Severity Zone and the intervening land uses between them. The proposed Project would require the installation or maintenance of additional distribution lines to connect the residences to the existing utility grid; however, the Project would be constructed in accordance with all local and State regulations regarding power lines and other related infrastructure, as well as fire suppression requirements.
496
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48

5.4 Less Than Significant Environmental Impacts With Mitigation Public Resources Code Section 21081 states that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed that identifies one or more significant effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings:
 Changes or alternations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.  Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.  Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.

The following issues from the environmental categories analyzed in the EIR were found to be potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less than significant level with the imposition of mitigation measures. This City Council hereby finds, based on substantial evidence in the record including the EIR and as noted below, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 that all potentially significant impacts listed below can and will be mitigated to below a level of significance by imposition of the mitigation measures in the EIR; and that these mitigation measures are included as Conditions of Approval and set forth in the MMRP adopted by this City Council. Specific findings of this City Council for each category of such impacts are set forth in detail, below.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact 3.2-2: After mitigation, the Project wil not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: AG-2.

Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project site is not subject to a Williamson Act contract, pursuant to Government Code Section 51200 et seq. Therefore, there would be no conflict with a Williamson Act Contract and as such, no impacts to this subject area.

Total Project acreage is 507 acres, of which approximately 29.3 acres are already within the City limits of Visalia (zoned R-M-3) and no land use changes are proposed for the 29.3 acres.

The remaining 478 acres are within an unincorporated area of Tulare County, with the zoning as AE-40 (Exclusive Agriculture-40 acres minimum) and are proposed for annexation into the City.

Onced annexed, the zoning designations for 478 acres will be changed from agriculture to urban uses as described in Section 2.2 – Project Description. The new zoning would accommodate the proposed Project and as such, there would be no impact resulting from a zoning conflict. However, in order to ensure that existing agricultural operations in the area can be maintained, a Right-to-Farm Covenant will be required as identified in Mitigation Measure AG – 2. After mitigation, the impact is determined to be less than significant.

Impact 3.2-4: After mitigation, the Project would not involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. 497
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: AG-2
Facts in support of the Finding: The proposed Project site is located in an area that is surrounded by farmland / agricultural operations to the north, a proposed/future industrial complex to the west, existing residential to the south, and residential/agricultural land to the east. Total Project acreage is 507 acres, of which approximately 29.3 acres are already within the City limits of Visalia (zoned R-M-3) and no land use changes are proposed for the 29.3 acres. The remaining 478 acres are currently within an unincorporated area of Tulare County, with the zoning as AE-40 (Exclusive Agriculture-40 acres minimum) and are proposed for annexation into the City and zoning changed to urban uses. According to the LESA prepared for the Project, the site is substantially surrounded by Prime Farmland to the north (existing agriculture), east (already planned for future urban development) and west (already planned for future urban development). However, the requested General Plan Amendment and annexation is site specific and does not apply to any properties other than the proposed Project site.

Therefore, it is unlikely that the Project would result in the conversion of other farmland or forest land. With the implementation of mitigation measure AG-2 as identified in Impact 3.2-2, the impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Biological Resources
Impact 3.4-1: After mitigation, the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, and BIO-4
Facts in support of the Finding: According to the Biological Resource Evaluation report, one special-status plant species and two special-status animal species could occur on or near the Project site.

One record of Sanford’s Arrowhead from 2018 is known from approximately 7 miles northeast of the Project site. Although this species was not detected during the reconnaissance survey, which was conducted within the blooming period, aquatic habitat on and near the Project site could support this species. However, the frequent disturbance to these water conveyance features through vegetation clearing minimizes the potential of this species to occupy these habitats. Implementation of BIO-1 will ensure any impacts to Sanford’s arrowhead are less than significant.

There are two records of burrowing owl from within 5 miles of the Project site. Several California ground squirrel burrows that could support this species were found on the periphery of the Project site and within the fallow fields on the Project site. These fallowed fields could provide foraging habitat and thus support burrowing owl. However, the habitat is routinely disked, which minimizes the potential of this area to support this species. Mitigation measure BIO-2 shall be implemented to reduce potential impacts to less than significant.

There are three records of Swainson’s hawk from within 5 miles of the Project site. The fallow fields of the Project site provide potential foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk, and several potential nest trees were observed within 0.5 mile of the Project site. Therefore, the potential for this species to occur is moderate. Mitigation measures BIO-3 and BIO-4 shall be required to reduce impacts to Swainson’s hawk.
498
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Significant impacts to special status species could occur; however, implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-4 would provide specific avoidance and protection measures that will help ensure that potential impacts are less than significant.

Impact 3.4-3: After mitigation, the Project would not 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 site.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: BIO-5
Facts in support of the Finding: The proposed Project could impede the use of nursery sites for native birds protected under the MBTA and CFGC. Migratory birds are expected to nest on and near the Project site. Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings or otherwise lead to nest abandonment.

Construction activities such as excavating, trenching, and grading that disturb a nesting bird on the Project site or immediately adjacent to the construction zone could constitute a significant impact. Mitigation Measure BIO-5 shall be required to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Cultural Resources
Impact 3.5-1: After mitigation, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5 OR cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: CUL-1
Facts in support of the Finding: According to the records search and site survey, there are no recorded cultural resources within the Project area. Project construction and operation would occur on existing disturbed lands (most recently in agricultural use); however, further disturbance associated with the Project could potentially discover buried sensitive historical, archaeological or cultural resources. This would be a potentially significant impact. However, mitigation measure CUL – 1 included herein will reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

Impact 3.5-2: After mitigation, the Project would not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: CUL-2
Facts in support of the Finding: California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, CEQA Section 15064.5, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 mandate the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. Although soil-disturbing activities associated with development in accordance with the proposed project could result in the discovery of human remains, compliance with existing law would ensure that impacts to human remains would not be significant. Project development would occur on existing disturbed lands; however, further disturbance could potentially uncover human remains. This would be a potentially significant 499
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
impact. However, mitigation measure CUL-2 included herein will reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

Geology and Soils
Impact 3.7-2: After mitigation, the Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: GEO-1
Facts in support of the Finding: Construction activities associated with the Project involves ground preparation work for the proposed development of the site. These activities could expose barren soils to sources of wind or water, resulting in the potential for erosion and sedimentation on and off the Project site. The Applicant and/or contractor would be required to employ appropriate sediment and erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs) as part of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would be required and submitted to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB) in accordance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). In addition, soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be minimized through implementation of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) fugitive dust control measures (See Section 3.3 – Air Quality). Once construction is complete, the Project would not result in significant soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Mitigation Measure GEO – 1 (requirement to prepare a SWPPP) will ensure that impacts remain less than significant.

Impact 3.7-3: The Project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: GEO-2
Facts in support of the Finding: The proposed Project is located on relatively flat agricultural fields, and the threat of a landslide occurring on or adjacent to the project site is considered low.

The proposed Project would be located on soils that exhibit low to moderate potential for liquefaction during an earthquake, and the potential for lateral spreading to occur is considered low. A design-level geotechnical analysis will be required as identified in Mitigation Measure GEO – 2. The site would be designed in accordance with engineering design standards and structural improvement requirements to withstand the effects of soil settlement and collapsible soils. Engineered compacted fill would likely be used during construction in accordance with building code requirements, which would reduce the potential for lateral spreading of soils from Project construction. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO – 2, and structural/foundation design in accordance with the City of Visalia and current California Building Code standards, ground shaking impacts on the proposed Project area would be less than significant.

Impact 3.7-6: After mitigation, the Project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: CUL-1
500
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Facts in support of the Finding: There are currently no unique geologic features located in the Project Area. While the discovery of paleontological resources within the Project footprint is considered unlikely, Project buildout would adhere to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 which requires all earth-disturbing work to be temporarily suspended or redirected until a qualified paleontologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the records, in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines. In addition, Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would be implemented in the case of any inadvertent discoveries. With adherence to these regulatory requirements and measures, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 3.9-1: After mitigation, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: GEO-1
Facts in support of the Finding: Project construction activities may involve the use and transport of hazardous materials used during construction. Transportation, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations. Compliance would ensure that human health and the environment are not exposed to hazardous materials. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure GEO-1 which ensures the Project adhere to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program through the submission and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan during construction activities to prevent contaminated runoff from leaving the Project site. Therefore, after mitigation, no significant impacts would occur during construction activities.

The operational phase of the proposed Project would occur after construction is completed and residents and employees move in to occupy the structures on a day-to-day basis. The proposed Project includes land uses that are considered compatible with the surrounding uses, including single and multi-family residential uses, commercial uses, open space, parks / recreation areas and a stormwater basin. Compliance with all federal, State and local regulations, and the City of Visalia General Plan Implementing Policies S-P-3, S-P-15 through S-P-19, S-P-21, S-P-27 through S-P-30, S-P-32, S-P-37, and S-P-38 in the Safety and Noise Element would ensure that the Project would not cause an adverse effect on the environment with respect to the use, storage, or disposal of general household and commercial hazardous substances generated from future development or uses. In addition, Mitigation Measure GEO – 1 (requirement for SWPPP and erosion BMPs) will ensure impacts remain less than significant.

Impact 3.9-2: After mitigation, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure: HAZ-1, HAZ-2, and HAZ-3
Facts in support of the Finding: A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was prepared for the Project (See Appendix G). No CREC, HREC, or BER were identified on the Project site.

Based on the results of the Phase I, the Project will require subsurface investigation to evaluate the potential for elevated residual concentrations of agricultural chemicals that could potentially be present on site. Mitigation Measure HAZ – 1 will be implemented to reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
501
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Although the Phase I did not identify any previous oil / gas wells on or adjacent to the site, the California Department of Conservation – Geologic Energy Management Division (Division) provided an NOP comment letter that indicated there is one (1) well on the Project site that has been abandoned to current Division requirements as prescribed by law. However, the Division recommends that the Project provide a delineation of the well location and to provide notice to present and future property owners that an abandoned well may be on site. This is identified in Mitigation Measure HAZ – 2. In addition, Mitigation Measure HAZ – 3 has been included in the event that any unknown wells are uncovered or damaged during excavation or grading activities. Because the existing well has been abandoned pursuant to the Division’s requirements and because additional investigation will occur prior to issuance of grading permits (with any remedial action required),after implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1, HAZ-2, and HAZ – 3, the Project’s impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact 3.10-1: After mitigation, the Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures: GEO – 2.

Facts in support of the Finding: The Project has the potential to impact water quality standards and/or waste discharge requirements during construction (temporary impacts) and operation (polluted stormwater runoff due to an increase in impervious surfaces and urban runoff).

The Project site is located within the Central Valley RWQCB and is subject to the applicable requirements of the Basin Plan administered by the RWQCB in accordance with the PorterCologne Water Quality Control Act. In accordance with the NPDES Stormwater Program, and as described in Section 3.6 - Geology and Soils, Mitigation Measure GEO – 2 ensures the Project will comply with existing regulatory requirements to prepare a SWPPP designed to control erosion and the loss of topsoil to the extent practicable using BMPs that the RWQCB has deemed effective in controlling erosion, sedimentation, runoff during construction activities.

The specific controls are subject to the review and approval by the RWQCB and are an existing regulatory requirement. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO - 2 would ensure that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact.

Compliance with conditions or permit requirements established by the City as well as water discharge requirements outlined by the RWQCB would ensure that wastewater discharges coming from the proposed Project site and treated by the WWTP system would not exceed applicable Central RWQCB wastewater treatment requirements. The Project will not result in a violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Therefore, with mitigation, impacts result in a less than significant impact.

Impact 3.10-3: After mitigation, the Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite; ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
502
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures: GEO – 2.

Facts in support of the Finding: Construction and long-term operations of the proposed Project could result in potential impacts to surface water quality from urban stormwater runoff.

The proposed Project would result in new impervious areas associated with site improvements, including new asphalt, concrete and the proposed structures on site. In accordance with the NPDES Stormwater Program, and as described in the Section 3.6 - Geology and Soils, the Project will be required to comply with existing regulatory requirements to prepare a SWPPP designed to control erosion and the loss of topsoil to the extent practicable using BMPs that the RWQCB has deemed effective in controlling erosion, sedimentation, runoff during construction activities. The specific controls are subject to the review and approval by the RWQCB and are an existing regulatory requirement. Construction of the storm drain basin and implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO - 2 would ensure that the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.

Noise
Impact 3.13-1: After mitigation, the Project will not result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures: NOI-1, NOI-2, NOI-3, and NOI-4.

Facts in support of the Finding:

Noise Impacts to Off-Site Sensitive Receptors
The Project’s contribution to 2042 traffic noise exposure levels at the modeled representative receptor locations would not result in noise levels to exceed the City’s noise level standard, nor result in an increase of 3 dB in any sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s noise level standard without the implementation of the Project. The Project contribution to future noise levels (at full buildout) would be less than considerable and the Project would have a less than significant impact.

Off-Site Noise Impacts From Operational On-Site Sources The proposed Project includes up to 35.1 acres of commercial development in two locations within the Project.

Mixed Use Commercial (Impacts to Off-Site Receptors)
The Project would include up to 28.7 acres of Mixed‐Use Commercial near the southwest corner of the Project site. Anticipated developments within the Mixed‐Use Commercial Zone include a Costco retail center, gas station, car wash, drug store, retail and restaurants (including quick serve/drive‐through uses). The closest existing sensitive receptors (residential land uses) to the proposed Mixed‐Use Commercial Zone are single‐family residential uses located to the south, along W. Riggin Avenue. The single‐family uses along W. Riggin have an existing 6‐foot sound wall along the roadway frontage. The sound wall would provide a minimum of 5 dB of noise level reduction from groundlevel noise sources occurring within the Project site. As identified in 503
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
the Acoustical Analysis, an analysis was conducted for typical stationary noise sources associated with such land uses and each were determined to have a less than significant impact.

Neighborhood Commercial Zone (Impacts to Off-Site Receptors) The Project would include up to 6.4 acres of Commercial Neighborhood at the northeast corner of the development. Anticipated uses at this location may include development such as retail, services and restaurants. The closest existing residential land use to the Neighborhood Commercial Zone is located approximately 1,500 to the east. When specific uses within the study area are proposed that could result in a noise‐related conflict between a commercial or other stationary noise source and existing or proposed noise‐sensitive receptor, an acoustical analysis may be required that quantifies project‐related noise levels and recommends appropriate mitigation measures to achieve compliance with the City’s noise standards. This will be implemented as Mitigation Measure NOI – 1.

Off-Site Noise Impacts From Construction
Construction noise would occur at various locations within and near the Project site through the buildout period. Existing sensitive receptors could be located as close as 100 feet from construction activities. Construction noise is not considered to be a significant impact if construction is limited to the allowed hours and construction equipment is adequately maintained and muffled. Extraordinary noise‐producing activities (e.g., pile driving) are not anticipated. A noise impact could occur if construction activities do not incorporate appropriate best management practices (BMP) in regards to construction‐related noise. The Project will be required to comply with the City of Visalia’s Municipal Code regarding construction noise.

Therefore, impacts from construction noise are considered less than significant.

Noise Impacts to On-Site Sensitive Receptors
The proposed Project includes sensitive receptors (residential land uses) that could be impacted by traffic noise exposure adjacent to arterial roadways. Standard wall heights permitted by the City of Visalia range between 6‐foot to 7‐foot in height. Depending on the height and geometric relationship between the roadway and the receiver location, wall of this height range would be typically expected to provide between approximately 5‐6 dB of noise attenuation. While specific wall height requirements would generally be determined once final lot layout designs and elevations are known, wall heights of up to 7 feet will be sufficient to mitigate traffic noise within all proposed residential land uses, to below the City’s acceptable maximum allowed noise exposure levels. This will be implemented as Mitigation Measure NOI – 2.

Noise Impacts from Operational On-Site Resources:
 Mixed Use Commercial (Impacts to On-Site Receptors):

The first commercial area consists of up to 28.7 acres of Mixed‐ Use Commercial at the intersection of Riggin Avenue and Shirk Road. Anticipated uses at this location may include development such as a Costco, gas station, car wash, drug store, retail, restaurants (including drive‐throughs), and similar uses. The Project would include medium‐density residential land uses proposed adjacent to the Mixed‐ Use Commercial Zone.

In addition to the other noise producing components, the proposed Costco retail center would include a car wash facility. To achieve an output which is below the City’s threshold and would thus result in a less than significant impact,Mitigation Measure NOI – 3 will be a condition of Project approval.
 Neighborhood Commercial Zone (Impacts to On-Site Receptors):

The Project would include high‐density residential land uses proposed adjacent to the Neighborhood Commercial Zone. When specific uses within the study area are proposed (and their locations are defined) that could result in a noise‐related conflict between a commercial or other stationary noise source and Project proposed sensitive receptors, an acoustical analysis 504
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
may be required that quantifies Project‐ related noise levels and recommends appropriate mitigation measures to achieve compliance with the City’s noise standards. This will be implemented as Mitigation Measure NOI – 1. Refer to the mitigation measures at the end of this section.
 Noise Impacts from Proposed School Land Uses:

Sources of operational noise associated with school land uses could include mechanical equipment (trash compactors, HVAC, etc.), vehicle and bus movements and noise associated with general school activities (children at play). There is one existing school site (Ridgeview Middle School) as well as two proposed school sites within the overall Project site footprint. The locations of school parking lots and bus access and loading areas in relation to proposed residential land uses were not known at the time of this publication. If bus movements (occurring off public roadways, but on school campus) were to occur within ninety (90) feet of outdoor activity areas of residential land uses (outdoor common use areas and individual patios and balconies for multi‐family homes and backyards of single‐family homes), associated noise levels could exceed the City’s stationary noise level standards at residential land uses. Therefore, Mitigation Measure NOI – 4 will be implemented to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

As described herein, the Project could, without mitigation, result in the generation of a substantial temporary (during construction) or permanent (operational) increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project, or exceed standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. However, with implementation of mitigation measures NOI – 1 through NOI – 4, impacts are reduced to a less than significant.

Transportation
Impact 3.17-4: After mitigation, the Project would not result in inadequate emergency access.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures: TRA-3.

Facts in support of the Finding: Project construction activities could result in potential vehicular access issues due to potential temporary road detours and/or closures to accommodate Project construction. A construction-traffic management plan (Plan) will be required prior to construction of the proposed Project, as identified in Mitigation Measure TRA –

3. The Plan would delineate all road closure provisions to maintain access to adjacent properties at all times, prior notices, adequate sign-postings, detours, provisions for pedestrian and bicycle transportation and permitted hours of construction activity. Once constructed, the proposed Project includes multiple access roads allowing adequate egress and ingress to the residential and commercial developments in the event of an emergency. Additionally, as part of the proposed Project, internal access roadways would be constructed to City standards. The City has reviewed the site layout and determined that the Project provides adequate emergency access. Therefore, there is a less than significant impact.

Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact 3.18-1: After mitigation, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
505
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures: TRI-1, TRI-2, TRI-3, and TRI-4.

Facts in support of the Finding: The City of Visalia requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which was received on August 5, 2021. The search was negative for sacred sites and tribal cultural resources. According to SB 18, the tribes had 90 days from the receipt of the letter to request consultation with the City of Visalia. Of the tribes that were notified in August 2021, the City received one response from the Santa Rosa Indian Community of the Santa Rosa Rancheria, who requested that a Tribal representative be present for all ground disturbance related to the Project. As such, mitigation measure TRI – 1 has been included to accommodate this request.

Although construction and operation would occur on previously disturbed land, unknown historical resources may be discovered during ground-disturbing activities. In order to account for unanticipated discoveries and the potential to impact previously undocumented or unknown resources, the following mitigation measures are recommended. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures TRI-1 through TRI-4, impacts under this criterion would be less than significant with mitigation.

5.5 Environmental Impacts Not Fully Mitigated to a Less Than Significant Level The City Council finds, based on substantial evidence in the record including the EIR and as noted below, the following environmental impacts identified in the EIR remain significant even after application of all feasible mitigation measures, as set forth below. The City also finds that any alternative discussed in the EIR that may reduce the significance of these impacts is rejected as infeasible for the reasons given in the EIR and this Section of these Findings. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 1092(b)(2), the City Council of the City of Visalia cannot approve the Project unless if first finds (1) under Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provisions of employment opportunities make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR; and (2) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15092(b), that the remaining significant affects are acceptable due to overriding concerns described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 and, therefore, a statement of overriding considerations is included herein. Each potential unavoidable significant impact is overridden as set forth below in the Statement of Overriding Considerations as described further in Section 5.8, and the City finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.

Aesthetics
Impact 3.1-3: In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? 506
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Finding: There are no mitigation measures available that would reduce the loss of public views of the site and surroundings, thus the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: None.

Facts in Support of the Findings: The proposed Project is located in an area of Visalia that is planned for, and is undergoing urban development. The area to the west is planned for commercial/industrial development, areas to the east are planned for residential development and to the south is existing residential development. Areas to the north primarily consist of agriculture/dairy and scattered rural residences. In addition, the site is planned for urban development under the City’s General Plan.

Implementation of the proposed Project will alter the visual character of the Project site from historically agricultural uses to urban development. This includes residential housing (up to two stories in height) and commercial components including uses such as a Costco, retail, restaurants and other similar uses. New development would incrementally reduce views to open agricultural land now available to some residents and travelers on adjacent roadways.

Development of the proposed Project in compliance with the policies of the City of Visalia General Plan, the City Design Guidelines and development standards referenced above in the Regulatory Setting will ensure integration of new homes and non-residential structures in an aesthetically pleasing manner within the proposed development. However, because the Project would permanently alter the existing visual character of the site and area compared to existing conditions, this is considered a significant, unavoidable and irreversible impact.

All feasible mitigation measures have been included in the Project’s Draft EIR and will also be enforced as conditions of approval through the provisions of CEQA. However, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact 3.2-1: The Project would convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.

Finding: There are no mitigation measures available that would reduce the impact resulting from loss of farmland on the Project site, thus the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: AG-1.

Facts in Support of the Findings: According to the FMMP, the 507-acre proposed Project site is classified as Prime Farmland. The site is comprised of two parcels: APN 077-100-105 consists of approximately 29.3 acres and is within the City limits of Visalia, with the zoning as RM-3 (Multi-Family Residential). APN 077-100-088 consists of approximately 478 acres and is within an unincorporated area of Tulare County, with the zoning as AE-40 (Exclusive Agriculture-40 acres minimum). However, both parcels are within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City of Visalia. The Project site has been designated by the City’s General Plan for residential, commercial, public/institutional and park/recreation uses and is located in both Tier 2 and Tier 3 of the City’s future growth threshold boundaries.

The City has evaluated the Project’s farmland conversion impacts utilizing the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (LESA), which the California Department of Conservation developed to provide lead agencies with a methodology to ensure that significant effects on the environment of agricultural land conversions are quantitatively and consistently considered in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code §21095). According to the LESA Threshold of Significance, the total score of 89.17 for the proposed Project site is considered significant. As such, the Project is subject to the City’s General Plan Land Use Policy LU-P-34 which requires mitigation for the loss of farmland. 507
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
The Project consists of 507 acres, of which approximately 29.3 acres are already within the City limits of Visalia (zoned R-M-3) and, being within Tier I, are not subject to the City’s agricultural mitigation policy. The 29.3 acres of prime farmland was previously evaluated under the City’s General Plan EIR, adopted in October 2014 (State Clearinghouse #2010041078). The remaining 478 acres are within an unincorporated area of Tulare County, are currently zoned AE-40 (Exclusive Agriculture-40 acres minimum), are within Tiers II and III, and are proposed for annexation into the City. As such, the 478 acres proposed for annexation are subject to the City’s agricultural mitigation policy (See MM AG – 1).

The General Plan identifies the need for the conversion of agricultural land to urban development. The City has set aside three-tiered areas planned for development which contain land designated as Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance. The Project is within Tier 2 and Tier 3, which has been deemed as land to be converted from agricultural land to urban development.

The 2014 General Plan Policy LU-P-34 contained a requirement for an Agricultural Mitigation Program to address the conversion of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance within the Tier 2 and Tier 3 growth boundaries. As this is a requirement for consistency with the General Plan, the Project’s compliance is mandatory. Therefore, compliance with General Plan Policy LU-P-34 will allow the Project to convert Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance and preserve offsite farmland outside of the urban development boundaries at an equivalent ratio.

Although the Project will comply with the City’s agricultural mitigation policy based on City General Plan Policy LU-P-34 (Mitigation Measure AG – 1), conversion of agricultural land to urban use is not directly mitigable, aside from preventing development altogether. There is no additional feasible mitigation measure that would reduce the impacts related to the Prime Farmland converted as a result of development of the proposed Project. Therefore, even with mitigation, impacts as a result of farmland conversion are considered significant and unavoidable.

Air Quality
Impact 3.3-1: The Project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2A and AIR-2B will reduce impacts; however, impacts remain significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: AIR-2A and AIR-2B.

Facts in Support of the Findings: the Project’s emissions are significant for ROG, NOX, CO, and PM10 and would be considered inconsistent with the AQP for this criterion. The Project complies with applicable control measures of the AQP and would be less than significant for this criterion. The growth accommodated by the proposed Carleton Acres Specific Plan is included in the City of Visalia’s General Plan; therefore, it is consistent with the land use assumptions used to prepare the AQP. The Carleton Acres Specific Plan includes numerous design features to reduce motor vehicle trips and increase walking, bicycling, and transit use.

In addition, development contemplated under the Specific Plan would be subject to SJVAPCD Rule 9510, which is intended to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development in the San Joaquin Valley to the extent feasible. However, after compliance with Rule 9510, total emissions will still exceed the SJVAPCD quantitative thresholds of significance for several pollutants.

