Agenda packet — Visalia City Council, June 2, 2025 (part 4 of 5)

Photo 9. View of walnut orchard and site conditions on the northern boundary of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 10. View of walnut orchard and site conditions on the northern boundary of the project area facing northwest.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
619

Page 36 of 59 ends

Photo 11. View of residential properties on the eastern boundary of the project area facing east.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 12. View of walnut orchard and site conditions on the eastern boundary of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
620

Page 37 of 59 ends

Photo 13. View of oak trees and site conditions on the eastern boundary of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 14. View of walnut orchard and site conditions on the eastern boundary of the project area facing west.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
621

Page 38 of 59 ends

Photo 15. View of walnut orchard and Santa Fe Street and site conditions on the western boundary of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 16. View of walnut orchard and site conditions on the northwestern boundary of the project area facing east.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
622

Page 39 of 59 ends

Photo 17. View of site conditions on the northwest corner of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 18. View of site conditions on the northwest corner of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
623

Page 40 of 59 ends

Photo 19. View of site conditions on the northwest corner of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 20. View of site conditions on the northwest corner of the project area facing west.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
624

Page 41 of 59 ends

Photo 21. View of site conditions on the southern boundary of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 22. View of site conditions and potential nesting trees on the eastern boundary of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
625

Page 42 of 59 ends

Photo 23. View of site conditions and grape brambles on the eastern boundary of the project area facing east.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 24. View of site conditions and oak trees on the eastern boundary of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
626

Page 43 of 59 ends

Photo 25. View of site conditions and grape brambles on the eastern boundary of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 26. View of site conditions on the eastern boundary of the project area facing west.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
627

Page 44 of 59 ends

Photo 27. View of Tulare Irrigation Canal on the southern boundary of the project area facing west.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 28. View of Tulare Irrigation Canal and oak trees on the southern boundary of the project area facing west.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
628

Page 45 of 59 ends

Photo 29. View of site conditions on the southeast corner of the project area facing east.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 30. View of site conditions and ruderal weeds on the southeast corner of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
629

Page 46 of 59 ends

Photo 31. View of site conditions and adjacent vineyard on the southeast corner of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 32. View of site conditions on the southeast corner of the project area facing west.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
630

Page 47 of 59 ends

Photo 33. View of site conditions on the southeast corner of the project area facing northwest.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 34. View of Tulare Irrigation Canal small mammal burrows on the southern boundary of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
631

Page 48 of 59 ends

Photo 35. View of site conditions on the southwest corner of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 36. View of Tulare Irrigation Canal and oak trees on the southern boundary of the project area facing east.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
632

Page 49 of 59 ends

Photo 37. View of site conditions on the southwest corner of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 38. View of site conditions on the southwest corner of the project area facing west.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
633

Page 50 of 59 ends

Photo 39. View of site conditions and walnut orchard on the southern boundary of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 40. View of site conditions on the western boundary of the project area facing east.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
634

Page 51 of 59 ends

Photo 41. View of site conditions on the western boundary of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 42. View of site conditions on the western boundary of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
635

Page 52 of 59 ends

Photo 43. View of site conditions on the western boundary of the project area facing west.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 44. View of site conditions on the western boundary of the project area facing south.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
636

Page 53 of 59 ends

Photo 45. View of site conditions on the western boundary of the project area facing north.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.

Photo 46. View of site conditions on the western boundary of the project area facing east.

Photo taken by Lucas Knox on December 13, 2024.
637

Page 54 of 59 ends

APPENDIX B:

United States Fish and Wildlife Service IPaC Resource List 638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652

Page 55 of 59 ends

APPENDIX C:

California Department of Fish and Wildlife RareFind
653
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
ABNSB10010 None Candidate
Endangered
G4 S2 SSC
California jewelflower
Caulanthus californicus
PDBRA31010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
California tiger salamander - central California DPS
Ambystoma californiense pop. 1
AAAAA01181 Threatened Threatened G2G3T3 S3 WL
Crotch's bumble bee
Bombus crotchii
IIHYM24480 None Candidate
Endangered
G2 S2
Hoover's spurge
Euphorbia hooveri
PDEUP0D150 Threatened None G1 S1 1B.2
northwestern pond turtle
Actinemys marmorata
ARAAD02031 Proposed
Threatened
None G2 SNR SSC
San Joaquin adobe sunburst
Pseudobahia peirsonii
PDAST7P030 Threatened Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
San Joaquin kit fox
Vulpes macrotis mutica
AMAJA03041 Endangered Threatened G4T2 S3
San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass
Orcuttia inaequalis
PMPOA4G060 Threatened Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Swainson's hawk
Buteo swainsoni
ABNKC19070 None Threatened G5 S4
Tipton kangaroo rat
Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides
AMAFD03152 Endangered Endangered G2T1T2 S2
tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
ABPBXB0020 None Threatened G1G2 S2 SSC
valley elderberry longhorn beetle
Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
IICOL48011 Threatened None G3T3 S3
vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
ICBRA03030 Threatened None G3 S3
vernal pool tadpole shrimp
Lepidurus packardi
ICBRA10010 Endangered None G3 S3
western spadefoot
Spea hammondii
AAABF02020 Proposed
Threatened
None G2G3 S3S4 SSC
western yellow-billed cuckoo
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
ABNRB02022 Threatened Endangered G5T2T3 S1
Record Count: 17
Query Criteria: Quad IS (Cairns Corner (3611922) OR Visalia (3611933) OR Tulare (3611923) OR Exeter (3611932) OR Monson (3611943) OR Ivanhoe (3611942) OR Paige (3611924) OR Goshen (3611934) OR Traver (3611944)) AND (Federal Listing Status IS (Endangered OR Threatened OR Proposed Endangered OR Proposed Threatened OR Candidate) OR State Listing Status IS (Endangered OR Threatened OR Rare OR Candidate Endangered OR Candidate Threatened)) Report Printed on Friday, December 13, 2024
Commercial Version -- Dated December, 1 2024 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 1 Information Expires 6/1/2025
Selected Elements by Common Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
654