Incorporation of mitigation that would reduce the proposed Project’s regional criteria and ozone precursor emissions is identified under Impact 3.3-2. Because the combined emissions from operations of development under the proposed Specific Plan would continue to exceed at least one regional threshold after compliance with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 and incorporation of mitigation, the impact would be significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2A and 508
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
AIR-2B will reduce impacts; however, even after mitigation, impacts remain significant and unavoidable.

Impact 3.3-2: The Project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2A and AIR-2B will reduce impacts; however, impacts remain significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: AIR-2A and AIR-2B.

Facts in Support of the Findings: Air pollutant emissions have both regional and localized effects. The proposed Specific Plan development would be consistent with several measures identified in the General Plan EIR, while one measure would not be applicable . In addition, the Project would comply with all local regulations required by the City of Visalia. The Project would incorporate design features and required mitigation measures (including MM AIR- 2A and MM AIR-B) that reduce air quality impacts. In addition, regulations adopted by the SJVAPCD and the State of California provide emission reductions that would align with requirements of the mitigation measures included in the EIR and relevant General Plan policies.

Individual development projects will be subject to the most recent Title 24 in effect that building permits are issued, which will ensure that building energy consumption would not be wasteful or inefficient. Buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would provide future residents, visitors, and employees connectivity within the Project site and to adjoining land uses through pedestrian and bicycle connections. The proximity of the proposed new development to existing transit and existing buildout in the City of Visalia, coupled with the design features of the proposed Specific Plan, would increase accessibility to public transportation and would improve mobility within the Project area.

Overall, the proposed Specific Plan would create a considerable amount of internal capture between its components to reduce VMT compared to the same level of development built with land uses geographically separated from each other; however, as described above, Project emissions will exceed significance thresholds for both construction and operations. After incorporation of MM AIR-2A, regional construction emissions generated by the proposed Project would have a less-than-significant impact. However, non-permitted emissions generated during Project operations would exceed the applicable regional thresholds for ROG, NOX, CO, and PM10 even after incorporation mitigation. Therefore, even after mitigation, the impacts are significant and unavoidable.

Impact 3.3-3: The Project would potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2A and AIR-2B will reduce impacts; however, impacts remain significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: AIR-2A, AIR-2B, and AIR-3A.

Facts in Support of the Findings: The proposed Specific Plan contemplates the development of residential uses, commercial uses, and public facilities within the Specific Plan area to complement and support a developing area of the City of Visalia. The calculated health metrics from the proposed Project’s operational emissions would not exceed the cancer risk significance threshold, the non-cancer hazard index significance threshold, or the acute non-cancer hazard in any scenario analyzed. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a significant impact on nearby sensitive receptors (including future residents within the Specific Plan area) from Project-generated TACs from gasoline fueling activities and operational DPM from the proposed Costco gasoline station and warehouse. Mitigation Measure AIR-3A has thus been fully implemented for the Costco development.
509
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Mitigation Measure AIR-3A, which requires further evaluation of proposed commercial and commercial mixed-use development within the Specific Plan area, would require individual projects to reduce impacts to an acceptable level. Although individual development projects would be required to implement all feasible and enforceable mitigation to reduce a significant impact, information is insufficient to determine whether impacts would be less-than-significant after incorporation of all applicable mitigation. Therefore, this impact remains significant.

The Project would not exceed SJVAPCD localized emission daily screening levels for any criteria pollutant during Project construction. The localized emissions of PM10, PM2.5, and NOX would not exceed the screening thresholds during Project operations. Furthermore, the Project would not have a significant impact in regard to ROG during Project operations. The Project would not be a suitable habitat for Valley fever spores and is not in area known to have naturally occurring asbestos. However, the Project may expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of TACs from construction and/or operations of the Project and may expose sensitive receptors to significant levels of CO during Project operations. Therefore, the Project could result in significant impacts to sensitive receptors. As the exact timing, details surrounding potential sources, and exact locations and occupancy of planned residential receptors is unknown at this time, the impact is considered significant. Mitigation measures are included to reduce the severity of potential impacts; however, impacts are still significant and unavoidable.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact 3.10-2: The Project could substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin (Less than significant at project level only, cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable).

Finding: There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the cumulative impact to a less than significant level.

Facts in Support of the Findings: The City of Visalia (through Cal Water) is part of the MidKaweah Groundwater Sustainability Agency (MKGSA). The proposed Project, if approved, would become under the jurisdiction and purview of Cal Water which is subject to MKGSA’s Groundwater Sustainability Plan. The City of Visalia utilizes groundwater as its sole source of potable water. As identified herein and in the SB 610 Water Supply Assessment, the City anticipates being able to provide adequate potable water to the City through the year 2042.

However, development of the Project in combination with future projects within the Basin would increase the amount of overdraft in the Basin, which is already in a state of overdraft. Therefore, even with compliance with the GSP and implementation of water-reduction measures required by Cal Water, the Project would result in cumulatively considerable and unavoidable significant impacts to groundwater supplies in the Basin.

Transportation/Traffic
Impact 3.17-1: The Project would conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1 and TRA-2 will reduce impacts; however, impacts remain significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures: TRA-1 and TRA-2.

Facts in Support of the Findings: The proposed Project includes the construction and operation of a 507-acre mixed-use Project, which could result in potentially significant increases in traffic in and around the Project area. As the City’s currently adopted General Plan Circulation Element includes a LOS standard, to ensure that a Project is consistent with the General Plan policy, an LOS analysis may be required at the request of the City Traffic Engineer to determine necessary roadway infrastructure improvements and capacity. 510
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
All study intersections are expected to operate with minimal delay (at or above LOS D) during peak hours through the year 2046, both with and without Project traffic, or can be mitigated to operate at an acceptable LOS, expect for the following intersections:
• Rd 67/Betty Dr (#31)
• Dinuba Blvd/Riggin Ave (#45)
• Akers St/Ferguson Ave (#48)
• Demaree St/Goshen Ave (#54)
• Demaree St/Mineral King Ave (#60)
Therefore, even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, the Project will result in significant and unavoidable impacts.

Utilities and Service Systems
Impact 3.19-2: The Project will have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years at the project level, but cumulative impacts are determined to be significant and unavoidable.

Finding: There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the cumulative impact to a less than significant level.

Facts in Support of the Findings: The City of Visalia (through Cal Water) is part of the MidKaweah Groundwater Sustainability Agency (MKGSA). The proposed Project, if approved, would become under the jurisdiction and purview of Cal Water which is subject to MKGSA’s Groundwater Sustainability Plan. The City of Visalia utilizes groundwater as its sole source of potable water. As identified herein and in the SB 610 Water Supply Assessment, the City anticipates being able to provide adequate potable water to the City through the year 2042.

However, development of the Project in combination with future projects within the Basin would increase the amount of overdraft in the Basin, which is already in a state of overdraft. Therefore, even with compliance with the GSP and implementation of water-reduction measures required by Cal Water, the Project would result in cumulatively considerable and unavoidable significant impacts to groundwater supplies in the Basin.

5.6 Alternatives
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires the consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project that could feasibly attain most of the objectives of the proposed Project. The alternatives analyzed for the Project are as follows:

1. No Project

2. Alternate Location

3. Reduced (50%) Project
These alternatives are described in more detail below.

1. No Project Alternative
CEQA Section 15126.6(e) requires the discussion of the No Project Alternative “to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project”. The No Project scenario in this case consists of retaining the property in its original configuration, with no construction or operation of the proposed 511
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project. Under this alternative, the site remains in agricultural production and no new urban development would occur on the site.

Description
This alternative would avoid both the adverse and beneficial effects of the Project. This alternative would avoid ground disturbance and construction-related impacts associated with construction of the proposed Project. No new development would occur on the site. The No Project Alternative would avoid the generation of any environmental impacts beyond existing conditions.

Environmental Considerations
Continuation of the site as an agricultural facility would result in all environmental impacts being less than the proposed Project, as no new impacts would occur. There would be no changes to any of the existing conditions and there would be no impact to each of the 20 CEQA Checklist evaluation topics. The No-Project Alternative by definition would not meet the objectives of the proposed Project.

2. Alternate Location Alternative
Description
There are relatively few sites within the City of Visalia that provide adequately sized lands suitable for the proposed Project. The criteria for selection included whether or not the alternate site would substantially reduce environmental impacts, availability of land, adequately sized parcels, efficiency of access, and acceptable land use designations/zoning. There are areas of agricultural land of similar size located both south and west of the proposed Project. These areas could conceivably support the proposed Project and are depicted in the Figures A-1, A-2, and A-3 of the Draft EIR. The areas are partially outside the City limits but have similar zoning and land use designations as the proposed Project site. In addition, these areas would allow for contiguous growth adjacent to existing urban development in the City. Perhaps the greatest obstacle in selecting an alternative site for the proposed Project is that the Project Applicant does not already own land at these locations and/or does not have control of land at these locations. However, for purposes of environmental evaluation, a description of potential environmental impacts is provided below.

Environmental Considerations
Development of an alternate site could theoretically meet most of the Project objectives presented earlier in this chapter. However, construction and operation at an alternate site would result in environmental impacts that are likely equal to or in some cases could be greater than the proposed project. The majority, if not all, of project impacts are likely to occur at an alternate site.

3. Reduced Project (50%) Alternative
This alternative would reduce the Project components by 50% as follows:
• Reduction in acreage from 507 to 253.5
• Reduction in residential units from 3,262 to 1,631
• Reduction in commercial acreage from 35.1 to 17.5
• Reduction in parks/recreational acreage from 17.3 to 8.7 • Corresponding reductions in infrastructure, etc.

The Project would remain a mixed-use development with a variety of housing types, with the 50% reduction.
512
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Environmental Considerations
Most of the environmental issues associated with this alternative would be less or similar to those of the proposed Project. The Reduced (50%) Alternative would meet some of the Project Objectives. However, this Alternative would not be fully consistent with the objective to provide residential development that assists the City in meetings its Housing Element requirements (the City currently has a deficit in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals). A 50% reduction in units would result in a larger Regional Housing Needs Allocation deficit than the proposed Project.

Environmentally Superior Alternative
As presented in the comparative analysis above, there are a number of factors in selecting the environmentally superior alternative. An EIR must identify the environmentally superior alternative to the project. The No Project Alternative would be environmentally superior to the Project on the basis of its minimization or avoidance of physical environmental impacts.

However, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) states:

The “no project” analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. If the environmentally superior alternative is the “no project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.

Because the No Project Alternative cannot be the Environmentally Superior Alternative under CEQA, the Reduced (50%) Project Alternative would be the Environmentally Superior alternative because it would result in less adverse physical impacts to the environment with regard to air, water, noise, public services, population/housing, utilities and traffic. However, the Reduced (50%) Project Alternative does not eliminate the proposed Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts associated with Agriculture - Loss of Farmland (project and cumulative); Air Quality (project and cumulative); Hydrology – Water Supply (cumulative only); Transportation - Conflict with Plan/Program (project and cumulative); and Utilities & Service Systems – Water Supply (cumulative only). Furthermore, the Reduced (50%) Project Altenative does not meet all of the Project objectives, particularly with regard to quantity and diversity of housing.

Summary and Determination
Only the No Project and Reduced (50%) Project Alternatives could potentially result in fewer impacts than the proposed Project’s impacts. These Alternatives however, would not fully meet the objectives of the proposed Project. After this full, substantial, and deliberate analysis, the proposed Project remains the preferred alternative.

5.7 Growth Inducing Impacts
Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires than at EIR evaluate the growth-inducing impacts of a proposed action. A growth-inducing impacts is defined by the CEQA Guidelines as:

The way in which a proposed project could foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.

Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth… it is not assumed that growth in an area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.

Based on the State CEQA Guidelines, growth inducement is any growth that exceeds planned growth of an area and results in new development that would not have taken place without 513
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
implementation of the Project. A project can have direct and/or indirect growth inducement potential. Direct growth inducement would result if a project, for example, involved construction of new housing. A project would have indirect growth inducement potential if it established substantial new permanent employment opportunities or if it would involve a construction effort with substantial short-term employment opportunities that would indirectly stimulate the need for additional housing and services to support the new employment demand. Similarly, a project would indirectly induce growth if it would remove an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on a required public service. A project providing an increased water supply in an area where water service historically limited growth could be considered growth-inducing.

The State Guidelines further explain that the environmental effects of induced growth are considered indirect impacts of the proposed action. These indirect impacts or secondary effects of growth include increased demand on other community and public services and infrastructure, increased traffic and noise, and adverse environmental impacts such as degradation of air and water quality, degradation or loss of plant and animal habitat, and conversion of agricultural and open space land to developed uses.

Growth inducement may constitute an adverse impact if the growth is not consistent with or accommodated by the land use plans and growth management plans and policies for the area affected. Local land use plans provide for land use development patterns and growth policies that allow for the orderly expansion of urban development supported by adequate urban public services, such as water supply, roadway infrastructure, sewer service, and solid waste service.

The proposed Project involves the establishment of a mixed-use development that is being proposed in response to the demand for housing and commercial facilities in the area. The Project is consistent with the City of Visalia’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and will connect to all existing City utility services. The anticipated population and housing unit increase associated with the proposed Project are within the growth projections of the City’s General Plan. The proposed Project would create a relatively minor amount of new employment opportunities during construction and for the proposed commercial facilities associated with the Project. As of February 2023, Tulare County (Visalia-Porterville Metropolitan Statistical Area) had an unemployment rate of 10.6 percent1 and it is anticipated that those new employment opportunities associated with the Project could likely be filled by the existing employment base.

There are no other indirect aspects of the Project (such as creation of oversized public utility lines, etc.) that would induce further growth in the area. The proposed Project would not result in significant growth-inducing impacts.

5.8 Irreversible Environmental Changes
Section 15126(c) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR include a discussion of significant irreversible environmental changes that would result from project implementation.

CEQA Section 15126.2(d) identifies irreversible environmental changes as those involving a large commitment of nonrenewable resources or irreversible damage resulting from environmental accidents.

Irreversible changes associated with the project include the use of nonrenewable resources during construction, including concrete, plastic, and petroleum products and renewable resources such as timber. To the extent nonrenewable uses are used during construction, the Project is being created to meet existing demand for housing and services in the City, which would lead to the consumption of these resources elsewhere if the Project were not built.

Therefore, the Project would not result in a new impact to nonrenewable resources. During the operational phase of the proposed Project, energy would be used for lighting, heating, cooling, and other requirements and petroleum products would be used by vehicles associated with the residents of the proposed development and the commercial facilities. The use of these resources would not be substantial, would not be inefficiently used, and would not constitute a 514
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
significant effect. Refer to Draft EIR Section 3.6 – Energy for more information pertaining to the proposed Project’s energy use.

In the future, the site could be rezoned or redeveloped for a different use also allowed in the existing General Plan or Zoning Ordinance designations, in which case, at the end of the useful life of the Project, the use could change. Therefore, the Project would not commit future generations to a significant change in land use. This is in contrast to a large industrial use, where reuse for non-industrial uses likely would require extensive remediation, making such reuse difficult, or large infrastructure projects that are rarely moved or dismantled once constructed.

The proposed Project would not result in irreversible damage resulting from environmental accidents. The Project consists of a mixed-use residential and commercial development. None of these land uses routinely transport, use, or dispose of hazardous materials, or present a reasonably foreseeable release of hazardous materials, with the exception of common residential and commercial hazardous materials such as cleaners, paint, petroleum products, etc. Handling and use of hazardous materials and the disposal of the resulting hazardous wastes would be required to follow the applicable laws and regulations, as described in Section

3.9-1 – Hazards & Hazardous Materials herein. As such, irreversible environmental accidents are unlikely.

5.9 Statement of Overriding Considerations
Public Resources Code Section 21081 mandates that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified that identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the Project is approved or carried out unless the following occur:
 The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant impact:
o Changes or alternatives have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that mitigate or avoid the significant impacts on the environment. o Those changes or alternatives are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.
o Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. o With respect to the third point, the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social and technological, or other benefits of the Project outweigh the significant impact on the environment.

As discussed in Subsection 5.4, significant impacts were identified, but mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project that mitigate or avoid the significant impacts on the environment. Additionally, as discussed in Subsection 5.5, there were significant and unavoidable impacts that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level.

Accordingly, the Visalia City Council adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the significant unavoidable impacts associated with adoption of the Project as addressed in the EIR, specifically for the following impact areas:
 Aesthetics – Degrade existing visual character (project and cumulative level)  Agriculture & Forestry Resources - Loss of farmland (project and cumulative level)  Air Quality – Conflict with Air Quality Plan / Exceed criteria pollutant thresholds (project and cumulative level)
515
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
 Hydrology & Water Quality – Water supply (cumulative level only)  Transportation – Conflict with Plan/Program (project and cumulative level)  Utilities & Service Systems – Water supply (cumulative level only) The City Council hereby declares that, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council has balanced the benefits of the Project against any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the Project. If the benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts are considered “acceptable”.

The City Council hereby declares that the EIR has identified and discussed significant effects that may occur as a result of the Project. With the implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the EIR, these impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant except for the unavoidable and significant impacts discussed in Subsection 5.5, herein.

The City Council hereby declares that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Project.

The City Council hereby declares that to the extent any mitigation measures recommended to the City are not to be incorporated, such mitigation measures are infeasible because they would impose restrictions on the Project that would prohibit the realization of specific economic, social, and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts.

The City Council further finds that except for the Project, all other alternatives set forth in the EIR are infeasible because they may not substantially reduce environmental impacts associated with the Project, and would prohibit the realization of the Project objectives and/or specific economic, social, or other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives.

The City Council hereby declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project, to the extent feasible by adopting the proposed mitigation measures, having considered the entire administrative record on the Project and having weighted the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable significant impact after mitigation, the City Council has determined that the social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Project outweigh the potential unavoidable significant impacts and render those potential significant impacts acceptable based on the following considerations:
 The Project reflects the stated vision, goals and objectives of the City of Visalia.  The Project will ensure orderly development patterns to accommodate projected increases in population through buildout of the General Plan by providing strategic land use designations that avoid or minimize land use conflicts.  The Project will provide a variety of housing opportunities with a range of densities, styles, sizes and values that will be designed to satisfy existing and future demand for quality housing in the area.
 The Project will maximize and broaden the City’s sales tax base by providing local and regional tax-generating uses.
 The Project will improve and maximize economic viability of the Project site and area by providing strategic land use designations.
 The Project will provide a residential development that assists the City in meetings its General Plan and Housing Element requirements and objectives.

As the CEQA Lead Agency for the proposed action, the City of Visalia has carefully reviewed the Project and the alternatives presented in the EIR, and fully understands the Project and Project alternatives proposed for development. Further, this City Council finds that all potential adverse environmental impacts and all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impacts from the Project have been identified in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR and public testimony. This City 516
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-48
Council also finds that a reasonable range of alternatives was considered in the EIR and this document, Section 5.6, above, and finds that approval of the Project is appropriate.

In Section 5.8, the City Council has identified economic and social benefits and important policy objectives that will result from implementing the Project. The City Council has balanced these substantial social and economic benefits against the unavoidable significant adverse effects of the Project. Given the substantial social and economic benefits that will accrue from the Project, this City Council finds that these specific overriding benefits of the Project outweigh the significant impact on the environment.

Public Resource Code 21002 provides, “In the event specific economic, social and other conditions make infeasible such Project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects can be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.” Section 21002(c) provides, “In the event that economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects of a project on the environment, the project may nonetheless be approved or carried out at the discretion of a public agency”.

Finally, California Administrative Code, Title 4, 15093(a) states, “If the benefits of a Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered ‘acceptable.’”
The City Council hereby declares that the foregoing benefits provided to the public through approval and implementation of the Project outweigh the identified significant adverse environmental impacts of the Project that cannot be mitigated. The City Council finds that each of the Project benefits outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in the EIR, and finds those impacts to be acceptable.
517
Resolution No. 2023-49
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-49

A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA TO INITIATE ANNEXATION NO. 2021-05: A REQUEST TO ANNEX 468.3

ACRES AND RIGHT-OF-WAY, LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF VISALIA

URBAN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY TIERS II AND III, INTO THE
VISALIA CITY LIMITS. THE ANNEXATION REQUEST INCLUDES

AUTHORIZING THE DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA
NO. 1 IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND COUNTY REQUIREMENTS

AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AND ENTER INTO A PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT. THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS
LOCATED ON LAND GENERALLY BOUND BY W. RIGGIN AVENUE TO
THE SOUTH, N. AKERS STREET TO THE EAST, N. SHIRK ROAD TO THE WEST AND AVENUE 320 (W. KIBLER AVENUE) TO THE NORTH (APN 077-100-108)
WHEREAS, the project proponents approve to initiate proceedings for annexation to said city of territory described on the attached legal description and annexation map included as Attachment “A” of this resolution; and
WHEREAS, the proponent desires to annex said territory to the City of Visalia for the following reasons: 1) The annexation will contribute to and facilitate orderly growth and development of both the City and the territory proposed to be annexed; 2) The annexation will facilitate and contribute to the proper and orderly layout, design and construction of streets, gutters, sanitary and storm sewers and drainage facilities, both within the City and within the territory proposed to be annexed; and 3) The annexation will provide and facilitate proper overall planning and zoning of lands and subdivision of lands in said City and said territory in a manner most conducive of the welfare of said City and said territory; and
WHEREAS, this proposal is made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzburg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, commencing with Section 56000 of the Government Code of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed is uninhabited; and WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed is located in Voting District 3 as identified in the Election District Map adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2022, per Resolution No. 2022-11; and
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, which considered impacts from Annexation No. 2021-05, was released on May 4, 2023, for circulation for a period of 45 days; and, WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, was released on September 1, 2023, and consists of the 518
Resolution No. 2023-49
Draft EIR and the revisions of, and additions to, the Draft EIR; the written comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR; the written responses of the City of Visalia to public comments on the Draft EIR; errata to the foregoing; and other information added by the City of Visalia as specified in the record; and, WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required that, in connection with the approval of a project for which an EIR has been prepared that identified one or more significant effects, the decision making body makes certain findings regarding those effects, which in full are contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-42 and the City Council Resolution pertaining to the certification of the Final EIR prepared for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia, after a 10 day published notice, reviewed this proposal and held a public hearing on September 11, 2023, and found it to be consistent with the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia, after a 10 day published notice, reviewed this proposal and held a public hearing on October 2, 2023, and found it to be consistent with the General Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Visalia finds that Final EIR for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, SCH# 2021050418, was prepared consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act and City of Visalia Environmental Guidelines.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Visalia makes the following specific findings with regards to the project:

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

2. That the proposed Annexation, which will re-designate 468 acres of AE-20 (Agricultural Exclusive 20-acre) and AE-40 (Agricultural Exclusive 40-acre) County zone district to QP (Quasi-Public) zone, R-1-5 (Single-family Residential, 5,000 square feet minimum lot size) zone, R-M-2 (Multi-family Residential, one unit per 3,000 square feet), R-M-3 (Multi-family Residential, one unit per 1,200 square feet), C-MU (Commercial Mixed Use), and C-N (Neighborhood Commercial), will not impose new land uses or development that will adversely affect the subject site or adjacent properties.

3. That the parcel is not located within an Agricultural Preserve.

4. That the parcel will be annexed into Voting District 3 per the Council Election Voting District Map.

5. That the project is consistent with the project description contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (SCH# 2021050418) for the project associated with this Annexation, specifically for development is identified and described in the 519
Resolution No. 2023-49
Carleton Acres Specific Plan, and for which said FEIR is recommended to be certified by the City Council precedent to the Planning Commission and City Council’s consideration of this Annexation request, consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City of Visalia Environmental Guidelines.

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

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

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

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

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

5. Upon annexation, the territory shall be zoned QP (Quasi-Public) zone, R-1-5 (Singlefamily Residential, 5,000 square feet minimum lot size) zone, R-M-2 (Multi-family Residential, one unit per 3,000 square feet), R-M-3 (Multi-family Residential, one unit per 1,200 square feet), C-MU (Commercial Mixed Use), and C-N (Neighborhood Commercial), consistent with the underlying General Plan land use designations as proposed through the General Plan Amendment.

6. That the applicant(s) enter into a Pre-Annexation Agreement with the City which memorializes the required fees, policies, and other conditions applicable to the annexation. The draft Pre-Annexation Agreement is attached herein as Attachment “B” of Resolution No. 2023-49. The agreement is subject to final approval by the City Council of the City of Visalia.

7. Upon annexation, the territory shall be assigned to Voting District 3, and the Election District Map adopted on February 22, 2022, per Resolution No. 2022-11 shall be amended to reflect the new territory assigned to Voting District.

8. The City Clerk of the City of Visalia is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Executive Officer of Tulare County LAFCO. 520
Resolution No. 2023-49
Attachment “A” of Resolution No. 2023-49
Annexation legal description and map
521
Resolution No. 2023
-49
522
Resolution No. 2023
-49
523
Resolution No. 2023-49
Attachment “B” of Resolution No. 2023-49
Pre-Annexation Agreement
This Pre-Annexation Agreement (”Agreement”) is made and entered into this _____ day of ______________, by and among the City of Visalia, a charter law city (“City’) and Hayes Ranch LLC (hereinafter “Owner”):

RECITALS
WHEREAS, Owners are the record owners of the property, currently located in the unincorporated area of the County of Tulare, legally described in Exhibit A and depicted in Exhibit B, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter referred to as the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Property is adjacent to and contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City, but is not situated within the limits of any municipality; and WHEREAS, Owner desires to have the Property annexed to the City and to have the Property zoned as QP (Quasi-Public) zone, R-1-5 (Single-family Residential, 5,000 square feet minimum lot size) zone, R-M-2 (Multi-family Residential, one unit per 3,000 square feet), R-M-3 (Multi-family Residential, one unit per 1,200 square feet), C-MU (Commercial Mixed Use), and C-N (Neighborhood Commercial), which would permit the Property to be used for land uses consistent with the Low Density Residential, Medium Density, High Density Residential, Commercial Mixed Use, Neighborhood Commercial, Public Institutional, and Parks/Recreation General Plan land use designations; and WHEREAS, the Property consists of approximately 468 acres, and is uninhabited; and WHEREAS, proper applications have been filed with the City for approval of the annexation and for the legal subdivision of the lot, as may be required for the Property; and
WHEREAS, the City has, by a resolution requesting initiation of proceedings to annex territory (“Resolution”) adopted on _______________, 2023, initiated proceedings to annex the Property; and
WHEREAS, in certain annexation proceedings Williamson Act issues arise which require indemnification of LAFCO, in said event, City requires indemnification from Developer; and
WHEREAS, Condition No. 6 of Resolution No. 2023-49 initiating annexation requires entry into this Annexation Agreement prior to the City submitting an application to the Local Area Formation Commission to commence the proposed annexation; and WHEREAS, Owner acknowledges that during the term of this Agreement the Property will be subject to all ordinances, resolutions, and other regulations of the City, as they 524
Resolution No. 2023-49
may be amended from time to time, as well as state and federal statutes and regulations, as they may be amended.

WHEREAS, the City is authorized by its police powers to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community, and is entering into this Agreement and executing such authority for said purpose; and
WHEREAS, nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of the City’s legislative, governmental, or police powers to promote and protect the health, safety and welfare of the City and its inhabitants, nor shall this Agreement prohibit the enactment or increase by town of any tax, fee, or charge.

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

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

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

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

II. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF ANNEXATION; PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT Generally, each party to this Agreement is benefited and burdened by detachment from the County and annexation to the City. Owner will obtain a variety of services from City and City will obtain additional tax revenues. City has adopted ordinances, regulations, and policies concerning design, improvement, construction, development and use of property within the City. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of City’s legislative, governmental, or police powers to promote and protect the health, safety, and welfare of City and its inhabitants, nor shall this Agreement prohibit the enactment or increase by City of any tax or fee. The purpose of this Agreement is to spell out additional conditions to which Owner will be subject following annexation and prior to development within the City due to the burden placed on City by Owner’s desired annexation:

A. Water Acquisition Policy: Although City’s current water service provider, California Water Service, continues to issue will-serve letters, City’s Council is aware of the steadily decreasing level of water in the City’s underground water aquifers and has determined that increasing development is contributing to this serious problem. Therefore, City’s Council has studied the issue and investigated possible solutions in order that it may continue to assure citizens that there will be water available to serve the community’s needs. City’s Council is actively engaged in water replenishment activities with the Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District and it has adopted a policy, as set forth in Chapter 16.54 of the Visalia Municipal Code, which requires annexation applicants to convey title to water rights to City upon annexation and/or to pay a fee to City (pursuant 525
Resolution No. 2023-49
to an adopted fee schedule) so that City may acquire water for groundwater replenishment and storage in order to serve new development that comes with annexation, including development of the Property (the “Water Acquisition Policy”). Therefore, Owner agrees that, at the time that LAFCO issues a Certificate of Completion finalizing the annexation (and upon the running of all applicable statutes of limitation related thereto), Owner will comply with the Water Acquisition Policy by entering into an agreement with City to either (i) convey to City those water rights vested in the Property, if any, (ii) agree to pay City a fee in lieu thereof, (iii) agree to some combination of an in lieu fee payment and water right conveyance, or (iv) to comply by any other method allowed by the Water Acquisition Policy, provided that such agreement includes a condition precedent requiring City’s water supplier to agree to serve the Property with potable water in amount sufficient to meet Owner’s reasonably anticipated total water demand for the Property, as determined by a valid water supply assessment prepared pursuant to California Water Code § 10910 et seq. No post-annexation permit or entitlement approvals concerning the Property will be issued by City unless and until Owner complies with the Water Acquisition Policy in a manner consistent with this subsection II(A). Owner agrees that it shall identify all water rights which, to the best of Owner’s knowledge, have been used by Owner or its agents in connection with the Property, regardless of whether they are considered “vested” in the Property, and shall comply with the Water Acquisition Policy by entering into an agreement with City to convey such rights, if any, to City. City shall cooperate with Owner in valuing such water rights for the purposes of determining the amount of offset to be applied against the in lieu fee as required pursuant of the Water Acquisition Policy. Owner further agrees that City shall have first right of refusal in acquiring upon mutually acceptable terms any water rights that Owner owns that may be in addition to those required to meet Owner’s obligations under the Water Acquisition Policy. City agrees that water rights need not be conveyed and in lieu fees shall not be made payable until City’s issuance of one or more parcel maps or final subdivision maps covering the Property and, in the event Owner applies to City for its approval of multiple final maps covering the Property, City agrees such water rights conveyance or fee payment obligation shall be allocated on a pro rata basis to each phase of development covered by each final subdivision map, with conveyance of water rights or payment to be made on a per map basis upon City’s issuance of each final subdivision map covering the Property.

B. General Plan Maintenance Fee: On June 21, 2004, the City adopted (by Resolution 2004-63, as corrected) a General Plan Maintenance Fee. Owner agrees that, at the time LAFCO issues a Certificate of Completion finalizing the annexation (and upon the running of all applicable statutes of limitation related thereto), Owner will enter into an agreement with City to pay the General Plan Maintenance Fee in an amount equal to $445 per acre and no post-annexation permit or entitlement approvals concerning the Property will be issued unless and until said agreement is executed. City agrees that such fee shall not be made payable until City’s issuance of one or more final subdivision maps covering the Property and, in the event Owner applies to City for its approval of multiple final maps covering the Property, City agrees such fee payment obligation shall be allocated on a pro rata basis to each phase of development covered by each final subdivision map, with payment to be made on a per map basis upon City’s 526
Resolution No. 2023-49
issuance of each final subdivision map covering the Property. Owner’s satisfaction of its obligations under this Section II(B) will satisfy any and all of Owner’s obligations related to and arising under the General Plan Maintenance Fee.

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

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

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

IV. DEFAULT, REMEDIES AND ENFORCEMENT
In the event of breach or default of any term, condition, covenant or obligation of this Agreement by either party, the other party may exercise any rights available at law or in equity, including an action for specific performance or other injunctive relief, and all such remedies shall be cumulative. This Agreement shall be enforceable, unless lawfully terminated or cancelled, by any party to the Agreement or any party’s successor in interest, notwithstanding any subsequent changes in any applicable law adopted by the City which alters or amends the laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules or policies frozen by this Agreement.

V. INDEMNIFICATION
Owner agrees to indemnify and hold harmless City and the City’s officers, employees, agents, and contractors, from and against all liability, claims, causes of actions, and demands, including attorney’s fees and court costs, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this Agreement or its operation, or with any other action annexation or other action determined necessary or desirable by the City in order to effectuate the annexation of Owner’s property, or which are in any manner connected with the City’s enforcement of this Agreement. Owner further agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against or at the City’s option to pay the attorney’s fees and court costs, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this Agreement or its operation.
527
Resolution No. 2023-49
VI. MISCELLANEOUS
a. Binding Effect/Covenants to Run With Land. The Parties hereto agree to be bound by this Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, transferees, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. The terms and conditions stated herein shall constitute covenants running with the land.
b. Assignment. Neither party shall assign, delegate or transfer their rights and duties in this Agreement without the written consent of the other party. c. Authorized Signatory. The individuals executing this Agreement, by their signature hereto, declare that they are authorized to, and have the legal power, right and actual authority to bind the party to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
d. Notices. All notices under this Agreement shall be effective upon personal delivery to City, or Owner, as the case may be, three (3) business days after deposit in the United States Mail, postage fully prepaid, addressed to the respective parties as follows:

To the City: City Manager
City of Visalia
220 N. Santa Fe Street
Visalia, CA 93292
With Copy to: Kenneth J. Richardson
City Attorney
Peltzer & Richardson
3746 West Mineral King Avenue
Visalia, CA 93291
To Owner: Hayes Ranch LLC
Attn: Eric Shannon
____________________
____________________
Or such other address as the parties may from time to time designate by giving notice as required hereunder.
e. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the City and Owner as to its subject matter and no prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or affect.
f. Amendment. No part of this Agreement may be modified without the written consent of both parties.
g. Headings. Section headings are provided for organizational purposes only and do not in any manner affect the scope, meaning, or intent of the provisions under the heading.
528
Resolution No. 2023-49
h. No Third Party Beneficiaries Intended. Except as provided herein, the parties of this Agreement do not intend to provide any other party with any benefit or enforceable legal or equitable right or remedy.
i. Exhibits and Recitals. The recitals and any exhibits to this Agreement are fully incorporated by reference and are integral parts of this Agreement. j. Conflict With Laws or Regulations/Severability. This Agreement is subject to all applicable laws and regulations. If any provision(s) of this Agreement is found by any court or other legal authority, or is agreed by the parties, to be in conflict with any code or regulation governing this subject, the conflicting provision(s) shall be considered null and void. If the effect of nullifying any conflicting provision is such that a material benefit of the Agreement to either party is lost, the Agreement may be terminated at the option of the effected party. In all other cases, the remainder of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. k. Waiver. A waiver of any breech of this Agreement by any party shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breech of the same or any other provision of this Agreement.
l. Choice of Law - Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California and any questions arising hereunder shall be construed or determined according to such law. Venue for any legal action arising from or in connection with this Agreement or the Property shall be in Tulare County, California.
m. Attorneys Fees. In the event either party commences any action, arbitration or legal proceedings for the enforcement of this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the court or arbitrator, shall be entitled to recovery of its reasonable fees and costs, including attorneys fees, court costs and arbitration costs incurred in the action brought thereon.
n. No Agency, Joint Venture or Partnership. It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by City and Owner and that Owner is not an agent of City. City and Owner hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection therewith shall be construed as making City and Owner joint venturers or partners.
o. Excusable Delays; Extension of Time of Performance. In the event of delays due to strikes, inability to obtain materials, civil commotion, fire, war, terrorism, lockouts, third-party litigation or other legal challenges regarding the annexation, riots, floods, earthquakes, epidemic, quarantine, freight embargoes, failure of contractors to perform, or other circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the parties and which cause substantially interferes with the ability of either party to perform its obligations under this Agreement, then the time for performance of any such obligation shall be extended for such period of time as 529
Resolution No. 2023-49
the cause of such delay shall exist but in any event not longer than for such period of time.
p. Further Assurances. The parties will execute and deliver, upon demand by the other party, such further documents, instruments and conveyances, and shall take such further actions as such other party may request from time to time to document the transactions set forth herein.
q. Recordation of Agreement; Counterparts. This Agreement, or an abstract of its material terms and conditions shall be recorded by either party in the Official Records of the Tulare County Recorder. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and, when all counterparts are combined, shall constitute a single agreement.
/////
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date set forth next to their signature.

CITY
Date: ____________ By: _________________________________ Leslie Caviglia, City Manager
Attest:

Date: ____________ By: _________________________________ Michelle Nicholson, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:

Date: ____________ By: _________________________________ Kenneth J. Richardson,
City Attorney
OWNER
Date: ____________ By: ________________________________ Eric Shannon
530
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-50

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2021-14: A REQUEST TO AMEND

THE LOCATION AND ACREAGE OF GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS WITHIN 507 ACRES, RESULTING IN THE REDISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENTIAL

LOW, MEDIUM, AND HIGH DENSITY, PARKS / RECREATION, COMMERCIAL

NEIGHBORHOOD, AND PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL DESIGNATIONS, AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMMERCIAL MIXED USE DESIGNATION.

THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 507 ACRES, GENERALLY BOUND BY W. RIGGIN AVENUE TO THE SOUTH, N. AKERS STREET TO THE EAST, N. SHIRK ROAD TO THE WEST AND AVENUE 320 (W. KIBLER AVENUE) TO THE NORTH (APN 077-100-108 AND 077-100-105.) WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14 is a request to amend the location and acreage of General Plan land use designations within 507 acres, resulting in the redistribution of Residential Low, Medium, and High Density, Parks / Recreation, Commercial Neighborhood, and Public Institutional designations, and the establishment of a Commercial Mixed Use designation. The proposed Project is located on approximately 507 acres, generally bound by W. Riggin Avenue to the south, N. Akers Street to the east, N. Shirk Road to the west and Avenue 320 (W. Kibler Avenue) to the north (APN 077-100-108 and 077-100-105.); and
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, which considered impacts from General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14, was released on May 4, 2023, for circulation for a period of 45 days; and, WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, was released on September 1, 2023, and consists of the Draft EIR and the revisions of, and additions to, the Draft EIR; the written comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR; the written responses of the City of Visalia to public comments on the Draft EIR; errata to the foregoing; and other information added by the City of Visalia as specified in the record; and, WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required that, in connection with the approval of a project for which an EIR has been prepared that identified one or more significant effects, the decision making body makes certain findings regarding those effects, which in full are contained in Resolution No. 2023-42 pertaining to the certification of the Final EIR prepared for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia, after 10 days published notice, held a public hearing before said Commission recommending approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14 on September 11, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia, after 10 days published notice, held a public hearing before said Council for General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14 on October 2, 2023; and
531
Resolution No. 2023-50
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council of the City of Visalia considered General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14 to be in accordance with Section

17.54.070 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Visalia based on evidence contained in the staff report and testimony presented at the public hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Visalia finds that Final EIR for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, SCH# 2021050418, was prepared consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act and City of Visalia Environmental Guidelines.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Visalia approves General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14 based on the following specific findings and evidence presented:

1. That the proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

2. That the proposed General Plan Amendment creating 28.7 acres of Commercial Mixed Use and 17.3 acres of Basin will not impose new land uses or development that will adversely affect the subject site or adjacent properties.

3. That the General Plan Amendment will help facilitate additional residential units within the Tier II and III Urban Development Boundaries, and that the proposed tentative subdivision map resulting from the amended General Plan land use map is compatible with the adjacent residential uses.

4. That the project is consistent with the project description contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (SCH# 2021050418) for the project associated with this General Plan Amendment, specifically for development is identified and described in the Carleton Acres Specific Plan, and for which said FEIR is recommended to be certified by the City Council precedent to the Planning Commission and City Council’s consideration of this General Plan Amendment request, consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City of Visalia Environmental Guidelines.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Visalia approves General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14, as depicted per Exhibit “A”, on the real property described herein, in accordance with the terms of this resolution and under the provisions of Section 17.54.070 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Visalia. 532
Resolution No. 2023-50
Exhibit “A”
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2021-14
City Council
Resolution No. 2023-50
533
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2021-13 A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A NEW SPECIFIC PLAN (CARLETON ACRES SPECIFIC PLAN) CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 507

ACRES, INCLUDING DISTRICTS FOR LOW, MEDIUM, AND HIGH DENSITY

RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, PARKS / OPEN SPACE, AND PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL. FULL BUILDOUT OF THE PLAN WILL ACCOMMODATE FOR APPROXIMATELY 3,262 DWELLING UNITS, APPROXIMATELY 205,000 SQUARE FEET OF LEASABLE COMMERCIAL AREA, 17 ACRES OF PARKS / TRAILS / RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, 17 ACRES FOR A

DRAINAGE BASIN, AND A FUTURE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE, TO BE DEVELOPED ACROSS URBAN DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY TIERS I, II, AND III.

THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 507 ACRES, GENERALLY BOUND BY W. RIGGIN AVENUE TO THE SOUTH, N. AKERS STREET TO THE EAST, N. SHIRK ROAD TO THE WEST AND AVENUE 320 (W. KIBLER AVENUE) TO THE NORTH (APN 077-100-108 AND 077-100-105.) WHEREAS, Specific Plan No. 2021-13 is a request to establish a new specific plan (Carleton Acres Specific Plan) consisting of approximately 507 acres, including districts for low, medium, and high density residential, commercial mixed use, neighborhood commercial, parks / open space, and public institutional. Full buildout of the plan will accommodate for approximately 3,262 dwelling units, approximately 205,000 square feet of leasable commercial area, 17 acres of parks / trails / recreational facilities, 17 acres for a drainage basin, and a future elementary school site, to be developed across Urban Development Boundary Tiers I, II, and III. The proposed Project is located on approximately 507 acres, generally bound by W. Riggin Avenue to the south, N. Akers Street to the east, N. Shirk Road to the west and Avenue 320 (W. Kibler Avenue) to the north (APN 077-100-108 and 077-100-105.); and,
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, which considered impacts from Specific Plan No. 2021-13, was released on May 4, 2023, for circulation for a period of 45 days; and, WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, was released on September 1, 2023, and consists of the Draft EIR and the revisions of, and additions to, the Draft EIR; the written comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR; the written responses of the City of Visalia to public comments on the Draft EIR; errata to the foregoing; and other information added by the City of Visalia as specified in the record; and, WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required that, in connection with the approval of a project for which an EIR has been prepared that identified one or more significant effects, the decision making body makes certain findings regarding those effects, which in full are contained in Visalia Planning Commission Resolution No. 2023-42 and the Visalia City Council Resolution pertaining to the certification of the Final EIR prepared for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia, after ten days published notice, held a public hearing before said Commission on September 11, 2023; and
534
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia considered the Carleton Acres Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 2021-13) to be in accordance with Chapter 12.04 of the Municipal Code of the City of Visalia based on evidence contained in the staff report and testimony presented at the public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia adopted Resolution No. 2023-43 recommending approval of Specific Plan No. 2021-13; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia, after ten days published notice, held a 1st reading and public hearing for Specific Plan No. 2021-13 on October 2, 2023; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia finds that Carleton Acres Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 2021-13) has been prepared in accordance with Chapter 12.04 of the Municipal Code of the City of Visalia based on evidence contained in the staff report and testimony presented at the public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia finds that Carleton Acres Specific Plan has been prepared for a new community that includes low density housing, medium density housing, high density housing, commercial, and parks and open space, and that the community is designed to integrate various modes of transportation including automotive, pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit; and, WHEREAS, a development agreement has been prepared for this project in accordance with Land Use Policy LU-P-22, which allows for parcels under common ownership or unified control that are within multiple Urban Growth Boundary Tiers to be annexed and developed in accordance with a master plan and development agreement that details the overall site plan development while maintaining the City of Visalia’s interest in maintaining concentric growth through the Urban Growth Boundary Tiers; and, WHEREAS, currently, the Development is situated in Growth Tiers II and III as defined in the City of Visalia General Plan. In accordance with Policy No. LU-P-22, the Development may be allowed to annex and develop in Tier III while the City is still limiting development approvals to land within the Tier II designation, subject to the terms and conditions stated in this Development Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement includes criteria that specify under what circumstances development in Growth Tier III map occur.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Visalia finds that Final EIR for the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Project, SCH# 2021050418, was prepared consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act and City of Visalia Environmental Guidelines.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Visalia approves Specific Plan No. 2021-13, and authorizes the City to enter into the Development Agreement, subject to making the following findings regarding Specific Plan No. 2021-13, and the following findings pursuant to Section 17.60.030 for development agreements based on the evidence presented:
535
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10

1. That the Carleton Acres Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with adopted local ordinance – in particular, Chapter 12.04 of the Visalia Municipal Code.

2. That the Carleton Acres Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with adopted State law – in particular, Sections 65450 through 65457 of the California Government Code.

3. That the Carleton Acres Specific Plan is consistent with the Visalia General Plan, and in particular, satisfactorily meets the intent of LU-P-22

4. That the Carleton Acres Specific Plan is consistent with the intent of the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, and Zoning Ordinance, and is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

5. That the project is consistent with the project description contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (SCH# 2021050418) for the project associated with this Specific Plan adoption, specifically for development is identified and described in the Carleton Acres Specific Plan, and for which said FEIR is recommended to be certified by the City Council precedent to the Planning Commission and City Council’s consideration of this Specific Plan adoption request, consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City of Visalia Environmental Guidelines.

6. That the proposed development agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the general plan of the City of Visalia, and of the Carleton Acres Specific Plan (being adopted through entitlement Specific Plan No. 2021-13) and of the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14, which have both been submitted simultaneously and in conjunction with the proposed development agreement. As explained in the development agreement itself, it is being prepared for the purpose of meeting General Plan Policy LU-P-22.

7. That the proposed development agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located. Related findings have been made in the Commission’s consideration of Specific Plan No. 2021-13 and General Plan Amendment No. 2021-14, wherein the project’s residential and commercial land uses that are discussed in the development agreement are compatible uses with the land use districts of Residential Low Density, Residential Medium Density, Residential High Density, Commercial Mixed Use, Neighborhood Commercial, Public Institutional, and Parks/Recreation.

8. That the proposed development agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice. The intent of the development agreement is to maintain the City of Visalia’s interest in keeping concentric growth through the Urban Growth Boundary Tiers while honoring land that is under common ownership to annex across growth boundaries so that the owner may have a longer time frame for development and infrastructure planning while maintaining financing interests.

9. That the proposed development agreement will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

10.That the proposed development agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values. 536
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Visalia approves Specific Plan No. 2021-13, as shown on Exhibit “1”, on the real property described herein, in accordance with the terms of this ordinance and under the provisions of Chapter 12.04 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Visalia, subject to the following conditions:

1. That the Carleton Acres Specific Plan be adopted in substantial compliance with the Specific Plan attached as Exhibit “1” of Ordinance No. 2023-10.

2. That the Carleton Acres Specific Plan be developed in accordance with the development agreement, attached as Exhibit “2”, which shall be signed and recorded prior to the recording of any final maps.

3. That the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and its mitigation measures adopted with the Final Environmental Impact Report certified for the project (State Clearinghouse 2021050418) and all conditions of this project be met during construction and upon final occupancy and ongoing operation of the project. 537
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10
EXHBIT “1” OF ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

ADOPTING THE CARLETON ACRES SPECIFIC PLAN AS FOLLOWS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA:

Section 1: The following Specific Plan document is hereby adopted.

Refer to the Specific Plan document found in Attachment 5 of the City Council Agenda Item that includes the Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 2023-10 for Specific Plan No. 2021-13 held on October 2, 2023.
538
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10
Exhibit “2” OF ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

ADOPTING THE CARLETON ACRES SPECIFIC PLAN
Exhibit “2” of Ordinance No. 2023-10 of the Visalia City Council refers to the development agreement exhibit found in Attachment 10 of the City Council Agenda Item that includes the Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 2023-10 for Specific Plan No. 2021-13 held on October 2, 2023.
539
Specific Plan
for
Carleton Acres

VISALIA, CA
ADOPTED OCTOBER XX, 2023
540
Jurisdiction
DeveloperArchitectCivil EnginnerEnviromental PlanningTraffic EngineerLegalCity StaffCommunity Development Director: Paul Bernal Principal Planner: Brandon SmithCity Engineer: Frank SentenoSenior Civil Engineer: Leslie BlairCivil Engineer: Diego CorveraCity Manager: Leslie CavigliaAssistant City Manager: Nick MasciaCity Council Mayor: Brian Poochigian Vice Mayor: Brett Taylor Council Members: Steve Nelsen Liz Wynn Emmanuel Hernandez Soto Planning Commission
Chairperson: Adam Peck
Vice Chairperson: Mary BeatiePlanning Commissioners:

Bill DavisMarvin Hansen
Chris Tavarez
City of VisaliaWest Star Construction, Inc.Hayes Ranch LLCM Architecture and Design4 CreeksCrawford and Bowen PlanningRuettgers and Schuler Civil EngineersWanger, Jones, Helsey PC Project Team

2.0 Special Thank you
Eric Shannon, The Shannon Family, Gary Artis
541
Page | 1
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Table of Contents:

1.0 Introduction pg. 7

1.1 Project Summary pg. 7

1.1.1 Objectives

1.1.2 General Plan Vision

1.1.3 Specific Plan Vision

1.2 Purpose of Specific Plan pg. 12

1.3 Legal pg. 12

1.3.1 Contents

1.3.2 Conformity

1.3.2.1 City of Visalia’s 2030
General Plan

1.3.2.2 California Government
Code

1.3.3 Environmental Impact Report

1.3.4 Approval Authority

1.3.5 Boundaries

1.3.6 Visalia 2030 General Plan Land Use
Designations

1.4 Format of the Specific Plan pg. 17

2.0 Project Description pg. 18

2.1 Project Location pg. 18

2.1.1 Existing Uses

2.1.2 Surrounding Land Use7

2.1.3 Circulation

2.2 Urban Growth Boundary Tiers
and Project Phasing pg. 20

2.3 Proposed Land Use, Open Space,
Utilities and Improvements pg. 20

2.3.1 Phase 1 Land Uses

2.3.2 Phase 2 Land Uses

2.3.3 Site Circulation and Access

2.3.4 Infrastructure

2.3.5 Parks, Trails and Open Space

3.0 Land Use pg. 31

3.1 Introduction pg. 31

3.2 Land Use Concept pg. 31

3.2.1 Residential Community

3.2.2 Commercial Uses

3.2.3 Public Uses

3.2.4 Circulation Concepts

3.2.5 Open Space Concepts

3.3 Project Boundaries and Phases pg. 35

3.3.1 Consistency

3.3.2 Specific Plan Area

3.3.3 Phases

3.3.4 Agriculture

3.4 Land Uses pg. 35

3.4.1 Land Use Designations

3.4.2 Land Use Summary for each Phase

3.4.3 Land Use Regulatory Categories

3.4.4 Street Sections

3.4.5 Levels of Land Use Flexibility

3.5 Development Guidelines pg. 36

3.5.1 Introduction

3.5.2 Land Use Designations by Phase

3.5.2.1 Phase 1

3.5.2.2 Phase 2
542
Page | 2
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

4.0 Commercial pg. 48

4.1 Introduction pg. 48

4.2 Commercial Development Concept pg. 48

4.3 Location of Commercial Uses pg. 48

4.3.1 Location of Commercial Mixed
Land Use

4.3.2 Location of Commercial
Neighborhood Land Use

4.4 Commercial Policies and Standards pg. 50

4.5 Commercial Development Standards pg. 51

5.0 Residential pg. 56

5.1 Introduction pg. 56

5.2 Residential Development Concepts pg. 56

5.3 Residential Locations per Use pg. 57

5.3.1 Low Density (R-1-5) Use

5.3.2 Medium Density (R-M-2 Use)

5.3.3 High Density (R-M-3 Use)

5.4 Residential Policies and Standards pg. 67

5.4.1 Single-Family Residential
Policies and Standards

5.4.2 Multi-Family Residential
Policies and Standards

5.5 Residential Product Type Development
Standards pg. 73

5.5.1 Introduction

5.5.2 Product Type Development Standards

5.5.2.1 1-R Large Lot
Single-Family (R-1-5)

5.5.2.2 2-R Small Lot
Single-Family (R-1-5)

5.5.2.3 3-R Cluster
Single-Family (R-M-2
and R-M-3)

5.5.2.4 4-R Townhouse
(R-M-2 and R-M-3)

5.5.2.5 5-R Duplexes and
Fourplexes
(R-M-2 and R-M-3)

5.5.2.6 6-R Apartment Buildings
(R-M-3)

5.5.3 Model Good Neighbor Policies

5.6 Residential Architectural Design pg. 81
Guidelines

5.6.1 Introduction

5.6.2 General Residential Standards

5.6.3 Residential Architectural
Guidelines

5.6.3.1 Standards per
Architectural Styles

5.6.3.2 Allowable Styles

5.6.3.3 Architectural Standard
for Each Style

6.0 Landscape pg. 90

6.1 Introduction pg. 90

6.2 Design Principles pg. 90

6.3 Street Plan pg. 91

6.3.1 Introduction

6.3.2 Arterial Streets

6.3.2.1 West Riggin Avenue
543
Page | 3
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

6.3.2.2 North Akers Street

6.3.2.3 North Shirk Street

6.3.2.4 Ave 320

6.3.3 Two Lane Collectors

6.3.3.1 Shannon Parkway

6.3.3.2 North Roeben Street

6.3.4 Local Streets

6.3.5 Commercial Drive Aisles

6.3.6 Residential Block Entrances

6.4 Park Design Plan pg. 93

6.4.1 Introduction

6.4.2 Design Concepts

6.4.2.1 Modoc Greenway

6.4.2.2 Parks

6.5 Edges and Buffers Standards pg. 96

6.5.1 Introduction

6.5.2 Design Concept

6.5.2.1 W. Riggin Ave., N. Shirk
St., Ave. 320, Shannon
Parkway and
N. Roeben St.

6.5.2.2 Commercial Uses

6.5.2.3 Modoc Greenway

6.6 Water Storage/Recharge Basin Plan pg. 97

6.7 Other Open Spaces pg. 97

6.7.1 Community Sports

6.7.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle
Circulation

6.8 Site Landscape Standards pg. 98

6.8.1 Site Landscape Standards

6.8.2 Off-Street Parking

6.8.3 Service/Loading Area and Trash
Enclosure Standards

6.8.4 Wall and Fence Standards

6.8.5 Paving Design Standards

6.8.6 Plant Material and Planting
Design

6.8.7 Irrigation Standards

6.8.8 Landscape Maintenance
Standards

6.8.9 Street Furniture Standards

6.9 Signage Standards pg. 101

6.9.1 Introduction

6.9.2 Signage Design Theme

6.9.3 General Signage Standards

6.9.4 Residential Entrance Signs

6.9.5 Monumental/Theme Signs

6.9.6 Master Sign Program

6.9.7 Commercial Signs

6.10 Exterior Lighting Standards pg. 110

6.10.1 Introduction

6.10.2 Lighting Quality

6.10.3 Lighting Spillover

6.10.4 Lighting Type

6.10.5 Residential Street Lights

6.10.6 Secondary Lighting

6.11 Landscaping and Lighting Act District pg. 111
544
Page | 4
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

7.0 Infrastructure pg. 117

7.1 Introduction pg. 117

7.2 Circulation Master Plan pg. 117

7.2.1 Objectives

7.2.2 Vehicular Circulation

7.2.3 Pedestrian Circulation

7.2.4 Bikeways

7.2.5 Parking

7.2.6 Public Transportation

7.3 Grading Master Plan pg. 138

7.3.1 Existing Conditions

7.3.2 Proposed Conditions

7.4 Drainage Master Plan pg. 138

7.4.1 Existing Conditions

7.4.2 Proposed Conditions

7.5 Water Master Plan pg. 142

7.5.1 Existing Conditions

7.5.2 Proposed Conditions

7.6 Sewer Master Plan pg. 144

7.6.1 Existing Conditions

7.6.2 Proposed Conditions

7.7 Electrical Master Plan pg. 146

7.7.1 Existing Conditions

7.7.2 Proposed Conditions

7.8 Gas Master Plan pg. 146

7.8.1 Existing Conditions

7.8.2 Proposed Conditions

8.0 Implementation pg. 147

8.1 Introduction pg. 147

8.1.1 Application

8.2 Purpose pg. 147

8.3 Responsibilities pg. 147

8.3.1 Master Developer
Responsibilities

8.3.2 Builder/Developer
Responsibilities

8.3.3 City Responsibilities

8.4 Approvals pg. 148

8.4.1 Specific Plan Approvals

8.4.2 Individual Project Development
Approvals

8.4.3 Other Public Agencies Approval
and Consultation

8.5 Project Review and Approval Process pg. 149

8.5.1 Project and Subdivision Map
Approval Process

8.5.2 Interpretations and
Amendments

8.5.3 Approval Process for Individual
Projects

8.5.4 Street Approval

8.5.5 Signage Approval

8.5.6 Architectural Board Approval

8.5.7 Other Approval Items

8.6 Development Phases pg. 154

8.7 Public Facilities Financing pg. 154

8.7.1 Landscaping and Lighting Act District
545
Page | 5
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figures:

Introduction

1.A Regional Location Map pg. 10

1.B City Boundary Map pg. 11

1.C Existing General Plan Land Use Map pg. 16
Project Description

2.A Aerial Site Vicinity Map pg. 19
2-1 Table Summary of Proposed Land Uses pg. 22

2.B City’s Tier Boundaries pg. 23

2.C Conceptual Use Plan pg. 24

2.D Open Space Plan pg. 30
Land Use

3.A Vehicular Circulation pg. 33

3.B Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation pg. 34
Commercial

4.A Commercial Mixed-Use Conceptual
Illustration pg. 52

4.B Commercial Mixed-Use Conceptual
Rendering pg. 53

4.C Commercial Neighborhood Conceptual
Illustration pg. 54

4.D Commercial Conceptual Design Illustrations pg. 55
Residential

5.A Phase 1 Low Density Conceptual
Illustrations pg. 58

5.B Phase 2 Low Density Conceptual
Illustrations pg. 59

5.C Phase 1 Medium Density Conceptual
Illustrations pg. 60

5.D Phase 2 Medium Density Conceptual
Illustrations pg. 61,62

5.E Phase 1 High Density Conceptual
Illustrations pg. 63,64

5.F Phase 2 High Density Conceptual
Illustrations pg. 65,66

5.G 3-R Single Family Medium Density
Conceptual Street pg. 72

5.H 3-R Single Family Medium Density
Conceptual Rear Garages pg. 72
Landscape

6.A Residential Conceptual Entrance pg. 93

6.B Park Conceptual Designs pg. 95

6.C Modoc Greenway Conceptual Designs pg. 97

6.D Wall Detail pg. 99

6.E Residential Entrance Conceptual Plan pg. 102

6.F Residential Entrance Conceptual
Designs pg. 103

6.G Monumental/Theme Signage
Conceptual Locations pg. 105

6.H Monumental/Theme Signage
Conceptual Designs pg. 106

6.I Commercial Signage Conceptual
Locations pg. 108

6.J Commercial Signage Conceptual
Designs pg. 109

6.K Tree Selection Preference pg. 112

6.L Plant Selection Preference pg. 113

6.M Shrub Selection Preference pg. 114

6.N Grass, Groundcover and Vine
Preference pg. 115

6.O Landscape Images pg. 116
546
Page |
6 Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________08-29-2023 Infrastructure

7.A Vehicular Circulation pg. 118

7.B W. Riggin Ave. Cross Section pg.120

7.C W. Riggin Ave. Plan View pg.120

7.D N. Shirk St. Cross Section pg.121

7.E N. Shirk St. Plan View pg.121

7.F Ave. 320 Cross Section pg. 122

7.G Ave. 320 Plan View pg. 122

7.H N. Akers St. Cross Section pg. 123

7.I N. Akers St. Plan View pg. 124

7.J N. Roeben St. Cross Section at
Proposed High School pg. 126

7.K N. Roeben St. Plan View at
Proposed High School pg. 126

7.L N. Roeben St. Cross Section pg. 127

7.M N. Roeben St. Plan View pg. 127

7.N Shannon Parkway Cross Section at
Phase 1 Residential pg. 128

7.O Shannon Parkway Plan View at
Phase 1 Residential pg. 129

7.P Sedona Ave. Cross Section pg.131

7.Q Sedona Ave. Plan View pg.131

7.R Local Street with Trail Cross Section pg. 132

7.S Local Street with Trail Plan View pg. 132

7.T Conceptual Roundabout Plan Views pg. 133

7.U Conceptual Roundabout Views pg. 134

7.V Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation pg. 136

7.W Storm Drain Master Planpg.140

7.X Storm Drain Basin Calculations pg. 141

7.Y Water Infrastructure Master Plan pg. 143

7.Z Sanitary Sewer Master Plan pg. 145
547
Carleton Acres has a rich history deeply rooted in
agriculture. The property was originally owned and cultivated by Helen Hayes. Subsequently, it was purchased by Carleton Shannon, who had a strong farming background within the San Joaquin Valley. Carleton, also known as Dick, took over the land and continued its agricultural legacy.Under Carleton Shannon's ownership, the land was used for a variety of agricultural activities. A significant portion of the property was dedicated to permanent wine grape cultivation and row crops like cotton and grains are also grown on the property.Carleton Shannon's family has a long history in farming, indicating a generational commitment to agriculture in the region. Carleton himself had a profound passion for farming and the outdoors. He found great enjoyment in activities like hunting, fishing, and flying, which further connected him to the land and the natural environment. He was actively involved in the community, being part of various organizations, and his family held a special place in his heart.The transition from agricultural land to a vibrant new community represents a significant step in the evolution of the area, honoring its history while embracing the vision for a thriving and inclusive neighborhood within the City of Visalia.

Introduction

1.0 548
Page | 7
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

1.0 Introduction:

1.1 PROJECT SUMMARY
Carleton Acres is a 507-acre new community situated in the northern part of the City of Visalia, located in Tulare County. See Figures 1.A and 1.B. As a master-planned mixed-use community, Carleton Acres is designed to have its own distinct identity within Visalia while fostering a strong neighborhood character and promoting pedestrian-friendly activities.

Carleton Acres incorporates a mix of land uses, such as residential and commercial areas. The commercial zones are planned to serve the needs of both the neighborhood and the broader north Visalia area, enhancing the overall livability and economic vitality of the region.

In response to the demand for affordable housing and single-family residences in the City of Visalia, Carleton Acres is designed to accommodate these needs. The presence of the existing Ridgeview Middle School, a planned high school, and an elementary school enhances the appeal of the area for residential growth, making it an ideal location for families and individuals seeking a desirable living environment.

The development objectives of Carleton Acres are shaped by a consideration of the community's requirements, the potential of the site, and the long-term goals outlined in the City of Visalia's 2030 General Plan. By aligning with the city's broader vision, the development of Carleton Acres is more likely to contribute positively to the overall growth and prosperity of Visalia.

Overall, Carleton Acres represents an opportunity for the City of Visalia to create a well-planned, inclusive, and thriving community that meets the needs of its residents and enhances the city's overall quality of life.

1.1.1 Objectives
The following are the Carleton Acres objectives:
 To provide a mixed-use development at pricing appropriate for the market, in a growing area of the City of Visalia that satisfies the City of Visalia’s policies, regulations and expectations as defined in the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and other applicable plans, documents, and
programs adopted by the City.
 To provide a variety of housing opportunities with a range of densities, styles, sizes and values that will be designed to satisfy existing and future demand for quality housing in the area.
 To provide a residential development that assists the City in meeting its General Plan and Housing Element requirements and objectives.
 To provide conveniently-located commercial development to serve north Visalia residents and the Carleton Acres
development in a growing area of the City of Visalia.
 To provide a sense of community and walkability within the development through the use of street patterns, parks/open space, landscaping and other project amenities.

1.1.2 General Plan Vision
The success of Carleton Acres as a new community relies on several critical factors to ensure its compatibility, planned growth, collaboration between the Developer and the City of Visalia, and adherence to the City's General Plan goals.
549
Page | 8
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023  Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses: The development of Carleton Acres must take into consideration the existing and planned land uses in the surrounding areas. This includes the nearby school site and existing residential neighborhoods to the south and east. Ensuring that Carleton Acres integrates seamlessly with its surroundings will contribute to a
harmonious and well-integrated community.
 Phased Growth: The project should be carefully planned with a phased approach. Phase 1 should focus on initial
development while ensuring that infrastructure and
amenities are adequately established. As the community
grows, Phase 2 towards the north can be implemented. This approach allows for orderly and controlled expansion while maintaining the quality of development.
 Cooperative Working Relationship: Collaboration between the Developer and the City of Visalia is essential for the successful implementation of Carleton Acres. Cooperation between both parties will help address challenges and
ensure that the project aligns with the city's vision and requirements.
 Implementation of General Plan Goals: Carleton Acres must align with the goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the City of Visalia's General Plan. This ensures that the
community's development is in line with the city's long-term vision and planning priorities. Adhering to the General Plan also helps maintain consistency with other planning
documents and promotes sustainable and well-balanced
growth.

By addressing these key factors, Carleton Acres can establish itself as a well-planned, compatible, and integrated community that fosters a high quality of life for its residents while contributing positively to the broader City of Visalia's vision and objectives.

1.1.3 Specific Plan Vision
 The development of Carleton Acres as a complete
community is characterized by its comprehensive approach to providing a wide range of facilities and amenities:
residential neighborhoods, mixed-use commercial,
neighborhood commercial, existing middle school, planned high school, future elementary school and a complete system of parks & bike paths.
 At full buildout uses will be linked by a bike path along Modoc Greenway, pedestrian and vehicle circulation and utility networks.
 The site plan and circulation network of Carleton Acres are thoughtfully designed to prioritize pedestrian use and create a walkable community. This approach aims to enhance the quality of life for residents by providing easy access to various amenities and destinations within the neighborhood.
 At the heart of Carleton Acres lies the residential
neighborhoods, forming the central focus of the community.

These neighborhoods are designed to be diverse, offering a wide range of housing options to accommodate different
lifestyles and preferences. The overall goal is to create a community that reflects the character and quality of Visalia while adhering to the objectives outlined in the City of Visalia's 2030 General Plan.
 Mixed-use commercial areas within Carleton Acres adds a vital component to the community's overall functionality and attractiveness. These commercial spaces are designed to accommodate a diverse range of businesses and services, 550
Page | 9
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 meeting the needs of both Carleton Acres residents and the broader Visalia community.
 Neighborhood commercial retail and restaurants within Carleton Acres serves as a valuable amenity for both the residents of the community and the surrounding
neighborhoods in northwestern Visalia.
 Community and publicity-oriented facilities will include three schools, passive and active parks of varying sizes and sites.  The attractive landscape design throughout the open spaces in Carleton Acres plays a crucial role in unifying the entire community and creating a cohesive and inviting
environment. The landscape design is carefully planned to enhance the aesthetics of the community while fostering pedestrian enjoyment, community interaction, and
recreational opportunities.
 The landscape design along the existing Modoc Ditch and proposed bioswales is important as it not only preserves the ecological significance of the Ditch but also enhances its functionality and aesthetic appeal. In preserving the
important role of the Ditch, it will be enhanced with riparian landscaping along the bioswales and a bike/walking path connecting one side of the development to the other.
551
Page | 10
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 1.A
Regional Location Map

552
Page | 11
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 1.B
City Boundary
Map
553
Page | 12
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

1.2 PURPOSE OF SPECIFIC PLAN
The Carleton Acres Specific Plan is a comprehensive planning document provided to the City of Visalia to guide the development of the Carleton Acres new community. It outlines the guidelines and regulations for land use and sets the vision and goals for the future development of the area.

The Specific Plan includes a conceptual land use plan as well as other development standards. The intention is for the Specific Plan to be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City of Visalia’s 2030 General Plan. Future development will utilize the Specific Plan’s vision and goals. As developments progress the multiuse communities shall be cohesive and desirable.

The Specific Plan establishes standards and ideas for development.

Design and engineering of the infrastructure and projects throughout Carleton Acres will be required. Throughout this document, the Carleton Acres Specific Plan may also be alternately referred to as the “Specific Plan” or “Plan.”
The Carleton Acres Specific Plan serves as a critical tool for developers, city officials, and other stakeholders to ensure that the future growth and development of the Carleton Acres community follow a well-defined and coordinated path. By adhering to the plan's vision and goals, the community will become a cohesive and desirable place to live and work.

1.3 LEGAL

1.3.1 Contents
This Specific Plan contains information and diagrams that provide detail for the following:
 Location of land uses within the Specific Plan area.
 Development standards, design guidelines and phasing.  Location of streets, sewage, drainage, water, and other facilities planned to support the land uses within the Specific Plan.
 Implementation measures including responsibilities,
approvals and financing.

The Carleton Acres Specific Plan includes the layout and location of land uses as well as streets allowed in the Specific Plan. When land uses are sub-divided, the developers shall provide detailed subdivision maps that will include street alignments and residential lot configurations.

1.3.2 Conformity
The Carleton Acres Specific Plan conforms with City of Visalia’s 2030 General Plan and the California Government Code.

1.3.2.1 City of Visalia’s 2030 General Plan:

The Carleton Acres Specific Plan aligns with the City of Visalia’s 2030 General Plan, which serves as the comprehensive guide for community development across the entire city. The Plan consists of nine chapters: land use, circulation, open space, conservation, noise, safety, air quality and greenhouse gases. It also includes historic preservation and parks, schools, community, and utilities. 554
Page | 13
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023  Policy LU-P-21 allows an approved master-planned site to be annexed before development is permitted in Tier 2 or Tier 3.

Annexations are to be reviewed with the regulations and polices in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Governments Reorganization Act of 2000 and the Tulare County Local
Agency Formation Commission Policy and Procedure Manual regarding development and inventory of existing vacant land designed for urban uses in the city limits.
 LU-P-22 allows for City Council to approve master-planned developments for sites under single ownership or unified control, which may include developable land within multiple Tiers. The Development Agreement is a separate document that details the overall development, density, phasing, infrastructure needs and financing. As well as outlines the responsibilities of each party. The Development Agreement and the Specific Plan have a consistent vision with Visalia’s General Plan and the City’s interest in growth through
phasing.
 LU-O-16 the Specific Plan will provide a high quality of life ensuring that each Low Density Residential neighborhood is complete, is walkable to parks, and has a range of housing types. Carleton Acres will be its own unique community
character that is inspired by Visalia.
 T-P-49 the purpose to minimize student crossings of major arterial streets and facilitate students’ safe travel to school on foot. The existing, planned and future school site’s circulation has been a focus to make circulation a success for the school sites and residents. The circulation also connects to existing residential south of the project.
 T-P-3 is the objective to design and build future roadways that complement and enhance the existing network. Streets shall be continuous for the vehicular and pedestrian
network. Local streets shall be narrow and have traffic slowing features at intersections.
 T-P-41 integrate a bicycle transportation system into new developments. The Modoc Ditch along N. Akers St. and
Shannon Parkway will provide a trail for bikes and
pedestrians. The pocket parks and trails throughout Carleton Acres will satisfy the general plan objective of having different recreation amenities for all ages. The green spaces promote health and wellness throughout the community.
 The Specific Plan addresses the 6 statements about new neighborhood development:
o LU-O-22 encourages compact developments
that allow local streets within new
developments to be self-sufficient.
o LU-O-20 planned density allows for new
development to be self-sufficient, paying for
infrastructure & open space.
o LU-O-25, LU-P-48 ensures interconnected local
street, pedestrian and bicycle circulation.
o LU-O-23 provides a range of housing types and
prices.
o PSCU-P-7 amenities for all residents with open
space and parks.
o Lastly provide additional revenues that would
support all services within the area to be
developed.

1.3.2.2 California Government Code:

The Carleton Acres Specific Plan has been established with the requirements of California Government Code Sections 65450-65457 555
Page | 14
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Article 8 Specific Plans. A Specific Plan allows an area to be developed whose development guidelines replace any prior zoning. A greater level of detail adds value to the community area. Specific Plans shall contain text and diagrams specifying all of the following in detail:
 Location and extent of land uses including open spaces.  Location and extent of major infrastructure to support land uses.
 Standards and criteria for development.
 Program of implementation measures.
 A statement of the correlation of the Specific Plan to the General Plan.
 Any other subjects by the planning agency for the purpose of the General Plan.

1.3.3 Environmental Impact Report
The Environmental Impact Report certified for Carleton Acres is the only environmental document for the Specific Plan and all individual projects within the Specific Plan area. The City of Visalia, as the Lead Agency, prepared the EIR in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. An Initial study, Negative Declaration, or other environmental analysis are not required for individual projects within Carleton Acres Specific Plan.

1.3.4 Approval Authority
The City of Visalia has authority for approval of the Specific Plan as a whole and approval of the individual development projects within the Specific Plan. Approvals requested from the City may include but are not limited to:
 Approvals related to the Specific Plan as a whole:
o Approval of the Specific Plan and amendments to the
Specific Plan.
o Approval of Development Agreement
o General Plan Changes
o Zone Changes
o Approval of Lot Line Adjustments
 Approvals related to individual development projects within the Specific Plan Area:
o Tentative Subdivision Maps
o Commercial Tentative Parcel Maps
o Amendments to the Specific Plan
o Annexations
o Building and Grading Permits
o Major and Minor Modifications to Specific Plan

1.3.5 Boundaries
Figure 1.B indicates the legal boundaries referred to by the Specific Plan.

1. City of Visalia Boundaries: Approximately 29.3 acres (APN:
077-100-105) of the project site are located within the City of Visalia. The remaining 478 acres (APN: (APN: 077-100-088) of the site are outside the City limits in unincorporated territory, County of Tulare.

2. City of Visalia Sphere of Influence Line (Urban Growth Development Tiers): The entire Carleton Acres site is located within the City of Visalia’s Urban Growth Development Tiers and the Sphere of Influence Line for the City of Visalia.

Approximately 29 acres are located within Tier 1.

Approximately 149 acres are located within Tier 2 and 329 acres located within Tier 3.
556
Page | 15
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 This Specific Plan will serve as the “zoning” entitlements for the site.

1.3.6 Visalia 2030 General Plan Land Use Designations
Exhibit 1.C. indicates the City of Visalia’s 2030 General Plan existing land use designations for the site. Carlton Acres is currently designated for development of Commercial Neighborhood,
Residential Low Density, Residential Medium Density, Residential High Density and Public/Instructional. All land uses remain the same acre per acre with the addition of Mixed-Use Commercial (Residential Low Density was reduced) see Figure 2.C for proposed land use locations.
557
Page | 16
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 1.C
Existing General Plan Land Use Map
558
Page | 17
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

1.4 FORMAT OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN
The Specific Plan is formatted for Builders/Developers to reference information that they will need for public agency approval of all development projects within Carleton Acres. The Specific Plan has established design standards and procedures with the intent for Builders/Developers to provide design quality and a distinguished development, while also providing flexibility.
 Section 1: Introduction: The Introduction outlines the purpose of the Specific Plan and defines the authority of the Plan and its relationship to the City of Visalia 2030 General Plan.
 Section 2: Project Description: Describes the location and existing conditions. Also, proposed land uses are described by Phases.
 Section 3: Land Use: This section addresses the different land uses concepts, project boundaries and phases, land use
designations, and development guidelines for each land use.  Section 4: Commercial: This section outlines the
development standards and design elements for the
commercial areas of Carleton Acres in Phase 1 and Phase 2.  Section 5: Residential: This section details the residential development concept, development standards and product
types. It defines the character and guidelines for the Specific Plan’s residential neighborhoods for Phase 1 and Phase 2.  Section 6: Landscape: This section defines Carleton Acres’ landscape design concept for the Specific Plan in its entirety, neighborhood parks, trails, Modoc Greenway and for the
streetscapes. It concludes with landscape lighting and
signage design standards and guidelines.
 Section 7: Infrastructure: This section describes the infrastructure components: vehicular circulation, grading, drainage, water, sewer, gas, electric and water quality, including storm water control.
 Section 8: Implementation: This section defines the
responsibilities of the City, Master Developer, and
Builder/Developer. It also includes the approval process and public financing.

Note that terms used throughout shall take their commonly accepted meaning. When there are conflicts between the definitions in the Specific Plan and Zoning Ordinance, those in the Specific Plan shall take precedence.
559
The design of Carleton Acres will not only prioritize
aesthetics but also serve as a meaningful tribute to the land's history and Carleton Shannon's farming legacy. By incorporating elements that reflect the area's agricultural heritage and his passion for farming, the community will be a distinctive and special place that honors its past while embracing its future.The incorporation of design elements reminiscent of cotton hauling wagons and cotton gins adds a nostalgic and authentic touch to the overall landscape of Carleton Acres. This design choice not only pays tribute to the area's agricultural past but also contributes to the cohesive theme throughout the development.Using light-colored stone in the landscape design, akin to the color of white cotton, further reinforces the homage to the crop that once flourished in the area. This choice of stone brings a soft and elegant touch to the surroundings, complementing the other design elements and creating a cohesive and harmonious environment.By thoughtfully incorporating these design features that draw inspiration from the cotton industry's history, Carleton Acres creates a unique and evocative atmosphere that celebrates the region's agricultural heritage. The landscape and architectural choices intertwine with the community's identity, fostering a sense of pride and appreciation for the land's past while creating a beautiful and inviting place to call home.

Project Description

2.0 560
Page | 18
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 Project Location
The proposed Project is located on approximately 507-acres in the northern area of the City of Visalia, California and is generally bound by W. Riggin Avenue to the south, N. Akers Street to the east, N. Shirk Road to the west and Avenue 320 (W. Kibler Avenue) to the north.

The site is comprised of two parcels: APN 077-100-088 and APN 077- 100-105. APN 077-100-088 consists of approximately 478 acres and is within an unincorporated area of Tulare County while APN 077- 100-105 consists of approximately 29.3 acres and is within the City limits of Visalia. The entire site is within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City of Visalia and the site has historically been used for agricultural purposes. However, the site has been designated by the City’s General Plan for residential, commercial, public/institutional and park/recreation uses. Refer to Figure 1.A: Regional Location Map, Figure 1.B: City Boundary Map, Figure 1.C: Existing Land Use Designations, and Figure 2.A: Aerial Site Vicinity Map
The project is located on significant intersections in the City of Visalia.

W. Riggin Avenue serves as a connection between the industrial uses to the West and the residential and commercial uses to the East. As Visalia’s industrial area has expanded on the West, W. Riggin Avenue has become a major connecting point for residents. N. Shirk Road and N. Akers Street are also important arterial streets.

2.1.1 Existing Uses
The project site land is currently utilized for agricultural field crop production. The site is being farmed with a rotation of row crops and wine grapes.

The site is nearly level and because of its current agricultural production there is little natural vegetation. The elevation is approximately 306 to 314 feet above mean sea level.

2.1.2 Surrounding Land Uses
The proposed Project site is located in a developing area of the City of Visalia. Currently, Ridgeview Middle School is located adjacent to and west of Akers Street and would abut the proposed Project site.

In addition, the City is currently planning a new high school that will be constructed adjacent to and west of Ridgeview Middle School and would be surrounded by the proposed Project to the north, west and south. Land uses of adjacent parcels surrounding the Project site are as follows:

Surrounding Land Uses
Location Existing Land
Use
North Dairy Farm /
Agriculture
South Residential / Church /
Water Storage Tank
West Dairy Farm /
Agriculture
East Agriculture
561
Page | 19
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 2.A
Aerial Site Vicinity Map
562
Page | 20
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

2.1.3 Circulation
W. Riggin Avenue is an arterial street that is very important in the north Visalia area to connect the east and west of the City. Currently Riggin is a two-lane street. The City of Visalia Circulation Element plans for Riggin Avenue to be four-lane street with median. Shirk and Akers are also two-lane streets that the City plans to be a four-lane street. Sedona Avenue is currently partially built with an existing roundabout.

2.2 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY TIERS AND PROJECT

PHASING
The City of Visalia’s General Plan includes a three-tier system to account for future growth (Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3). Thresholds were set on residential permits, commercial square-footage, industrial square-footage and regional commercial square-footage. Tier 1 currently allows development to occur within the Tier 1 boundary, while Tiers 2 and 3 can be developed after certain thresholds are met during/after buildout of Tier 1. Under the City of Visalia’s General Plan Policy LU-P-22, an approved specific-planned site can be annexed before development is permitted in Tier 2 or Tier 3.

Annexations are reviewed within the context of the regulations and polices in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Governments Reorganization Act of 2000 and the Tulare County Local Agency Formation Commission Policy and Procedure Manual regarding development and inventory of existing vacant land designed for urban uses in the City limits. The City of Visalia’s General Plan Policy LU-P-22 allows the City Council to approve master-planned developments for sites under single ownership or unified control, which may include developable land within multiple Tiers. A Development Agreement will be prepared, which is a separate document that details the overall development, density, phasing, infrastructure needs and financing, as well as outlines the responsibilities of each party. The Development Agreement and the Specific Plan have a consistent vision with Visalia’s General Plan and the City’s interest in growth through phasing. Figure 2.B identifies the City’s Tier boundaries relative to the Project site.

The Project is proposed to be built out in two phases as identified in Table 2-1 and as shown in Figure 2.C. Although the exact timing of construction and buildout will be determined by market conditions, the Project Applicant and the City, it is anticipated that the Project would be built out over a +15-year period with approximately 100 low-density residential units per year on average with the remaining buildout to be determined by demand.

2.3 PROPOSED LAND USE, OPEN SPACE, UTILITIES AND

IMPROVEMENTS
The Project Applicant is proposing a Specific Plan to develop approximately 507-acres of land into a mixed-use development. The Project will feature a variety of uses including single-family residential, multi-family housing, commercial, educational, and parks/trails facilities. The proposed Project components are described below. Refer also to Table 2-1: Summary of Proposed Land Uses and Figure 2.C: Conceptual Use Plan.

Residential
The proposal features several different types of housing for a total of up to 3,262 residential units at buildout which is broken down as follows:
 Low Density Residential: Up to 1,592 units
 Medium Density Residential: 758 units
 High Density Residential: 912 units
563
Page | 21
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 It should be noted that the number of proposed units for low density residential portion of the development may be lower than 1,592 units depending on final configuration of the lots. In addition, the

13.0 acres currently shown in Figure 2.B for a new elementary school could potentially be converted to low density residential. Therefore, for purposes of providing the maximum number of potential residential units, a total of 65 units was added to the total for both phases (13.0 acres X 5.0 units per acre = 65 units) for a maximum development potential of 1,592 low density units.

Commercial
The proposed Project includes up to 35.1 acres of commercial development in two locations within the Project for a total of approximately 205,000 square feet of gross leasable commercial area. The commercial developments will occur in the proposed Mixed Use Commercial Zone and the Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The maximum size for a single or anchor tenant shall be 170,000 square feet within the Mixed Use Commercial Zone. The first commercial area consists of up to 28.7 acres of Mixed-Use Commercial at the intersection of Riggin Avenue and Shirk Road.

Anticipated uses at this location may include development such as a Costco, gas station, car wash, drug store, retail, restaurants (including drive-throughs), and similar uses. The second consists of up to 6.4 acres of Commercial Neighborhood at the intersection of Akers and Ave. 320. Anticipated uses at this location may include development such as retail, services and restaurants. The commercial facilities are located to provide efficient accessibility to residents of the Project and the surrounding areas.

Other Project Components
Other proposed uses include approximately 13.0 acres for a potential site for a future elementary school, 17.3 acres for a drainage basin, and approximately 17.3 acres of parks/trails/recreational facilities.

Various other infrastructure improvements (water, stormwater and wastewater infrastructure, roadway improvements, and related improvements) will be required by the Project. Refer to the descriptions of these components later in this Chapter.

The Project is proposed to be built out in two phases as identified in Table 2-1 and as shown in Figure 2.B. Refer to the subsection titled Visalia Urban Growth Boundary Tiers and Project Phasing for a description of proposed Project phasing.

564
Page | 22
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Table 2-1
Summary of Proposed Land Uses
Phase 1

Total
Acreage

Park / Rec
Acreage*
Number
of Units

Proposed
Density
High
Density
Residential
(APN: 077-
100-088)

9.7 - 146 ~15 units/acre
High
Density
Residential
(APN: 077-
100-105)

29.3 0.8 440 ~15 units/acre
Medium
Density
Residential

9.1 0.1 91 ~10 units/acre
Low
Density
Residential
100.9 2.6 505** ~5 units/acre
Mixed Use
Commercial 28.7 - N/A -

Phase 1
Total:
177.7

3.5 1,182

Phase 2

Total
Acreage
Park / Rec
Acreage* Number of
Units
Proposed
Density
High Density
Residential 21.7 0.2 326 ~ 15 units/acre
Medium Density
Residential 66.7 3.4 667 ~10 units/acre
Low Density
Residential 204.5 9.0 1,022** ~5 units/acre
Neighborhood
Commercial 6.4 0.3 N/A -
Basin 17.3 - N/A -
Public/Institutional
(or LDR)*** 13.0 0.9 N/A (or 65)
~5
units/acre***

Phase 2 Total: 329.6 13.8 2,080***

Total for Both
Phases: 507.3 17.3* 3,262***
* Park / Recreation acreage is included within each land use designation’s “total acreage”. ** The number of proposed units for low density residential portion of the development may be lower than 1,527 units depending on final configuration of the lots. *** Includes 65 units of low density residential in place of the 13.0 acre elementary school. 565
Page | 23
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 2.B
City’s Tier Boundaries
566
Page | 24
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 2.C
Conceptual Use Plan
567
Page | 25
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

2.3.1 Phase 1 Land Uses
Phase 1 includes all of APN 077-100-105 (29.3 acres) and a portion of APN 077-100-088 (148.4 acres). For APN 077-100-105, the site is within the Tier 1 boundary and is currently designated by the City’s General Plan for High Density Residential. The Project intends to retain this land use designation and to develop the site as follows:
 29.3 acres of High Density Residential (440 units)
For APN 077-100-088, Phase 1 development only includes the southern portion of the parcel (approximately 148.4 acres) and is included in the Tier 2 boundary. This portion is proposed to be developed with a variety of uses as follows:
 9.7 acres of High Density Residential (146 units)
 9.1 acres of Medium Density Residential (91 units)
 100.9 acres of Low Density Residential (up to 505 units)  28.7 acres of Commercial Mixed Use
For APN: 077-100-088, the Low Density Residential housing will be constructed first. Proceeding into Phase 2 is only determined by the completion of Low Density Residential. It is not dependent on the completion of Medium and High Density Residential or Commercial uses.

2.3.2 Phase 2 Land Uses
Phase 2 includes the northern 329.6 acres of APN 077-100-088 and is within the Tier 3 boundary. This portion is proposed to be developed with a variety of uses as follows:
 21.7 acres of High Density Residential (326 units)
 66.7 acres of Medium Density Residential (667 units)
 204.5 acres of Low Density Residential (up to 1,022 units)  6.4 acres of Neighborhood Commercial
 17.3 acres of Basin
 13.0 acres of Public/Institutional
The timing of development and installation of infrastructure for Phase 1 and Phase 2 will be identified in the Development Agreement.

2.3.3 Site Circulation and Access
The overall layout of the proposed Project is block form, with shortened roadway lengths and cul-de-sacs in order to provide limited thru-traffic and to create a walkable urban environment. The site has been designed with 13 points of ingress and egress.

Additional access points will be provided for the commercial uses that are proposed to occur at the southwest corner and northeast corner of the site. The following is a summary of roadway improvements that will be required:

Arterials
W. Riggin Avenue, N. Shirk Road (Road 92), N. Akers Street (Road 100), and Avenue 320 are classified as arterial roads in the City’s Circulation Element with a right-of-way of 110 feet. The arterials in the Plan Area will include two through-lanes of traffic in each direction, as well as a left-turn channelization when needed. When applicable, road right-of-way may be required for improvements at intersections to allow for right turn movements. Four arterials border the proposed Project with two existing lanes. When the project is fully developed Riggin will have four lanes. N. Shirk Road, N. Akers Street and Avenue 320 shall have three lanes, ¾ buildout. Widening 568
Page | 26
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 of W. Riggin Avenue, N. Shirk Road and N. Akers Street will be necessary with right-of-way dedications.

Collectors
Shannon Parkway and N. Roeben Street are designated as collectors and serve to connect arterial and local roadways within the Plan Area.

Shannon Parkway and N. Roeben Street will feature two lanes of traffic (single lane in each direction) within a minimum 84-foot rightof-way.

Local Streets
The remaining streets within the Plan Area, including Sedona Avenue, are classified as local and will be developed to residential street standards. Most local streets within the Plan Area will have a right of way width of 60 feet. A combination of speed tables and roundabouts will be used as traffic calming devices.

The Project will be responsible for construction of internal roadways as well as for potential improvements to surrounding roadways to accommodate the Project. The Project also includes improvements and landscaping along the frontage roads and within the site itself.

2.3.4 Infrastructure
The Project will require connection to various City-operated utility and infrastructure systems. These include City-provided services such as sewer/wastewater, water and stormwater facilities. Non-City-provided infrastructure includes natural gas (to be provided by Southern California Gas Company) and electrical services (to be provided by Southern California Edison). The Project will be responsible for construction of connection points to the City’s existing infrastructure.

Proposed infrastructure improvements for sewer/wastewater, water and stormwater facilities are described in Section 7.0.

Utilities and Improvements by Phase
Below is a summary of utilities and improvements by Phase. See Section 7 for detailed information.

Phase 1

1. Extension of 42” sewer trunk line along Shirk from the Shirk and Riggin intersection. The sewer truck line is to extend north to Phase

2. Extension of 12” water line from the Shirk and Riggin intersection. The water line is to extend north to Phase 2.

3. A 10” sanitary sewer main and appurtenances shall be extended from North Roeben Street, Shannon Parkway, and Sedona Avenue.

4. Extension of 8” water line along Shannon Parkway from Shirk to Roeben.

5. Installation of storm drainage facility. Partial completion of proposed storm basin located within Phase 2.

6. Installation of improvements along Shirk frontage to Phase 2.

Including: Min. 6’ tall block wall, 8’ wide landscape, 5’ wide side sidewalk, 6’ wide path lane, 5’ wide planter, curb/gutter, where applicable deceleration lane, (2) 11’ travel lanes, median (18’ wide) and 11’ wide travel lane.

7. Installation of improvements along Riggin from Shirk to where improvements already in place West of
Akers. Including: Min. 6’ tall block wall at residential, 5’ wide sidewalk, 6’ wide bike path, 5’ wide planter, curb/gutter, where applicable deceleration lane, (2) 11’ travel lanes and 18’ wide median.

8. Installation of improvements along Sedona at existing roundabout to Shirk. Including: 5’ wide sidewalk, 5’ wide planter, curb/gutter, 8’ wide parking, (2) 12’ wide travel 569
Page | 27
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 lanes, 8’ wide parking, curb/gutter, 5’ wide planter, 5’ wide sidewalk.

9. Installation of improvements along Shannon Parkway from Roeben to Shirk. Including: Min. 6’ tall block wall, 9’ wide landscape, 6’ wide sidewalk, 10’ wide planter, curb/gutter, 5’ wide bike lane, 5’ wide buffer, 12’ wide travel lane, 15’ wide median and 12’ wide travel lane.

10. Installation of improvements along Roeben from Riggin to Shannon Parkway. Including: Min. 6’ tall block wall, 5’ wide planter, 6’ wide sidewalk, 6’ wide bike trail, 5’ wide planter, curb/gutter, 8’ wide parking, 12’ wide travel lane, 11’ wide median and 12’ wide travel lane.

11. Installation of three roundabouts: Shannon Parkway and Roeben, Sedona and Denton, and Roeben and Sedona.

Phase 2

1. Extension of 42” sewer trunk line along Shirk to Ave. 320.

2. Extension of 36” sewer trunk line along Ave 320 from Shirk to Akers.

3. A minimum 10” sanitary sewer main and appurtenances shall be extended along Pratt from Shirk to Roeben.

4. Extension of 12” water line along Shirk to Ave. 320. Ave 320 between Shirk & Akers and Akers from Shannon Parkway to Ave 320.

5. Completion of proposed storm basin located within Phase 2.

6. Installation of improvements along Roeben from Shannon Parkway to Ave. 320. Including: 6’ tall block wall, 5’ wide planter, min. 6’ wide sidewalk, 5’ wide planter, curb/gutter, 8’ wide parking, 5’ wide bike lane, 12’ wide travel lane, 11’ wide median, 12’ wide travel lane, curb/gutter, 5’ wide planter, 6’ wide bike trail, 6’ wide sidewalk, 5’ wide planter and min. 6’ tall block wall.

7. Installation of improvements along Shirk frontage. Including:

Min. 6’ tall block wall, 8’ wide landscape, 5’ wide sidewalk, 6’ wide bike path, 5’ wide planter, curb/gutter, where applicable deceleration lane, (2) 11’ travel lanes, median (18’ wide) and 11’ wide travel lane.

8. Installation of improvements along Shannon Parkway from Roeben to Akers. Including: 12’ wide travel lane, 15’ wide median, 12’ wide travel lane, 8’ wide parking, 5’ wide planter, 6’ wide sidewalk, 10’ wide ditch access & decomposed granite walking path, existing 19’ wide Modoc Ditch, 12' wide ditch & police access, 18' wide bioswale, 12' wide class 1 bike trail, 6' wide planter and min. 6’ tall block wall.

9. Installation of improvements along Akers to Ave.
320. Including: 6’ wide planter, 12' wide class 1 bike trail, 18' wide bioswale, +/-12’ wide ditch & police access, existing 32’ wide Modoc Ditch, +/-10’ wide ditch access and walking path, 5’ wide sidewalk, 5’ wide bike path, 5’ wide planter, curb/gutter, (2) 12’ travel lanes, median (18’ wide) and (1) 12’ travel lane.

10. Installation of improvements on Ave. 320 from Akers to Shirk. Including: Min. 6’ tall block wall, 8’ landscape, 7’ wide sidewalk, 6’ wide bike path, 5’ wide planter, curb/gutter, where applicable deceleration lane, (2) 12’ travel lanes, median (18’ wide) and (1) 12’ wide travel lane.

11. Complete the installation of improvements along Shannon Parkway from Roeben to Shirk. Including: 8' wide parking, curb/gutter, 5' wide planter, 6’ wide sidewalk, 10' wide ditch access & decomposed granite walking path, existing 19' wide Modoc Ditch, 12' wide ditch & police access, 18' wide bioswale, 12' wide class 1 bike trail, and 6' wide landscaping. 570
Page | 28
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

2.3.5 Parks, Trails and Open SpaceThe Project will provide a variety of public recreational facilities, including trails within the development that will be accessible by the public. A Landscaping and Lighting Act Assessment District shall be formed, prior to recordation of the final map. The purpose is for the maintenance of the landscaping, fences and/or walls along the public street frontages and open space areas of the subdivision. The Landscape and Lighting Act Assessment District shall include the operational and maintenance cost for the street lights within the subdivision and along streets abutting the subdivision. The Landscape and Lighting Act District shall include the provisions for the City to collect payment from the subdivider to cover the estimated cost to operate and maintain the improvements of the District prior to assessments occurring on the property tax roll.Refer to Figure 2.D for the general location of the proposed recreational facilities, which are described as follows: Modoc Greenway Modoc Ditch is an existing site feature at Ave. 320 and Akers to Shannon and Akers, then running east/west through the center of the site north of Shannon Parkway. A trail will be installed along the existing Modoc Ditch. The trail will be located north of Shannon Avenue and the existing Modoc Ditch. Modoc Greenway will be installed along Akers Street, immediately west of the roadway and the existing Modoc Ditch. The Greenway will include a Class 1 bike trail with landscaping on either side and tree clusters will provide shade for the users. The Modoc Greenway will connect to the nearby basin trail. The trail will provide a route for residents to access school sites, commercial areas and neighborhoods throughout Carleton Acres.

TrailsThe network of trails proposed by the Project will provide convenient walking and biking options for residents to connect throughout Carleton Acres. Modoc Greenway is the main east/west and north/south trail facility within the development and will serve as a connection point for other smaller trails. As described above, Modoc Greenway will be a Class 1 bike trail with landscaping on either side.

Other trails throughout Carleton Acres will be 22’ wide (6’ walking & 6’ bike lane with 5’ landscaping on each side). These trails are as follows:
 Trail to connect the proposed high school to the future elementary school site (north & south) within the development.  Trail to connect the future elementary school to Modoc Greenway to the east.
 Trail along Roeben to connect the future elementary school and proposed high school, to the medium and high density residential along Riggin and to the commercial center at the northeast corner of Riggin and Shirk.  Around the basin, a trail will connect Modoc Greenway to the high-density development in the northwest corner of the site.

Parks Parks within residential neighborhoods will range from 0.5 to 1 acre in size. Parks may be within a neighborhood or be located along the Modoc Greenway. Each park may include an open grass space, 571
Page | 29
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 playground, picnic area, barbeque grills, seating, and drinking fountain. Shade trees will be provided and, where possible, droughttolerant/native species will be encouraged. Parks will be located and designed to provide social activities within the development. 572
Page | 30
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 2.D
Open Space Plan
573
Land Use

3.0 574
Page | 31
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

3.0 Land Use

3.1 INTRODUCTION
This Section defines the Carleton Acres land use concept and Specific Plan Area Boundaries and Phases. Each land use discussed in Section 3 has defined allowable development including square footage and maximum allowable dwelling units for the Project as a whole and the range of types of units.

3.2 LAND USE CONCEPT
The Carleton Acres Project provides a broad and balanced mix of residential, commercial, educational and open space uses serving an expansive range of local users. Figure 2.C is the conceptual use plan of Carleton Acres in accordance with the standards of the Specific Plan.

3.2.1 Residential Community
Number of Units: Up to 3,262 residential units will be permitted by the Specific Plan. These units will serve the City of Visalia as a considerable new housing resource for people with a range of incomes and lifestyles.

Permitted Residential Land Uses: Three categories of permitted residential land uses are defined in the Conceptual Use Plan, Figure

2.C.
 Residential: Low (densities between 2 and 10 dwelling units per gross acre.)
 Residential: Medium (densities between 10 and 15 dwelling units per gross acre.)
 Residential: High (densities between 15 and 35 dwelling units per gross acre.)
The term “gross acre” is defined as an acre area of land which includes in measurement of public street or other areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use.

Location of Residential Densities: Multi-unit housing with the greatest density shall be located along the arterial streets.

Single-family detached homes shall be located within the center of Carleton Acres.

Residential Product Types: Within each residential land use category, six product types ranging from single-family detached to multi-family will be allowed. This will provide a full range of housing prospects within Carleton Acres.

Residential Neighborhoods: The residential neighborhoods are designed to be walkable and connected to amenities throughout Carleton Acres.

3.2.2 Commercial Uses
Permitted Commercial Land Uses: The project may include up to 205,000 square feet of gross leasable commercial area. The commercial developments occurring in the proposed Mixed-Use Commercial Zone and the Neighborhood Commercial Zone are defined by the Conceptual Use Plan, Figure 2.C.

Location of Commercial Uses: The project’s major commercial uses shall be along W. Riggin Ave. This location will serve the daily shopping needs of the residents of Carleton Acres and its surrounding neighborhoods. The commercial spaces shall also 575
Page | 32
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 service those who commute between their homes in North
Visalia and the industrial work opportunities to the West.

Commercial Building Types: The types of commercial uses permitted within Mixed-Use and Neighborhood Commercial are defined in Section 4.

3.2.3 Public Uses
The Permitted public uses indicated by the Conceptual Use Plan are:
 Open Space: Modoc Greenways
 Open Space: Water Storage/Recharge Basins
 School

3.2.4 Circulation Concepts
Carleton Acres circulation system consists of four primary elements:
 The vehicular circulation (Figure 3.A) will facilitate regional and local access to and from Carleton Acres.
 The pedestrian circulation of sidewalks and trails (Figure 3.B) will be appealing and safe. Higher density residential is located closer to commercial uses to encourage pedestrian walking rather than auto trips. Landscaped streetscapes and Modoc Greenway will link the different residential densities and school sites. Streetscapes shall be designed for an enjoyable experience and encourage walking. The Modoc
Greenway trail shall be attractive for active bike and walking activity.
 The bicycle circulation (Figure 3.B) incorporates dedicated bike lanes on public streets as well as bike trails.
 Parking within Carleton Acres consists of on-site parking for residential and commercial uses. Access to residential shall be at the front for single-family. Multifamily and commercial parking areas shall be screened with landscaping.

3.2.5 Open Space Concepts
Carleton Acres incorporates an integrated public open space network (Figure 2.D), a critical element of the development and importance to the residential uses.

The open space elements include neighborhood parks, vehicular and pedestrian corridors, medians, buffers, entry treatments, trail and water storage/recharge basins.

Section 6 Landscape details each element of the Open Space elements.
576
Page | 33
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 3.A
Vehicular Circulation
577
Page | 34
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 3.B Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation
578
Page | 35
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

3.3 PROJECT BOUNDARIES AND PHASES

3.3.1 Consistency
All land uses and development guidelines within the Specific Plan Area are concise with the City of Visalia’s General Plan Land Use Map.

The Specific Plan uses match acre per acre to the City of Visalia’s General Plan Land Use Map for all uses except the Mixed-Use Commercial was added by reducing the Single-Family Residential Use area. This document will indicate the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Area as a single land use termed Specific Plan. Within this designation, the Carleton Acres Specific Plan then establishes more detailed land uses.

3.3.2 Specific Plan Area
The Specific Plan Area is the portion of the City of Visalia within which this Specific Plan applies. The Specific Plan Area is shown by Figures

1.B and 2.A.

3.3.3 Phases
Within the Specific Plan there are two phases as shown on Figure 2.C.

Phase 1 includes land uses south of Modoc Greenway and Shannon Parkway. The development agreement shall have guidelines for when Phase 2 construction may begin.

3.3.4 Agricultural
Project phasing and design will allow the undeveloped portion of the project site to remain in agricultural production for the longest feasible period. Phase 2 which includes the wine grapes will continue to be farmed. The phasing allows +/-329 acres to be continually farmed while Phase 1 is in development stage. The City of Visalia’s Urban Development Boundaries limits the conversion of agricultural land into Tiers. Phase 1 includes Tier 1 and Tier 2. Phase 2 of the project is within the last 3rd Tier of the growth boundary.

3.4 LAND USES

3.4.1 Land Use Designations
As discussed in Sub-section 3.2, Figure 2.C indicates respectively the Permitted Land Uses and their locations within Carleton Acres.

3.4.2 Land Use Summary for each Phase
Table 2-1 provides a breakdown of land use designations, their respective acreages, and permitted dwelling unit ranges for each phase.

3.4.3 Land Use Regulatory Categories
The Specific Plan defines two basic regularity categories of land uses, Permitted and Conditional Use Permit. Permitted Land Uses are allowed by right and do not require review and approval by the Planning Commission. Conditional Use Permit land uses are uses incorporated within the Specific Plan which are allowed with separate review and approval from the City of Visalia Planning Commission. The review and approval process is defined in Section

8.5. Uses which are not incorporated in the Specific Plan may be provided only with an amendment to the Specific Plan and, if required, a General Plan Amendment (see Section 8.5).

3.4.4 Street Sections
Figures 7.B through 7.Q indicate sections taken through Carleton Acres’ major roads. These sections illustrate the relationship 579
Page | 36
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 between the streets, parkways and sidewalks on Builder/Developer private lots, buffers and street space landscaping. The street sections in Section 6 convey more detailed information about the landscape, hardscape, streetscape and amenities within the street space. 3.4.5 Levels of Land Use Flexibility The market demand and economy are unpredictable. In order for Carleton Acres to be successful the Specific Plan must include measures to assure that development can meet market demand.  Optional Residential Product Types: Multiple product types are permitted for each location designated for residential use.  Optional Residential Building Densities: Within each
residential land use category, the Builder/Developer may choose from a range of allowed densities. For example, the high-density residential category allows between 15 to 35 housing units per acre.  Choice of Product Types: The Specific Plan is designed to provide flexibility in the choice of residential product types and lot sizes within a given area.  Flexibility within Commercial Uses: Each commercial
building type provides options in terms of lot area, width, depth, and coverage and building height.  Specially Permitted Land Uses: The school site allows for an alternate land use of low density residential. Such uses are subject to approval by the City Planning Commission and City Council, and a letter from the Visalia Unified School District stating that it does not want to purchase or utilize the land. Procedures for approving Specially Permitted Land Use are defined in Section 8.  Ability to Change the Specific Plan: A Builder/Developer who wants to provide uses not incorporated as a Conditional Use Permit land use may apply to the City of Visalia for an amendment to the Specific Plan. The procedure for doing so is defined by the City of Visalia.

3.5 DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 3.5.1 Introduction The Specific Plan contains two basic types of development guidelines: land use designations and design standards. Land Use Designations: The land use designations are indicated by Figure 2.C defining all Permitted Land Uses incorporated by the Specific Plan. The Project Boundary and each Phase is illustrated. Design Standards and Guidelines: The standards for Commercial, Residential and Landscape uses and Infrastructure are located in Sections 4,5,6 and 7 of this Specific Plan. 3.5.2 Land Use Designations by Phase This section presents Land Use Designations for each Phase in the following format: 1. A brief discussion describes the Phase in terms of its location, existing development, permitted land use, Conditional Use Permit and the Specific Plan sections in which other development controls are located.

2. Two tables contain the Land Use Summary and allowed uses for each Permitted and Conditional Use Permit.
580
Page | 37
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

3.5.2.1 Phase 1
Location: Phase 1 is located in the southwest portion of Carleton Acres bordered by W. Riggin Avenue to the South, N. Shirk Road to the West, and Shannon Parkway to the North. The planned high school located to the East. Phase 1 includes approximately 177.7 acres. For the boundaries and location of Phase 1 see Figure 2.C. Pedestrian and bicycle access will link the commercial to the surrounding residential neighborhoods.

Permitted Land Use: Phase 1 contains four permitted land uses:

Commercial Mixed Use, Low Density Residential, Medium
Density Residential and High Density Residential. Commercial Mixed-Use uses can accommodate up to 188,000 square feet of commercial anchor, retail uses and food services. The allowable uses will benefit the most from their proximity to W. Riggin Avenue.

General Guidelines: Refer to the following sections for additional development guidelines and implementation
information generally applicable to Phase 1:
 Section 4: Commercial Master Plan
 Section 5: Residential Master Plan
 Section 6: Landscape Master Plan
 Section 7: Infrastructure Master Plan
 Section 8: Implementation
Land Use Summary
Permitted Land Use Gross Acreage Allowed DU Range
Commercial Mixed Use 28.7 N/A
Residential Low Density 100.9 202-1,009
Residential Medium Density 9.1 91-137
Residential High Density 39 585-1,365
Open Space (Park) 3.5* N/A___________
Phase 1 Totals 177.7 878-2,511
*The Open Space (Park) is included in the gross acreage of each land use and not included in the total acreage for Phase 1.
581
P a g e | 38
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Allowed Uses for each Permitted & Conditional Use Permit Permitted Land Use Allowed Use Commercial Mixed Use See Permitted Uses on next page. Residential Low Density Single Family and Small Single Family Lots
Residential Medium Density Cluster, Townhouse, Duplex, or Fourplex Residential
Residential High Density Fourplex Residential or Apartment Building
Open Space (Park) Park and Open Landscape Areas
Allowed Uses for Commercial Mixed-Use
Automotive: Auto Oil, Lube & Smog Test Shops-Automotive Supplies, Parts & Accessories-Tire Sales & Service Banks & Financial Institutions: Stand-alone automatic teller-Office Barber, Hairstylists, Tanning Centers, Cosmeticians & Day Spa: Stand Alone Catering Services Clothing/ Costume Rental Communications: Communications Equipment Building, Radio and TV Broadcasting Studios-with antenna off-site. Daycare: Up to 12 adults, Up to 14 children Drive-thru lanes meeting all standards Eating & Drinking Establishments: Cafeterias-Fast Food RestaurantsPizza/Sandwich Shops (serving wine/beer)-Ice Cream Shop-Site Down Restaurant/Café with or without full bar using less than 25% of public area. Florist Fuel Storage: Propane/Butane, Above Ground Tanks dispensing Class I,II, and III-A liquids-more then 100 feet of a residential use or residential zoned property. Galleries Home Occupation Businesses Laundry/Dry Cleaners: Dry Cleaners, Diaper Supply Service, Linen & Uniform Supply Service, Self Service Laundries Medical Facilities/Services: Dialysis Center and Blood Donation Centers, Laboratories (medical testing & diagnostic), Medical Equipment/supplies, Opticians 582
Page | 39
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Offices: less than 2,000 square feet to more than 6,000 square feet, More than 25% of total leased area for center, Medical, Counseling/psychologist Parcel Delivery Services/Parcel Distribution
Parking Facilities for Off-Site Uses
Photocopy Services (without printing press)
Photography Studio, Photography Labs/Blue Printing/Microfilming, Photography Labs with Retail on Site
Private Postal Service
Public Community Services: Police Stations & Substations, Post Office Substations
Recreation Facilities: Athletic and Health Clubs less than 5,000 square feet, Dance, Yoga & Music Studio, Martial Arts, Video Machines/Coin Operated Games 1 to 4 machines.

Recycling Facilities: Reverse Vending MachinesResidential: Household Pets Retail General Merchandise: Up to 60,000 square feet
Building/Landscape Materials: Floor & wall coverings, Garden Centers/Nurseries located within primary use, Glass Stores, Hardware Stores less than 10,000 square feet, Paint Stores, Home Improvement, Drugstore/Pharmacy
Food Stores: Specialty Food Stores (bakery, delicatessen, butcher shop, meat market, health food, gourmet/imported food, et.),
Supermarkets/Grocery stores
Furniture & Furnishings new
Furniture & Furnishings secondhand up to 10,000 square feet Gun shops
Magazine/Newspaper Sales indoor
Outlet Stores: bakery, apparel, furnishings
Pet Stores
Pool/Spa Supplies/Equipment
Secondhand Store/Thrift Shops
Service/Commercial: Appliance, Electrical Equipment, Tools (disassemble & repair), Courier Services, Equipment Rental (indoors), Gunsmith Shops (including incidental retail), Locksmiths, Pet Grooming/Dog Training (conducted indoors), Printing Service, Sharpening Service, Shoe Repair Shops, Tailor, Dressmaking & Alterations, Upholstering Shops (furniture only)
Taxi/Limousine Service
Utilities: Business Offices, Elevated Pressure Tanks, Payment Centers Veterinary Services: Animal Care Clinic (no boarding)
Warehousing Storage: Do not exceed 20% gross floor area of permitted use Other: Other Uses Similar in Nature and Intensity as Determined by the City Planner
583
P a g e | 40
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Requires Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Mixed-Use Automotive: Auto Leasing/Renting, Auto Repairs, -Car Washing self-service or automated Barber, Hairstylists, Tanning Centers, Cosmeticians & Day Spa: Located within the Primary Permitted Use on the Site & Tattooist Bus Depots: Public & Private Transfer Point Churches & Other Religious Institutions: Up to 200 Seats Communications: Radio and TV Broadcasting Studios-with antenna on-site, Communications Equipment Building, Wireless telecommunication facilities more than 100 feet from residential or planned/zoned residential Daycare: More than 12 adults, More than 14 childrenDrive-thru lanes not meeting all standards Eating & Drinking Establishments: Bars/Taverns within & not within 300 feet of any residence/public use, Micro-breweries/micro-wineries (with or without restaurants, Craft distilleries, Live Entertainment, Sit-Down Restaurant/Café with full bar using greater than 25% of public area Fuel Storage: Above Ground Tanks dispensing Class I,II, and III-A liquidswithin 100 feet of a residential use or residential zoned property. Funeral Home/Mortuary Hotels and Motels Massage Therapist Medical Facilities/Services: Rehabilitations Hospitals Photocopy Services/Desktop Publishing (with printing press) Planned Unit Development Private Clubs and Lodges Public Community Service: Community & Recreation Centers, Community Gardens, Fire Stations, Public Buildings, Offices & Grounds, Public Libraries, Public Parks/Playgrounds Recreation Facilities: Athletic and Health Clubs, Aquatic Centers-, Athletic/Playing Fields, Bowling Alleys, Golf Courses & Driving Ranges, Miniature Golf Courses, Ice & Roller Skating Rinks, Pool Halls/Billiard Parlors, Video Machines/Coin Operated Games 5 or more machines, Other Recreational Facilities, Rifle and Pistol Range indoor Recycling Facilities: Small Collection Residential: Residential Units, New or Expansions, which may or may not be associated with a commercial activity, Senior Citizen Residential Developments Retail General Merchandise: over 60,000 square feetBuilding/Landscape Materials: Garden Centers/Nurseries stand alone, Feed Stores Food Stores: Convenience Store 7,000 square feet or less, Liquor Store within & not within 300 feet of residential/public use, wine tasting with sales, Magazine/Newspaper Sales outdoor Pawnshops Smoke Shops Schools, Public and Private: Preschool/After School Care, Elementary, Middle School, High School, Colleges/Universities, Business, Trade, Vocational, Charter or other Specialized Schools, Tutor Centers Service/Commercial: Check/cashing Service, Bail Bonds, Equipment Rental (conducted outdoors), Sheltered Workshops Service Stations: Fuel Dispensing, which may include major auto repair 584
Page | 41
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Theaters: Drive-in, Movie, Live Performance
Utilities: Electric Distribution Substations, Gas Regulator Stations, Public Service Pumping Stations, Public Utility Service Yards
Veterinary Services: Hospitals/Clinics located 500 feet from a residential zone including short term boarding of animals
Warehousing Storage: In excess of 20% gross floor area of permitted use Mini Storage Facilities
Other: Other Uses Similar in Nature and Intensity as Determined by the City Planner Subject to the Granting of a Conditional Use Permit 585
Page | 42
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Allowed Uses for R-1 Single Family Residential
One-family dwelling
Accessory structures: private garages/carports, one guest house, garden structures, hobby shops
o Max. 12’ height
o Max. coverage 20% of required rear yard
o Reverse corner lots: No structure within 15’ of adjacent lot’s front yard area.

Swimming pools
Temporary subdivisions sales office
Licensed day care for a maximum of 14 children in addition to residing family.
24 hour residential care facilities or foster homes with a maximum of six individuals in addition to residing family.

Accessory dwelling units as specified in zoning code
Adult day care up to 12 persons in addition to the residing family Requires Conditional Use Permit for R-1 Single Family Residential Public and quasi-public uses of an educational or religious type including public and elementary schools, junior high schools, high schools and colleges, nursey schools, licensed day care facilities for more than 14 children, churches and other religious institutions.

Public and private charitable institutions, general hospitals, nursing and convalescent homes.

Public uses of an administrative, recreational, public service, or cultural type including city, county, state or federal administrative centers and courts, libraries, museums, art galleries, police and fire stations, ambulance service and other public building, structures and facilities; public playgrounds, parks and community centers.

Electric distribution stations
Gas regulator stations
Public service pumping stations
Communication equipment buildings
Planned neighborhood commercial center
Residential development specifically designed for senior housing Adult day care in excess of 12 persons
Duplexes on corner lots
24 hour residential care facilities or foster homes for more than six individuals in addition to residing family.

Residential structure and accessory buildings totaling more than 10,000 square feet
586
Page | 43
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Allowed Uses for R-M Multi-Family Residential
Multi-family dwellings up to 80 dwelling units per site in the R-M-2 zone and R-M-3 zone
Planned developments
Swimming pools
Temporary subdivisions sales office
Licensed day care for a maximum of 14 children in addition to residing family.
24 hour residential care facilities or foster homes with a maximum of six individuals in addition to residing family.

Accessory buildings
Adult day care up to 12 persons in addition to the residing family Requires Conditional Use Permit for R-M Multi-Family Residential Public and quasi-public uses of an educational or religious type including public and elementary schools, junior high schools, high schools and colleges, nursey schools, licensed day care facilities for more than 14 children, churches and other religious institutions.

Public and private charitable institutions, general hospitals, nursing and convalescent homes.

Public uses of an administrative, recreational, public service, or cultural type including city, county, state or federal administrative centers and courts, libraries, museums, art galleries, police and fire stations, ambulance service and other public building, structures and facilities; public playgrounds, parks and community centers.

Open air public or private parking lot
Electric distribution stations
Gas regulator stations
Public service pumping stations
Communication equipment buildings
More than 80 units per site in the R-M-2 zone
More than 80 units per site in R-M-3 zone
Residential development specifically designed for senior housing Adult day care in excess of 12 persons
Other uses similar in nature and intensity as determined by the city planner Residential developments utilizing private streets in which the net lot area (lot area not including street area) meets or exceeds the site area prescribed by this chapter and in which the private streets are designed and constructed to meet or exceed public street standards
587
Page | 44
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

3.5.2.2 Phase 2
Location: Phase 2 is in the northern portion of the Carleton Acres Project site. It is bordered by N. Akers Street to the East, Shannon Parkway to the South, N. Shirk Road to the West and Avenue 320 to the North. The Modoc Greenway borders to the East and South. Phase 2 includes approximately 329.6 acres. For the boundaries and location of Phase 2 see Figure 2.C. Pedestrian and bicycle access will link the residential uses to the school sites.

The Modoc Greenway provides a link for residents across the whole project. It is an amenity to be enjoyed by all for active walking or biking.

Permitted Land Use: Phase 2 contains five permitted land uses:

Commercial Neighborhood, Public/Institutional, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density
Residential and Open Space. Commercial Neighborhood uses can accommodate up to 21,500 square feet of retail uses and food services. See section 3.5.2.1. for Residential permitted uses.

General Guidelines: Refer to the following sections for additional development controls and implementation
information generally applicable to Phase 2:
 Section 4: Commercial Master Plan
 Section 5: Residential Master Plan
 Section 6: Landscape Master Plan
 Section 7: Infrastructure Master Plan
 Section 8: Implementation
Land Use Summary
Permitted Land Use Gross Acreage Allowed DU Range
Commercial Neighborhood 6.4 N/A
Public/Institutional 13.0 N/A
Residential Low Density 204.5 409-2,045
Residential Medium Density 66.7 667-1,001
Residential High Density 21.7 326-780
Open Space (Basin) 17.3 N/A
Open Space Park) 13.8* N/A
Phase 2 Totals 329.6 1,402-3,826
*The Open Space (Park) is included in the gross acreage of each land use and not included in the total acreage for Phase 2.
588
Page | 45
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Allowed Uses for each Permitted & Specially Permitted Land Use Permitted Land Use Allowed Use
Public/Institutional School Site, Community Playfields, or Single Family Residential
Residential Low Density Single Family and Small Single Family Lots
Residential Medium Density Cluster, Townhouse, Duplex, or Fourplex Residential
Residential High Density Fourplex Residential or Apartment Building
Open Space (Basin) Water Storage/Recharge, Trail on
East side, or Single Family
Residential
Open Space (Park) Park and Open Landscape Areas
589
Page | 46
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Allowed Uses for Commercial Neighborhood
Banks & Financial Institutions: Stand-alone automatic teller-Office Barber, Hairstylists, Tanning Centers, Cosmeticians & Day Spa Daycare: Up to 12 adults, Up to 14 children
Drive-thru lanes meeting all standards
Eating & Drinking Establishments: Cafeterias-Fast Food RestaurantsPizza/Sandwich Shops (no alcohol)-Ice Cream Shop-Site Down Restaurant/Café with or without full bar using less than 25% of public area.

Florist
Fuel Storage: Above Ground Tanks dispensing Class I,II, and III-A liquids, more then 100 feet of a residential use or residential zoned property.

Galleries
Home Occupation Businesses
Laundry/Dry Cleaners: Dry Cleaners, Self Service Laundries Offices: Less than 2,000 square feet, Up to 25% of total leased area for center
Photocopy Services (without printing press)
Photography Studio
Private Postal Service
Recreation Facilities: Athletic and Health Clubs less than 5,000 square feet, Dance, Yoga & Music Studios, Martial Arts, Video Machines/Coin Operated Games 1 to 4 machines.

Recycling Facilities: Reverse Vending Machines
Residential: Household Pets
Retail General Merchandise: Up to 4,000 square feet
Building/Landscape Materials: Garden Centers/Nurseries located within primary use, Hardware Stores less than 10,000 square feet, Drugstore/Pharmacy
Food Stores: Specialty Food Stores (bakery, delicatessen, butcher shop, meat market, health food, gourmet/imported food, et.),
Supermarkets/Grocery stores
Furniture & Furnishings secondhand up to 10,000 square feet Gun shops
Pet Stores
Pool/Spa Supplies/Equipment
Service/Commercial: Appliance, Electrical Equipment, Tools (disassemble & repair), Locksmiths, Pet Grooming/Dog Training, Sharpening Service, Shoe Repair Shops, Tailor, Dressmaking & Alterations
Utilities: Payment Centers
Veterinary Services: Animal Care Clinic (no boarding)
Warehousing Storage: Do not exceed 20% gross floor area of permitted use Other: Other Uses Similar in Nature and Intensity as Determined by the City Planner
590
Page | 47
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Requires Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Neighborhood Automotive: Auto, Lube & Smog Test Shops-Automotive Supplies, Parts & Accessories, Car Washing self-service or automated, Tire Sales & Service Communications: Communications Equipment Building, Wireless telecommunication facilities more than 100 feet from residential Daycare: More than 12 adults, more than 14 children
Drive-thru lanes not meeting all standards
Eating & Drinking Establishments: Bars/Taverns within 300 feet of any residence/public use, Micro-breweries/micro-wineries (with or without restaurants, Sit-Down Restaurant/Café with full bar using greater than 25% of public area
Fuel Storage: Above Ground Tanks dispensing Class I,II, and III-A liquids, within 100 feet of a residential use or residential zoned property.

Massage Therapist
Medical Facilities/Services: Clinics (medical group, urgent care/walk-ins, dental, rehabilitation, outpatient surgery center), Opticians (dispensing), counseling/psychologist
Offices: Above 2,000 square feet
Offices: More than 25% of total leased area for center
Park & Ride
Planned Unit Development
Public Community Service: Community & Recreation Centers, Community Gardens, Fire Stations, Police Stations & Substations, Public Buildings, Offices & Grounds-Public Libraries, Public Parks/Playgrounds, Post Office Substations
Recreation Facilities: Athletic and Health Clubs, Aquatic Centers, Video Machines/Coin Operated Games 5 or more machines, Other Recreational Facilities, Rifle and Pistol Range indoor
Recycling Facilities: Small Collection
Residential: Residential Units, New or Expansions, which may or may not be associated with a commercial activity
Retail General Merchandise: 4,001 to 40,000 square feet Building/Landscape Materials: Floor & Wall Coverings, Garden Centers/Nurseries stand alone
Food Stores: Convenience Store 7,000 square feet or less-Liquor Store not within 300 feet of residential/public use.

Magazine/Newspaper Sales indoor or outdoor
Schools, Public and Private: Preschool/After School Care, Elementary, Middle School, High School, Tutor Centers
Service/Commercial: Check/cashing Service, Printing Service, Sheltered Workshops
Service Stations: Fuel Dispensing only not including major auto repair services of any kind
Utilities: Electric Distribution Substations-Elevated Pressure Tanks, Gas Regulator Stations, Public Service Pumping Stations
Veterinary Services: Hospitals/Clinics located 500 feet from a residential zone including short term boarding of animals
Warehousing Storage: In excess of 20% gross floor area of permitted use Other: Other Uses Similar in Nature and Intensity as Determined by the City Planner Subject to the Granting of a Conditional Use Permit 591
Commercial

4.0 592
Page | 48
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

4.0 Commercial

4.1 INTRODUCTION
This Specific Plan contains standards which apply to all commercial uses built within the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Area. Basic land uses are established by Section 3. Any regulatory issues not addressed by this Specific Plan shall be administrated by the City of Visalia requirements.

Related standards affecting commercial development are in the following locations:
 Permitted land uses and intensity of land use: Section 3.  Street and open spaces within commercial: Section 6.
 Commercial drive aisles: Section 6.3.5
 Off-street parking: Section 6.8.2
 Service area and trash enclosures: Section 6.8.3
 Signage: Section 6.9

4.2 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
The Commercial Mixed-Use area in Carleton Acres is designed to be a dynamic space, featuring a major anchor tenant, drive-thru pads for fast-food options, and pads for various shops and restaurants. This commercial hub offers convenience and amenities not only for Carleton Acres residents but also for all of North Visalia's community, including workers and visitors. The strategic positioning along W.

Riggin Ave. ensures high visibility and easy access, making the commercial area easily identifiable from nearby streets. With a diverse mix of businesses, the Commercial Mixed-Use area shall thrive and serve as a busy destination for the community. Refer to Commercial Mixed-Use Conceptual Illustration Figure 4.A and Commercial Mixed-Use Conceptual Rendering Figure 4.B.

The Commercial Neighborhood land use in Carleton Acres is carefully planned to meet the day-to-day needs of its residents as well as the future adjacent neighborhoods. The area is envisioned to include essential amenities such as a drug store, restaurants, and various shops. These businesses are strategically oriented towards the street.

The Commercial Neighborhood has a direct connection to the Modoc Greenway, ensuring seamless accessibility and promoting a sense of connectivity between the commercial area and the surrounding community. Refer to Commercial Neighborhood Conceptual
Illustration Figure 4.C.

Monumental features as well as architecture shall demonstrate the identity and character of Carleton Acres.

Architectural recommended features:

Classic/timeless architecture
Smooth stucco light in color
Gray/Black metal awnings
Stone columns with metal trellis
See Figure 4.D Commercial Conceptual Illustrations

4.3 LOCATION OF COMMERCIAL USES

4.3.1 Location of Commercial Mixed Land Use
Phase 1 includes Commercial Mixed-Use at the major intersection of W. Riggin Avenue and N. Shirk Road.
593
Page | 49
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 The accessibility and convenience of the Commercial Mixed-Use site along W. Riggin Ave. are key factors contributing to its success as a thriving commercial hub. The constant flow of people traveling along this major road provides high visibility to the businesses, attracting potential customers and fostering a vibrant commercial district within Carleton Acres. This strategic placement also aids in managing traffic flow, directing high-density traffic to the main arterial streets and reducing congestion near schools and residential areas. As a result, the community creates safer and more pedestrian-friendly environments, contributing to a harmonious and family-friendly atmosphere.

Beyond serving the Carleton Acres Community, the Commercial Mixed Uses attract residents south of W. Riggin Ave. and east of N.

Akers St., providing them with convenient access to daily conveniences and services. Additionally, Visalia residents traveling along W. Riggin Ave. benefit from the added commercial options in North Visalia, enhancing the appeal of the area as a shopping and dining destination.

The vision for the Commercial Mixed-Use area includes a mix of businesses, including a large "anchor type" tenant and various smaller shops and pad sites that attract renowned chain-type businesses. The development also encourages the establishment of fast-food and dine-in restaurants.

The site's easy accessibility by vehicle, bicycle, or foot travel, facilitated by the trail, bike lane, and adjacent sidewalks throughout Carleton Acres, ensures that residents and visitors can access the Commercial Mixed-Use area conveniently. This inclusive approach to transportation options promotes an active and connected community where commerce thrives, and residents' well-being remains a top priority. The Commercial Mixed-Use area becomes a vibrant and dynamic hub that contributes to the overall success and harmony of Carleton Acres as a well-balanced and desirable community.

4.3.2 Location of Commercial Neighborhood Land Use
Phase 2 includes Commercial Neighborhood use at the major intersection of Ave. 320 and N. Akers Street.

For the commercial uses in Carleton Acres to thrive, visibility to the traffic along arterial streets is essential. The strategic location of these commercial areas ensures that traffic remains concentrated along the main arterial streets, reducing congestion within the residential areas and promoting a safer and more pedestrian-friendly environment for residents. The Commercial Neighborhood uses serve as a valuable resource for Carleton Acres residents, offering local conveniences and amenities. Additionally, these commercial areas are planned to cater to the future residential development east of N. Akers Street.

The vision for the Commercial Neighborhood uses includes a mix of local shops, businesses, restaurants, and a drive-thru pad. This diverse offering meets the varied needs and preferences of Carleton Acres residents, enhancing their overall quality of life.

The location of the Commercial Neighborhood use site is strategically accessible to the high and medium residential areas situated in the northeast portion of Carleton Acres. The Modoc Greenway trail serves as a vital link, connecting the commercial uses to the residential neighborhoods, the existing middle school, and the future high school. Additionally, a trail to the south of the commercial neighborhood will connect residents on the west side of Carleton Acres to the future elementary school, promoting connectivity and encouraging alternative transportation options.
594
Page | 50
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

4.4 COMMERCIAL POLICIES AND STANDARDS
The following standards shall apply to all commercial developments.

A) Building Type Standards: Section 4.4 contains building standards for each commercial building type allowed within Carleton Acres. Section 3.5 provides the development
guidelines for allowed uses and the maximum square
footage of commercial developments.

B) Walkability: All streets within the commercial use should be designed with a high level and quality of landscape and hardscape to create an appealing and pedestrian-friendly environment. The high-quality pedestrian environment in Carleton Acres' commercial areas would enhance their
appeal as attractive places to shop and work as well as encouraging residents to choose walking as a convenient alternative to local auto trips.

C) Identity: All commercial development should have a distinct and unique identity, promoting diversity and enhancing the overall character of the community. This distinctiveness should be achieved through consideration of various
elements such as building architecture, siting, scale,
massing, materials, monumental features, landscaping, and the thoughtful design of parking areas, resulting in a diverse and visually appealing commercial landscape that enhances the community's character and charm.

D) Design and Construction Quality: The architectural, lighting, signage, parking and construction quality of commercial uses should follow a high standard.

E) Parking: The parking areas within this Master Plan for each use should be attractive, convenient, landscaped and
lighted.

F) Signage and Lighting: Lighting is important for public security and safety. Signage and lighting features should complement the architecture.

G) Mechanical Equipment Screening: All mechanical
equipment should be screened from public view using
screening devices consistent with the adjacent architectural design.

H) Design Concept: The building design is to prioritize street frontages with main entries clearly visible, promoting a pedestrian-friendly environment. Complexity in building design is also favored, and articulated corners, varied facades, deep openings, and shadow-creating details are recommended for added visual interest. The ground floor should feature transparent elements, such as windows or glass facades, to engage pedestrians, while arcades,
awnings, and canopies provide shade and enhance the
pedestrian experience. At least 30% of the ground floor facade is encouraged to be transparent. The color palette should draw inspiration from traditional farm-style natural colors, with vibrant accents allowed in appropriate
locations, and high-quality materials for roofs that promote individuality and variety along the street.

I) Landscape: The landscape design plays a vital role in unifying and defining the identity of Carleton Acres. Open spaces should be thoughtfully designed as outdoor rooms, with plazas as focal points to encourage community
engagement and outdoor dining areas are encouraged to
enhance the overall experience and sense of togetherness within the community.
595
Page | 51
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

4.5 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Land Use
Zoning C-MU
Land Use Designation Commercial Mixed-Use
Permitted Uses Section 3.5
Conditioned Uses Section 3.5
Setbacks (Minimum)
Riggin Avenue 15’ (Landscape 15’ minimum)
Shirk Road 10’ (Landscape 10’ minimum)
Denton Street 10’ (Landscape 10’ minimum)
Rear 0’ (Landscape 5’ minimum)
Rear abutting R-1 or R-M zone 15’ (Landscape 5’ minimum) Side 0’ (Landscape 5’ minimum)
Side abutting R-1 or R-M zone 15’ (Landscape 5’ minimum) Building Height 50’ maximum
Parking Section 6.8.2
Wall & Fence Section 6.8.4
Signage Section 6.9
Landscape Section 6.8
Lighting Section 6.10
Land Use
Zoning C-N
Land Use Designation Commercial Neighborhood
Permitted Uses Section 3.5
Conditioned Uses Section 3.5
Setbacks (Minimum)
Avenue 320 15’ (Landscape 15’ minimum)
Akers Street & Local Street 10’ (Landscape 10’ minimum) Rear 0’ (Landscape 5’ minimum)
Rear abutting R-1 or R-M zone 15’ (Landscape 5’ minimum) Side 0’ (Landscape 5’ minimum)
Side abutting R-1 or R-M zone 15’ (Landscape 5’ minimum) Building Height 50’ maximum
Parking Section 6.8.2
Wall & Fence Section 6.8.4
Signage Section 6.9
Landscape Section 6.8
Lighting Section 6.10
596
Page | 52
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 4.A
Commercial Mixed-Use Conceptual Illustration
Key Map
597
Page | 53
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 4.B
Commercial Mixed-Use Conceptual Rendering
598
Page | 54
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 4.C
Commercial Neighborhood Conceptual Illustration

Key Map
599
Page | 55
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 4.D
Commercial Conceptual Design Illustrations

600
Residential

5.0 601
Page | 56
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.0 Residential

5.1 INTRODUCTION
This Specific Plan addresses all residential development in Carleton Acres. Residential development standards and design elements include location, site configuration, density, design character and other features of residential development within Carleton Acres.

This section outlines the Specific Plan’s neighborhood development visions. This Specific Plan contains standards which apply to all residential uses built within the Carleton Acres Specific Plan Area.

Basic land uses are established by Section 2. Any regulatory issues not addressed by this Specific Plan shall be governed by the City of Visalia requirements.

Related standards affecting residential development are in the following locations:
 Permitted land uses and intensity of land use: Section 3.  Street and open spaces within residential: Section 6.

The development standards are organized by the following:
residential policies and standards, residential product types development standards, and residential architectural style.

5.2 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
The residential Standards and Guidelines of Carleton Acres’ neighborhood concept is based on the policies of the City’s General Plan. The key elements of this vision which have guided the development of this Specific Plan are:
 Neighborhoods should contain a diverse mix of housing types to enable residents from a wide range of economic levels, age groups and household types to live within its boundaries.  Interconnected local street and pedestrian circulation.  Provide a range of housing types and prices. Allow
developers flexibility in meeting housing needs.
 Provide amenities for all residents with open space, parks and recreational areas. This can include shared use of school properties.
 Allow sufficient density to enable new development to be self-sufficient, paying for all required infrastructure and open space.
 Provide additional revenues (sales tax, property tax, impact fees, etc.) that would support all services within the area to be developed and contribute to the City’s general fund.  Neighborhoods should have well-defined edges created by commercial districts, major streets and public facilities.  Neighborhoods streets, pedestrian paths and bike paths should be planned as a system of fully connected and
interesting routes.

Character of Neighborhood Streets
 Narrow streets
 Street trees which form a canopy
 Traffic calming strategies
 Variable lot setbacks
 Architectural and site design which supports the street as a social space
 Rear auto access for some product types
 Variety of compatible architectural styles
 Front porches are encouraged
602
Page | 57
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023  Wrap-around elevation treatments
 Varied roof pitches
 Varied garage placement
 Varied yet consistent color palette
The densities below determine the type of housing that is allowed per zone. The building standards define the lots where the Product Type may be constructed. The planning in Carleton Acres creates a harmonious streetscape and imparts a distinctive character to each neighborhood, resulting in a unique and cohesive community ambiance.

5.3 LOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL USES

5.3.1 Low Density (R-1-5 Use)
In Carleton Acres, the Low Density Residential areas are strategically concentrated towards the center of the community, with each residential development playing a crucial role in fostering a strong sense of neighborhood within the larger master planned community.

All residential developments share common theme materials and details, creating a cohesive and unified visual identity. Some of these developments may even function as their own gated communities, adding an element of exclusivity while maintaining a sense of belonging within the larger community. Where walls are required by the city, the design emphasizes the use of plantings to soften their appearance and mitigate potential graffiti issues, promoting a more aesthetically pleasing and secure environment.

The residential development in Carleton Acres is thoughtfully organized through a traditional street grid intersected by parkways, avenues, bicycle paths, trails, and the Modoc Greenway. These elements define the various neighborhood villages and reinforce connections to the commercial areas, school sites, and public spaces.

This strategic layout enhances accessibility and connectivity, ensuring that residents can easily access amenities and services within the community, contributing to a sense of cohesiveness and convenience.

Recognizing the importance of offering housing diversity to accommodate various lifestyles, the Specific Plan includes a mix of housing types, sizes, and styles. Different clusters of development provide residents with the flexibility to choose a housing option that aligns with their evolving lifestyle needs throughout different stages of life. Varied lot and home sizes within each residential development offer a range of lifestyle opportunities, making Carleton Acres a dynamic and inclusive place to call home.
603
Page | 58
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 5.A
Phase 1 Low Density Conceptual Illustrations
Key Map
604
Page | 59
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 5.B
Phase 2 Low Density Conceptual Illustrations
Key Map
605
Page | 60
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.3.2 Medium Density (R-M-2 Use)
Phase 1 Medium density uses are a suitable buffer between commercial and low density residential. In Phase 2 of the Project medium density residential is placed along N. Akers St., Ave 320 and N. Shirk St. Along N. Akers St., the Modoc Greenway & bike trail provide a buffer for the multi-family dwellings.

Figure 5.C
Phase 1 Medium Density Conceptual Illustrations
Key Map
Key Map
606
Page | 61
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 5.D
Phase 2 Medium Density Conceptual Illustrations
Key Map
Key Map
607
Page | 62
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Key Map Key Map
608
Page | 63
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.3.3 High Density (R-M-3 Use)
Multi-family acts as a buffer between arterial streets on W. Riggin Ave., N. Shirk Road, Ave 320 and N. Akers St. to the low-density residential lots.

Figure 5.E
Phase 1 High Density Conceptual Illustrations
Key Map
609
Page | 64
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Key Map
610
Page | 65
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 5.F
Phase 2 High Density Conceptual Illustrations
Key Map Key Map
611
Page | 66
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Key Map
612
Page | 67
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.4 RESIDENTIAL POLICY AND STANDARDS

5.4.1 Single-Family Residential Policies and Standards
A) Building Type Standards: Development Standards for
Product Type 1-R Large Lot Single-Family and 2-R Small lot Single-Family are in Section 5.5. Front yard setbacks should be staggered.

B) Walkability: All streets within the residential use area should be a high level of quality landscape and hardscape to foster an appealing pedestrian environment. This deliberate focus would not only enhance the attractiveness of the residential areas as desirable places to live but also encourage and promote pedestrian use, contributing to a vibrant and
pedestrian-friendly community.

C) Identity: A variety of architectural product types is encouraged for a distinct residential identity. This emphasis on variety is achieved through careful consideration of building architecture, siting, scale, massing, and materials, all of which contribute to creating a cohesive and visually appealing neighborhood character.

D) Design and Construction Quality: The architectural, lighting, signage, parking, and construction quality of residential uses should adhere to a high standard, ensuring a consistent and elevated level of design and construction throughout the community.

E) Signage and Lighting: Lighting is important for public security and safety. Signage and lighting features should complement the architecture.

F) Screening: Service uses like trash storage and utility meters should be discreetly screened and kept out of sight from the street view to maintain the community's aesthetic appeal.

Additionally, all mechanical equipment should be adequately screened from public view, utilizing screening devices that blend harmoniously with the adjacent architecture, ensuring a visually pleasing and seamless integration within the neighborhood.

G) Design Concept: A diversity of architectural styles is promoted regardless of block lengths, with a minimum of two elevation styles per plan. To ensure architectural and visual variety, adjacent lots should have distinct color schemes. Additionally, it is encouraged to have different floor plans plotted next to each other, for a unique
streetscape. Primary entrances to all homes are oriented towards the public streets or greenspaces, ensuring clear access to all residences and enhancing the community's
connectivity. Porches are encouraged, with a minimum
depth of 6' measured at the walking surface, adding to the charm and appeal of the residential neighborhoods.
613
Page | 68
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 H) Landscape: Enhance architecture through the thoughtful integration of complementary landscape elements.

Decorative arbors and shade structures are highly
encouraged and can be found throughout the community,
enriching various areas such as front, side, and rear yards, recreation spaces, paseos, and entries. These arbors can be constructed using wood or metal and are to reflect the
overall theme and character of Carleton Acres, creating a cohesive and visually appealing environment.

I) Garages: Garages should have a variety of placements and setbacks from the street, offering flexibility and visual interest. The garage doors should match the building style.

Attached and detached garages are permitted. Additional parking spaces may be provided within the garage, and the requirement for parking can be satisfied with one covered and one uncovered parking space.

Tandem garage spaces are encouraged for garages with spaces for more than two cars.

Recessed garages are encouraged to reduce the overall visual mass of the garage.
614
Page | 69
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Corner lot garage encourages entrance on one street and garage access on the other street.

Split garage provides a variation in appearance and
deemphasis the garage. A minimum twenty-four foot
backup space should be provided for side access garage. 615
Page | 70
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.4.2 Multi-Family Residential Policies and Standards
A) Building Type Standards: Development Standards for
Product Type 3-R Cluster Single-Family, 4-R Townhouse, 5-R Duplexes and Fourplexes and 6-R Apartment are in Section

5.5. Setbacks along the development perimeter should vary beyond the minimum established by constraints of the site location and building codes. Minimum on-site building
separations vary and are determined by the building code.

B) Walkability: Streets should be carefully designed with a focus on high-quality landscape and hardscape elements, creating an appealing and inviting pedestrian environment.

This not only enhances the attractiveness of the residential areas as desirable places to live but also encourages and promotes a pedestrian-friendly community
C) Identity: A diverse range of architectural product types is encouraged for a distinct and unique residential identity. This emphasis on variety is achieved through careful
consideration of building architecture, siting, scale, massing, and materials, all of which contribute to creating cohesive neighborhoods with individual character and charm.

D) Design and Construction Quality: The architectural, lighting, signage, parking, and construction quality of residential uses should adhere to a high standard, ensuring a visually
appealing and well-maintained living environment.

E) Parking: The parking standards outlined in the Plan prioritize creating attractive, convenient, and well-landscaped parking areas that are properly illuminated. Access to these parking spaces should be provided from one of the residential drives and/or streets. Additionally, all parking areas visible from public streets should be screened, ensuring a visually
pleasing and seamlessly integrated streetscape
a. Product Type 6-R
Parking may be located in the sub-ground. Note that
the ground floor level shall not be more than 6’
above the public sidewalk. Carports or garages may
be constructed in the areas where parking is
permitted. Where garage doors are provided the
style is to compliment the architecture. Attached
and detached garages are allowed.

F) Signage and Lighting: Lighting is important for public security and safety. Signage and lighting features should complement the architecture.

G) Screening: Service uses such as trash storage and utility meters should be screened and not visible from the street.

All mechanical equipment should be screened from public view using screening devices consistent with the adjacent architecture. Individual roll-out cans should be screened and not visible from the street to maintain a clean and appealing streetscape. If trash enclosures are necessary, they should be constructed of solid masonry materials. The minimum wall height is 6’. To enhance their aesthetics, trash enclosures should feature decorative heavy metal gates, and those
visible from residences above will have trellis screening overhead, maintaining the community's visual appeal and coherence.

H) Design Concept: Provide a diverse range of architectural styles throughout the community, regardless of block
lengths. The focus is on ensuring that buildings front towards the street or greenspaces (See Figures 5.G and 5.H),
contributing to a cohesive and welcoming streetscape.

Building elevations facing public view areas are designed with significant one-story elements, including entries where 616
Page | 71
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 appropriate, enhancing the overall aesthetic appeal. A
minimum of 5 to 8 feet of landscape space should be
provided between any drive or sidewalk and the adjacent building wall, ensuring a pleasant and visually appealing pedestrian environment. For residential blocks with attached units, a paseo, at least 10 feet wide, should be provided approximately every 300 feet to allow pedestrian access from the front to the rear property lines. The inclusion of porches is encouraged, with a minimum depth of 6 feet,
measured at the walking surface, adding charm and
character to the homes. These porches are permitted to
encroach within the setbacks. See Product Type
Development Standards.

I) Landscape: Enhance architecture with complementary
landscape, encouraging the incorporation of decorative
arbors and shade structures throughout the community.

These features can be found in various locations, such as front, side, and rear yards, recreation areas, paseos, and entries, adding visual interest and charm to the
surroundings. Arbors may be constructed using wood or
metal and should reflect the overall theme and character of Carleton Acres, contributing to a harmonious and
aesthetically pleasing environment. In front yards, low fences or walls with a maximum height of 36 inches may be used, constructed a minimum of 18 inches behind the public
sidewalk.
617
Page | 72
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 5.G
3-R Single-Family Medium Density Conceptual Street
Figure 5.H
3-R Single-Family Medium Density Conceptual
Rear Garage

618
Page | 73
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.5 RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT TYPE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

5.5.1 Introduction
The Master Plan incorporates Standards and Guidelines related to residential product types. A product type is a basic residential building configuration to which specific regulations can be applied.

5.5.2 Product Type Development Standards
The Master Plan defines six product types, summarized with their variations. These Product Types encompass all of the types of residential development permitted within Carleton Acres. The Product Types represent a range of densities from single-family detached units to apartments.

Residential Product Types
1-R Large Lot Single-Family (R-1-5)
Notes: Single-Family, Detached, Street Parking Access
2-R Small Lot Single-Family (R-1-5)
Notes: Single-Family, Detached, Street Parking Access
3-R Cluster Single-Family (R-M-2 and R-M-3)
Notes: Single-Family, Detached, Street/Side or Rear Drive Parking Access
619
Page | 74
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 4-R Townhouses (R-M-2 and R-M-3)
Notes: Two or more units Attached, Condo or Rental, Street/Side or Rear Drive Parking Access
5-R Duplexes and Four-Plex’s (R-M-2 and R-M-3)
Notes: Two or more units Attached, Condo or Rental, Street/Side or Rear Drive Parking Access
6-R Apartment Buildings (R-M-3)
Notes: Two or more units Attached, Condo or Rental, Side or Rear Drive Parking Access
620
Page | 75
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Land Use
Zoning R-1-5
Land Use Designation Single-Family Residential
Permitted Uses Section 3.5
Conditioned Uses Section 3.5
Lot Size 5,000 SF minimum
Lot Width
60' minimum interior, 65' minimum
corner
Building Height 35' maximum
Lot Frontage Lots front the public street
Setbacks (Minimum)
Front 15' Living Space
22’ Garage or Parking Facilities
On cul-de-sac and knuckle lots with a
front line of which all or a portion is
curvilinear, the front yard setback
shall be no less than 15’ for living
space and 20’ for garages.

Side 5'
10' Street side on corner lot side yard
and 22’ for garages.

Rear 20' *
*Exception to rear setback to allow 7’
rear setback if single story, over 1,500
SF of useable open space in the rear,
minimum lot depth of 112’ and allow
space for accessory dwelling.

Parking
2 enclosed spaces minimum for each
dwelling unit
Wall and Fence Section 6.8.4
Landscape Section 6.8
Lighting Section 5.4.7, 6.10

5.5.2.1 1-R Large Lot Single-Family (R-1-5) Development Standards Notes: Single-Family, Detached, Street Parking Access
621
Page | 76
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Land Use
Zoning R-1-5
Land Use Designation Single-Family Residential
Permitted Uses Section 3.5
Conditioned Uses Section 3.5
Lot Size 5,000 SF minimum
Lot Width 50' minimum interior, 55' minimum
corner
Building Height 35' maximum
Lot Frontage Lots front the public street
Setbacks (Minimum)
Front 15' Living Space
22’ Garage or Parking Facilities
On cul-de-sac and knuckle lots with a
front line of which all or a portion is
curvilinear, the front yard setback
shall be no less than 15’ for living
space and 20’ for garages.

Side 5'
10' Street side on corner lot side yard
and 22’ for garages.

Rear 10'
Open Space
12% minimum of site area to be open
space in the rear including setbacks
Parking
2 enclosed spaces minimum for each
dwelling unit
Wall and Fence Section 6.8.4
Landscape Section 6.8
Lighting Section 5.4.7, 6.10

5.5.2.2 2-R Small Lot Single-Family (R-1-5) Development Standards Notes: Single-Family, Detached, Street Parking Access
622
Page | 77
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Land Use
Zoning R-M-2 and R-M-3
Land Use Designation Multi-Family Residential
Permitted Uses Section 3.5
Conditioned Uses Section 3.5
Lot Size (Total Site) 2,000 SF minimum site area per dwelling unit Building Height 35' max. or three stores whichever is taller.

Where R-M-2 site adjoins an R-1 site, the
second stories shall be designed to limit
visibility from the second and third story to the
R-1 site.

Lot Frontage
Lots front the public street or greenspace and
shall be served by a residential drive at the
sides and/or rear.

Buildings can be on individual lots or combined
onto a single lot.

Setbacks (Minimum)
Front 15' Living Space
22’ Garage or Parking Facilities
Side 5'
10' Street side on corner lot, 10' access to
more than one dwelling unit and 22’ for
garages.

Rear 10' *
15' on a corner lot or 10' on the long side of
lot.

Exception if the rear yard is to be used for
parking.

Exception if open space is provided else
where.
* Planned Unit Development with individual
lots allow 0’ setbacks, overall development
shall follow the above setback requirements.

Private Yards
Each building shall have a private yard. The yard
should be 200 SF minimum. One side having a
minimum 7' wide dimension.

Permitted
Encroachments
Porches (roofed and open on 3 sides:
6' maximum
Courtyards (low fenced or walled area) :
10' maximum
Common Open Space
5% minimum of the site for residents. The
calculated space shall not include setback areas
adjacent to the street. Shared open space could
include parks, playgrounds, sports courts,
swimming pools, gardens and coved patios or
gazebos open on at least 3 sides. The
calculated space shall not include enclosed
meeting or community rooms.

Parking

1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. On-site
visitor parking or parking behind garages is
encouraged.

Wall and Fence Section 6.8.4
Landscape Section 6.8
Lighting 5.4.7, 6.10

5.5.2.3 3-R Cluster Lot Single-Family (R-M-2 and R-M-3) Development Standards
Notes: Single-Family,
Detached, Street/Side or Rear
Drive Parking Access
623
Page | 78
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Land Use
Zoning R-M-2 and R-M-3
Land Use Designation Multi-Family Residential
Permitted Uses Section 3.5
Conditioned Uses Section 3.5
Lot Size (Total Site) 2,000 SF minimum site area per dwelling unit Building Height 35' max. or three stores whichever is taller.

Where R-M-2 site adjoins an R-1 site, the second
stories shall be designed to limit visibility from
the second and third story to the R-1 site.

Lot Frontage
Lots front the public street or greenspace and
shall be served by a residential drive at the sides
and/or rear.

Setbacks (Minimum)
Front 15'
22’ Garage or Parking Facilities
Side 5' (0' for attached units)
10' Street side on corner lot, 10' access to more
than one dwelling unit and 22’ for garages.

Rear 25' *
25' on a corner lot or 20' on the long side of lot.

Exception if the rear yard is to be used for
parking.

Exception if open space is provided else where.
* Planned Unit Development with individual lots
allow 0’ setbacks, overall development to follow
the above setback requirements.

Permitted
Encroachments
Porches (roofed and open on 3 sides:
6' maximum
Courtyards (low fenced or walled area) :
10' maximum
Common Open Space
5% minimum of the site for residents. The
calculated space shall not include setback areas
adjacent to the street. Shared open space could
include parks, playgrounds, sports courts,
swimming pools, gardens and coved patios or
gazebos open on at least 3 sides. The
calculated space shall not include enclosed
meeting or community rooms.

Parking

1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. On-site
visitor parking or parking behind garages is
encouraged.

Wall and Fence Section 6.8.4
Landscape Section 6.8
Lighting Section 5.4.7, 6.10

5.5.2.4 4-R Townhouses (R-M-2 and R-M-3) Development
Standards
Notes: Two or more units
Attached, Condo or Rental,
Street/Side or Rear Drive
Parking Access
624
Page | 79
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Land Use
Zoning R-M-2 and R-M-3
Land Use Designation Multi-Family Residential
Permitted Uses Section 3.5
Conditioned Uses Section 3.5
Lot Size (Total Site) R-M-2 2,000 SF minimum site area per dwelling unit
R-M-3 1,200 SF minimum site area per dwelling
unit
Building Height 35' max. or three stores whichever is taller.

Where R-M-2 or R-M-3 site adjoins an R-1 site,
the second stories shall be designed to limit
visibility from the second and third story to the
R-1 site.

Lot Frontage
Lots front the public street or greenspace and
shall be served by a residential drive at the front
and/or sides and/or rear.

Setbacks (Minimum)
Front 15'
22’ Garage or Parking Facilities
Side 5' (0' for attached units)
10' Street side on corner lot, 10' access to more
than one dwelling unit and 22’ for garages.

Rear 15' R-M-3 and 25' R-M-2 *
25' on a corner lot or 20' on the long side of lot.

Exception if the rear yard is to be used for
parking.

Exception if open space is provided else where.
* Planned Unit Development with individual lots
allow 0’ setbacks, overall development to follow
the above setback requirements.

Private Yards
Each building shall have a private yard. The yard
shall be 200 SF minimum. One side having a
minimum 7' wide dimension.

Permitted
Encroachments
Porches (roofed and open on 3 sides:
6' maximum
Courtyards (low fenced or walled area) :
10' maximum
Common Open Space
5% minimum of the site for residents. The
calculated space shall not include setback areas
adjacent to the street. Shared open space could
include parks, playgrounds, sports courts,
swimming pools, gardens and coved patios or
gazebos open on at least 3 sides. The
calculated space shall not include enclosed
meeting or community rooms.

Parking

1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. On-site
visitor parking or parking behind garages is
encouraged.

Wall and Fence Section 6.8.4
Landscape Section 6.8
Lighting Section 5.4.7, 6.10

5.5.2.5 5-R Duplexes and Four-Plex’s (R-M-2 and R-M-3)
Development Standards
Notes: Two or more units
Attached, Condo or Rental,
Street/Side or Rear Drive Parking
Access
625
Page | 80
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Land Use
Zoning R-M-3
Land Use Designation Multi-Family Residential
Permitted Uses Section 3.5
Conditioned Uses Section 3.5
Lot Size (Total Site) 1,200 SF minimum site area per dwelling unit Building Height Four stores maximum
Where R-M-3 site adjoins an R-1 site, the second
stories shall be designed to limit visibility from
the second and third story to the R-1 site.

Lot Frontage
Lots front the public street shall be
interconnected with other lots within the block
by common drives. Such common drives or
private streets, shall be designed as a continuous
route.

Setbacks (Minimum)
Front 15'
22’ Garage or Parking Facilities
Side 5' (0' for attached units)
10' Street side on corner lot, 10' access to more
than one dwelling unit and 22’ for garages.

Rear 15' *
Exception if the rear yard is to be used for
parking.

Exception if open space is provided else where.
* Planned Unit Development with individual lots
allow 0’ setbacks, overall development to follow
the above setback requirements.

Permitted
Encroachments
Porches (roofed and open on 3 sides:
6' maximum
Courtyards (low fenced or walled area) :
10' maximum
Common Open Space
5% minimum of the site for residents. The
calculated space shall not include setback areas
adjacent to the street. Shared open space could
include parks, playgrounds, sports courts,
swimming pools, gardens and coved patios or
gazebos open on at least 3 sides. The
calculated space shall not include enclosed
meeting or community rooms.

Parking 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit that includes on-site visitor parking.

Wall and Fence Section 6.8.4
Landscape Section 6.8
Lighting Section 5.4.7, 6.10

5.5.2.6 6-R Apartments – Multi-Family (R-M-3) Development Standards
Notes: Two or more
units Attached, Condo
or Rental, Side or Rear
Drive Parking Access
626
Page | 81
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.5.3 Model Good Neighbor Policies
The City of Visalia requires an operational management plan for R-M zones. The City shall approve the plan for long term maintenance and management of the development. (View the City code section referencing the Model Good Neighbor Policies).

The plan shall include but not be limited to the following:
 Maintenance of landscaping.
 Maintenance of private drive and open space parking.
 Maintenance of fences, on-site lighting and other
improvements not along the public street frontages.
 Buildings and premises shall be kept in good repair and free of junk and debris.
 Establish and maintain a regular program of routine property maintenance.
 Provide a tenant agreement form. All tenants shall read and receive a copy of the Tenant Agreement.
 Enforcing all provisions covered by covenants, conditions and restrictions that are placed on the property.
 Enforcing all provisions of the Model Good Neighbor Polices as specified by Resolution of the Planning Commission.

Before issuance of a building permit for the project the plan shall be submitted, approved by the Planning Director and recorded with the Tulare County Recorder.

5.6 RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES

5.6.1 Introduction
The following residential architectural design guidelines provide those design criteria necessary to assure that all residential design is consistent with Carleton Acres’ goals for neighborhood character as defined in this Section.

5.6.2 General Residential Standards
These Standards apply to all Residential Product Types and architectural styles. They are not meant to be restrictive but rather to assist in the design for a higher-level quality in architectural and community design.
a) The standards are based on the following for good
neighborhood design:
a. Entrance directed to street or greenspace if possible b. Varied garage placement
c. Variable lot setbacks
d. Varied roof pitches
e. Variety of architectural styles
f. Wrap around architecture
b) The architectural styles should be appropriate in massing, scale, and details for the architectural character.
c) Design elements to be avoided are continuous flat blank walls when exposed to public view and harsh contrasts of materials and colors.
d) Sides and rears of residential garage structures exposed to public view should receive the same level of architectural enhancement as the fronts of the residential structure. 627
Page | 82
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.6.3 Residential Architectural Guidelines
Purpose
The purpose of the residential architectural design guidelines is to provide design criteria and direction for the development of various product types. The styles and quality of architectural design are described in the following sections.

Desired Design Characteristics
The architectural style should be incorporated into the site plan, landscape and floor plan.

Design Characteristics to Avoid
a) Inappropriate mass, scale and proportion.
b) Extreme architectural style.
c) Continuous flat blank walls when exposed to public view. d) Harsh contrast of materials and colors.

Design Guidelines
The following guidelines should be used for a desired result and to assist the Builder/Developer in providing architectural design appropriate for Carleton Acres.

1. Architectural authenticity:
a. Develop floor plans and massing solutions that will
be authentic to the architectural style.
b. Architectural detail should be as authentic as
possible.

2. Architectural forward: Provide a mix of floor plans that includes pushing garages back and bringing the living spaces forward.

3. Varied garage placement: Encourage floor plan design that minimizes the impact of the garage on home and street.

4. Variety of architectural styles: Provide a variety of architectural styles that are historically based in the Central Valley region.

5. Varied roof heights and roof pitches. Varied hip and gable forms.

6. Varied front yard setbacks: Encourage variations in front yard setbacks to avoid monotony.

7. Wrap around architecture: Provide architectural
enhancement of side and rear elevations exposed to public view.

8. Single- and two-story homes and elements: Create a sense of variety within a street scene with varying heights and profiles. Single story homes are encouraged to be located at street corners.

9. Rear and side architectural treatment: Provide the same architectural treatment as the front when the rear or side is exposed to public view.

10. Color palettes: Define a selection of style-specific colors for architectural styles.

11. Authentic or natural-looking building materials are encouraged. These include wood, brick, smooth plaster,
stone, and roof tile as listed in the following standards for each style.
628
Page | 83
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

5.6.3.1 Standards for Architectural Styles
These standards govern the stylistic aspects of the design of residential buildings and site elements within the Master Plan Area.

They address all major residential elements that are visible from public streets and/or open spaces.

5.6.3.2 Allowable Styles
The allowable styles and variations of the styles are:

Craftsman
Monterey
Spanish Colonial Revival
American Heritage
Ranch
Modern

5.6.3.3 Architectural Standards for Each Style
The following section includes standards specific to each of the allowable styles. The photographs and text provided on the following pages represent the elements of each architectural style to be incorporated in Carleton Acres’ residential architecture. The photos represent concepts. Designs are subject to future refinement based upon the economy, marketing and engineering details.
629
Page | 84
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Craftsman
History
The Craftsman style is charming with custom details. Influenced by the Arts and Crafts movement, The American style emerged between 1900 and 1929. The style is a simpler form of the ornate Victorian architecture at the end of the 19th century.

Design Characteristics
 Deep overhangs.
 Exposed rafter tails.
 Low-pitched, gabled, or hipped roof.
 Covered front porch.
 Flat tile roofs.
 Faux wood siding: horizontal, vertical, or shingle.
 Stucco.
 Stone or brick base.
 Garage door patterns complementary to style.

Additional Style Elements
 Porch columns with stone base.
 Tapered columns.
 Grid pattern windows.

Historic Design
Current Adaptation
630
Page | 85
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Monterey
History
The Spanish style is a combination of Spanish Colonial adobe construction methods with New England colonial house. Built in the 1800’s throughout California with two stores. The single story became very popular during the 1930’s.

Design Characteristics
 Simple building form.
 Symmetrical or asymmetrical building masses.
 Shutters, balconies and verandas.
 Barrel or “S” tile roofs.
 Shallow or medium roof pitch featuring gables or hips, often with exposed rafter tails.
 Fine sand to California Monterey stucco finish.
 White vinyl wrap aluminum windows are allowable.
 Round tile attic vents.
 Garage door patterns complementary to style.

Additional Style Elements
 Simplified colonial style window and door trim.

Historic Design
Current Adaptation
631
Page | 86
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Spanish Colonial Revival
History
The style became popular during the early 1900’s. Courtyard designs with shade and flowering gardens were a welcoming entrance. Key features of this style are adapted throughout California. The charm of the style is within its directness and contrast of materials and textures.

Design Characteristics
 Simple box plan form.
 Barrel or “S” tile roofs.
 Shallow or medium roof pitch featuring gables or hips.  Fine sand to California Monterey stucco finish.
 White vinyl wrap aluminum windows are allowable.
 Round tile attic vents.
 Garage door patterns complementary to style.
 Simplified colonial style window and door trim.

Additional Style Elements
 Ornamental ironwork.
 Wood looking sash windows at front elevation.
 Deep, recessed windows at front elevation.

Historic Design
Current Adaptation
632
Page | 87
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 American Heritage
History
The American Heritage represents a practical and quaint country house. As American Frontier moved westward the style evolved depending on the available materials. The asymmetrical causal farmhouse look with a more detailed appearance is typical of Midwest American Heritage.

Design Characteristics
 Large front porches with wood railings.
 Horizontal or vertical siding blended with stucco finish.  Wood shingle appearance roofs.
 Medium or steep roof pitch with gables.
 Simple paned windows.
 Garage door patterns complementary to style.

Additional Style Elements
 Dormers and symmetrical elevations.
 Simple wood railings.
 Shutters
 Architectural grade asphalt shingle.

Historic Design
Current Adaptation
633
Page | 88
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Ranch Heritage
History
The Ranch Heritage represents a practical and charming rural country house. As American Frontier moved westward the style evolved depending on the available materials.

Design Characteristics
 One and two story “L”, “U” or rectangular plan forms.  Front porch and porte cochere are common features.
 Main hip or gable roof, possible secondary shed roofs over one story element.
 Barrel, S-shaped or flat concrete roof tile with 18” overhangs.  Medium roof pitch.
 Fine to medium stucco finish with large areas of stone veneer usually the full wall height.
 Minimum 6” wide stucco over window and door trim at front elevations.
 Garage door patterns complementary to style.

Additional Style Elements
 Thick, oversize arches without trim.
 Shutters
 Tower forms.
 Earth color palette-beige, tan, yellow.
 Possible ornamental iron details
Historic Design
Current Adaptation
634
Page | 89
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Modern
History
The Modern house style, prevalent from the early 20th century to the mid-1950s, emerged as a response to the ornate Victorian design of the late 19th century. The style is characterized by minimalist architectural elements, oversized windows, and unconventional flat roofs.

Design Characteristics
 Simple rectangular plan forms.
 Hip or flat roof
 Medium roof pitch with concrete roof tiles.
 Fine to medium stucco finish.
 Simple facades with no decorations.
 Emphasis on entrance door contemporary design.
 Garage door patterns complementary to style.

Additional Style Elements
 Large windows
Historic Design
Current Adaptation
635
The landscape design for Carleton Acres takes
inspiration from its rich agricultural background to create a unique and meaningful environment for the new community. The design aims to pay homage to the land's farming heritage while incorporating elements that reflect the region's agricultural legacy.To evoke the memory of cotton fields, the landscape will feature white trailing roses and other white flowering plants. These white blooms symbolize the cotton bolls, creating a beautiful and nostalgic connection to the land's agricultural past.Incorporating a variety of grasses in the landscape design represents the grain row crops. These grasses not only add visual interest but also evoke the sense of expansive grain fields that were a prominent feature of the area's agricultural landscape.Vines will be used strategically on walls and trellises throughout Carleton Acres. These vines serve as a reminder of the vineyards farmed on the property and contribute to the overall aesthetic, adding a touch of rustic charm and natural beauty.By incorporating these elements into the landscape design, Carleton Acres will foster a deep connection to its agricultural roots while creating a visually appealing and harmonious environment. The design will not only be aesthetically pleasing but also serve as a unique way to honor the land's history and the legacy of Carleton Shannon's farming passion.

Landscape

6.0 636
Page | 90
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Section 6 Landscape

6.1 INTRODUCTION
The Specific Plan of Carleton Acres outlines comprehensive design standards for all open spaces, encompassing streets, the Modoc Greenway, bike and pedestrian trails, parks, and landscaped areas.

These standards serve as guidelines for the detailed design of public open spaces within the community, describing landscape design principles and requirements. More detailed landscape and irrigation plans will be subjected to review by the Architectural Board and City Agencies to ensure they align with the design character and standards established in this Specific Plan.

The open space area design holds significant importance in shaping the identity of Carleton Acres, as these public spaces play a crucial role in defining the overall theme of the entire community. The street open spaces, in particular, act as vital connections within the community, promoting pedestrian use and encouraging a sense of community interaction and engagement. The meticulous planning and thoughtful design of these open spaces contribute to the cohesive and attractive ambiance of Carleton Acres, enhancing its appeal as a desirable place to live and thrive.

Design principles and standards are discussed first in this section.

Design concepts will be refined as details of the street engineering develop. The basic landscape quality should be applied. Final detailed designs should be reviewed and approved per Section 8.

6.2 DESIGN PRINCIPLES
Below are the design principles that all landscape design should follow:
 Establish a sense of place: In Carleton Acres, the
establishment of a distinct sense of place is a priority, with the public streets being the key open space areas for
conveying the community's identity and theme. The
thoughtful design of these public spaces aims to create a recognizable and cohesive character unique to Carleton
Acres, ensuring that residents and visitors alike recognize and appreciate the community's distinctiveness and thoughtful planning.
 Provide a diverse range of open spaces: Open Spaces and Parks are to be designed to encompass the essential
recreational needs of both the community and individual neighborhoods. These areas play a crucial role in enhancing the overall identity of Carleton Acres and are to be carefully planned to offer a diverse range of recreational
opportunities, catering to both passive and active activities, and creating an inviting and enjoyable environment for all residents and visitors.
 Provide plants and landscaping design that is sustainable:

The planting of low water use, drought-tolerant, and/or native plants indigenous to the Central Valley is actively encouraged to promote water conservation and
environmentally sustainable landscaping practices.
 Landscape design should incorporate theme plantings such as white trailing roses to symbolize cotton, vines to represent vineyards, and grasses to evoke the image of grain row crops, 637
Page | 91
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 adding to the overall aesthetic and identity of the
community.
 Neighborhood Identity: Carleton Acres embraces the
concept of distinct neighborhood designs, allowing each area to showcase its own unique characteristics and identity. As a result, the landscape design of each neighborhood can be tailored to reflect its individuality.
 Water storage/storm basin incorporated into open space:

The facilities of Carleton Acres’ stormwater management should be designed as open space use for the community.  Provide landscape buffers: The landscape buffer and
transitions along the boundaries of Carleton Acres create a clear and distinct sense of place for the community,
enhancing its visual appeal and contributing to a cohesive and well-defined environment.

6.3 STREET PLAN

6.3.1 Introduction
This section discusses the possible type of landscape treatment for each of Carleton Acres’ streets, pedestrian paths and bicycle circulation.

6.3.2 Arterial Streets

6.3.2.1 West Riggin Avenue
West Riggin Avenue is Carleton Acres’ primary east-west arterial. The type of trees suggested are Valley Oak, Crape Myrtle (white), and/or Chinese Pistache. Fruitless olive trees or similar at entrances into Carleton Acres and commercial. Plantings along streets to include grass & white flowers. Block walls adjacent to residential should have vine plants to soften the wall.

6.3.2.2 North Akers Street
North Akers Street is Carleton Acres’ secondary north-south arterial.

The type of trees suggested are Valley Oak, Crape Myrtle (white), and/or Chinese Pistache. Fruitless olive trees or similar at entrances into Carleton Acres and commercial. Plantings along streets to include grass & white flowers. Block walls adjacent to residential should have vine plants to soften the wall. See Figures 6.K to 6.N for landscape planting types along Modoc.

6.3.2.3 North Shirk Road
North Shirk Road is Carleton Acres’ primary north-south arterial. The type of trees suggested are Valley Oak, Crape Myrtle (white), and/or Chinese Pistache. Fruitless olive trees or similar at entrances into Carleton Acres and commercial. Plantings along streets to include grass & white flowers. Block walls adjacent to residential should have vine plants to soften the wall.

6.3.2.4 Avenue 320
Avenue 320 is Carleton Acres’ secondary east-west arterial. The type of trees suggested are Valley Oak, Crape Myrtle (white), and/or Chinese Pistache. Fruitless olive trees or similar at entrances into Carleton Acres and commercial. Plantings along streets to include grass & white flowers. Block walls adjacent to residential should have vine plants to soften the wall.
638
Page | 92
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

6.3.3 Two Lane Collector Streets

6.3.3.1 Shannon Parkway
Shannon Parkway should have a strong sense of place. The Modoc Greenway runs along the entire width of the Site, North of the street.

The southeast portion of the parkway includes the existing middle school and planned high school. The proposed landscape treatment includes canopy trees spaced at 50 feet on center. The trees should provide a strong distinctness of the street edge and a clear separation of pedestrians from vehicular traffic. Trees should be planted in both parkways and in the proposed median. The canopy should create a shaded pedestrian path. Large shrubs should be used within the median to discourage pedestrians and students from crossing other than at designated crosswalks. See Figures 6.K to 6.N for landscape planting types.

6.3.3.2 North Roeben Street
North Roeben Street at the center of the Site will be a main street for the residents coming from the south going towards the north. A similar plant choice as Shannon Parkway can give a strong identity for the community. The intersection of N. Roeben St. and Shannon Parkway should be carefully designed as well as the intersection of N.

Roeben St. and W. Riggin Ave. The proposed landscape treatment includes canopy trees spaced at 50 feet on center. The trees should define the street edge and separate pedestrians from vehicular traffic. Trees should be planted in both parkways and in the proposed median. The canopy should create a shaded pedestrian path. The median should be planted with large shrubs to discourage crossings other than at crosswalks. See Figures 6.K to 6.N for landscape planting types.

6.3.4 Local Streets
Parkway landscape per City Standards is 5 feet along the street with a 5-foot-wide sidewalk.

Trees should be spaced approximately 40 feet on center depending on the location of driveways. They should be scaled with the streetlights. Regularly spaced trees with one species per street selected from the plant list is highly encouraged. See Figures 6.K.

6.3.5 Commercial Drive Aisles
Along commercial storefronts sidewalks should range in width from 8 to 20 feet. Street trees should be planted in a minimum 8 feet square planters. Tree grates, flush with pavement, may be used for maximum sidewalk area. Canopy trees should be used throughout the drives spaced 40 to 50 feet on center. Special paving should be utilized at the main entrances of commercial uses and at crosswalk crossings to create visually appealing and distinct areas. The landscape design should be carefully curated to complement the commercial architecture, incorporating elements like trellised outdoor areas. Furthermore, the pedestrian's comfort and scale will be prioritized in the design process, ensuring a welcoming and pleasant environment for pedestrians throughout the community.

6.3.6 Residential Block Entrances
In Carleton Acres, each neighborhood block entrance should be thoughtfully designed to be unique yet cohesive with the overall identity and theme of the community. The landscape design should be carefully planned to highlight and accentuate these entrances, creating a welcoming and distinctive sense of arrival. Special paving should be utilized to mark the entry points into the neighborhoods, 639
Page | 93
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 and where applicable, medians may be incorporated to separate traffic entering and exiting the area, with coordinated landscape elements enhancing the overall aesthetics.

Figure 6.A
Residential Conceptual Entrance

6.4 PARK DESIGN PLAN

6.4.1 Introduction
The design concept for Modoc Greenway, parks, and open
landscaped areas is outlined in this section of the plan. Detailed designs will be developed for each open space, encompassing both active and passive recreational elements. With recreational opportunities including a bike trail along Modoc Greenway and several proposed parks integrated within residential communities, Carleton Acres is thoughtfully planned to offer a diverse range of recreational experiences for its residents and visitors.

6.4.2 Design Concepts

6.4.2.1 Modoc Greenway
Modoc Ditch is an existing site feature that begins at two points along the east property line. The first is on the east side of the Ridgeview Middle school and then travels north to the center of the project. The second is from the southwest corner of Ave 320 and N. Akers Street that travels down along the east property line to the center of the project (Shannon Parkway). The two ditches join at this point then continue west to N. Shirk Street.

The existing Modoc Ditch will become an amenity to residents within Carleton Acres and beyond known as Modoc Greenway. The Modoc Greenway will have a linear bike and walking trail along the north side of Shannon Parkway and the West side of N. Akers St. A bioswale will run parallel with the trail providing added landscape features. See Figure 6.C. Tree clusters will provide shade for the users. The trail will serve as a vital connector, linking residential areas to the school sites and creating seamless accessibility throughout the entire Carleton Acres development. Refer to Figure 3.B.

6.4.2.2 Parks
The parks within residential neighborhoods of Carleton Acres are designed to range from 0.8 to 1 acre in size, providing ample recreational space for residents. Each park should be equipped with essential amenities, including an open grass area, playground, picnic spots, barbeque grills, seating, and drinking fountains, ensuring a welcoming and enjoyable environment for all. To enhance yearround usability, shade trees are thoughtfully incorporated, offering relief from the sun and creating inviting spaces for community gatherings. The landscaping of these parks prioritizes environmental 640
Page | 94
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 sustainability, with a focus on low water use, drought-tolerant, and/or native plant species, contributing to water conservation efforts. Additionally, the strategic placement and design of these parks aim to encourage community interaction and socialization, creating a strong sense of community and connection among the residents of Carleton Acres.
641
Page | 95
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 6.B
Park Conceptual Designs
642
Page | 96
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023

6.5 EDGES AND BUFFERS STANDARDS

6.5.1 Introduction
Carleton Acres will be carefully planned to maintain a clearly defined edge and buffer, ensuring a distinct boundary for the community while also demonstrating respect for the neighboring adjacent communities. The thoughtful design and implementation of these features will contribute to a harmonious and well-integrated development within the broader context of the surrounding area.

6.5.2 Design Concept

6.5.2.1 W.Riggin Ave., N. Shirk Rd., Ave 320, N. Akers St., Shannon Parkway and N. Roeben St.

The Carleton Acres Specific Plan incorporates continuously landscaped corridors along four boundaries and major streets within the community to enhance the overall environment. These buffers serve multiple purposes, including creating a sense of privacy, establishing neighborhood boundaries, facilitating smooth transitions between different land uses, and mitigating noise. Along the streets, a parkway and sidewalk will be accompanied by a maximum 7-foot-tall 4-inch block wall, which will be softened with landscaping and/or vines to add aesthetic appeal and promote a welcoming streetscape.

6.5.2.2 Commercial Use
To ensure the privacy and noise reduction for residential areas, a buffer should be established between commercial and residential uses in Carleton Acres. This buffer will consist of a 7-foot-tall 4-inch block wall on the commercial side, complemented by landscaping.

This thoughtful design approach will create a visual and acoustic barrier, enhancing the living experience of residents and maintaining a harmonious coexistence between commercial and residential zones within the community.

6.5.2.3 Modoc Greenway
The Modoc Greenway will serve as a valuable buffer along Shannon Parkway, benefiting both multi-family and single-family residential residents in Carleton Acres. The inclusion of a riparian edge along the bioswales will attract diverse wildlife species, enhancing the natural appeal of the area. To promote environmental conservation, a mix of native trees, including Valley Oak, Interior Oak, Sycamore, and Mexican Redbud, should be planted along the bioswales, while native shrubs like Mexican Sage bush, Dwarf Coyote Brush, and California Manzanitas are planned to line the bicycle/walking path. The native landscaping and wildlife attracted by the Modoc Greenway will have positive impacts on the entire north Visalia community, adding to the overall ecological richness of Carleton Acres.

See Figures 6.K to 6.N for Preferred Tree, Plant, Shrub, Grass Selections.
643
Page | 97
Carleton Acres Specific Plan_________________________________________________________________________ 08-29-2023 Figure 6.C
Modoc Greenway Conceptual Designs

6.6 WATER STORAGE/RECHARGE BASIN PLAN
The Landscape Master Plan for Carleton Acres includes thoughtful landscaping to visually enhance the edges of the proposed basins, elevating their aesthetics and overall appeal. To ensure safety and proper maintenance, access to the basins should be restricted with appropriate fencing. The edge landscaping is planned to feature low water use, drought-tolerant, and/or native plants, contributing to water conservation and environmental sustainability. Additionally, the trail on the western portion of the basin will be thoughtfully designed in coordination with the proposed basin, providing residents with an enjoyable pathway.