Page 56 of 59 ends

APPENDIX D:

California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Inventory
655
Search Results
CNPS Rare Plant Inventory
21 matches found. Click on scientific name for details
Search Criteria: CRPR is one of [1A:1B:2A:2B:3:4] , 9-Quad include [3611922:3611933:3611923:3611932:3611943:3611942:3611924:3611934:3611944] ▲ SCIENTIFIC
NAME
COMMON

NAME FAMILY LIFEFORM

BLOOMING
PERIOD
FED
LIST
STATE
LIST
GLOBAL
RANK
STATE
RANK
CA
RARE
PLANT
RANK
CA

ENDEMIC
DATE

ADDED PHOTO
Amaranthus
watsonii
Watson's
amaranth
Amaranthaceae annual herb Apr-Sep None None G5? S3 4.3 2001- 01-01
© 2003
Debra
Valov
Atriplex
cordulata var.
cordulata
heartscale Chenopodiaceae annual herb Apr-Oct None None G3T2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1988- 01-01
© 1994
Robert E.

Preston,
Ph.D.

Atriplex
cordulata var.
erecticaulis
Earlimart
orache
Chenopodiaceae annual herb AugSep(Nov)None None G3T1 S1 1B.2 Yes 2001- 01-01
© 2009
Robert E.

Preston,
Ph.D.

Atriplex
depressa
brittlescale Chenopodiaceae annual herb Apr-Oct None None G2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1994- 01-01
© 2009
Zoya
Akulova
Atriplex
minuscula
lesser
saltscale
Chenopodiaceae annual herb May-Oct None None G2 S2 1B.1 Yes 1994- 01-01
© 2000
Robert E.

Preston,
Ph.D.

Atriplex
persistens
vernal pool
smallscale
Chenopodiaceae annual herb Jun-Oct None None G2 S2 1B.2 Yes 2001- 01-01 No Photo
Available
12/11/24, 10:30 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&crpr=1A:1B:2A:2B:3:4&qsl=9&quad=3611922:3611933:3611923:3611932:3611943:3611942:3611924:3611934:3611944:&elev=:m:o 1/3 656
Atriplex subtilis subtle
orache
Chenopodiaceae annual herb (Apr)JunSep(Oct)None None G1 S1 1B.2 Yes 1994- 01-01
© 2000
Robert E.

Preston,
Ph.D.

Caulanthus
californicus
California
jewelflower
Brassicaceae annual herb Feb-May FE CE G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1984- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Delphinium
hansenii ssp.
ewanianum
Ewan's
larkspur
Ranunculaceae perennial herb Mar-May None None G4T3 S3 4.2 Yes 1994- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Delphinium
recurvatum
recurved
larkspur
Ranunculaceae perennial herb Mar-Jun None None G2? S2 1B.2 Yes 1988- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Eryngium
spinosepalum
spinysepaled
buttoncelery
Apiaceae annual/perennial
herb
Apr-Jun None None G2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1980-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Euphorbia
hooveri
Hoover's
spurge
Euphorbiaceae annual herb (MayJun)JulSep(Oct)FT None G1 S1 1B.2 Yes 1974- 01-01
© 2020
Neal
Kramer
Helianthus
winteri
Winter's
sunflower
Asteraceae perennial shrub Jan-Dec None None G2? S2? 1B.2 Yes 2014- 10-15
© 2014
Chris
Winchell
Hordeum
intercedens
vernal barley Poaceae annual herb Mar-Jun None None G3G4 S3S4 3.2 1994- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Imperata
brevifolia
California
satintail
Poaceae perennial
rhizomatous herb
Sep-May None None G3 S3 2B.1 2006-
12-26
© 2020
Matt C.

Berger
Lasthenia
chrysantha
alkali-sink
goldfields
Asteraceae annual herb Feb-Apr None None G2 S2 1B.1 Yes 2019- 09-30
© 2009
California
State
University,
Stanislaus
Lasthenia
glabrata ssp.
coulteri
Coulter's
goldfields
Asteraceae annual herb Feb-Jun None None G4T2 S2 1B.1 1994- 01-01
© 2013
Keir Morse
12/11/24, 10:30 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&crpr=1A:1B:2A:2B:3:4&qsl=9&quad=3611922:3611933:3611923:3611932:3611943:3611942:3611924:3611934:3611944:&elev=:m:o 2/3 657
Orcuttia
inaequalis
San Joaquin
Valley Orcutt
grass
Poaceae annual herb Apr-Sep FT CE G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Pseudobahia
peirsonii
San Joaquin
adobe
sunburst
Asteraceae annual herb Feb-Apr FT CE G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Puccinellia
simplex
California
alkali grass
Poaceae annual herb Mar-May None None G2 S2 1B.2 2015-
10-15
© 2017
Chris
Winchell
Sagittaria
sanfordii
Sanford's
arrowhead
Alismataceae perennial
rhizomatous herb
(emergent)
MayOct(Nov)None None G3 S3 1B.2 Yes 1984-
01-01
©2013
Debra L.

Cook
Showing 1 to 21 of 21 entries
Suggested Citation:

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2024. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9.5). Website https://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 11 December 2024].
12/11/24, 10:30 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&crpr=1A:1B:2A:2B:3:4&qsl=9&quad=3611922:3611933:3611923:3611932:3611943:3611942:3611924:3611934:3611944:&elev=:m:o 3/3 658

Page 57 of 59 ends

APPENDIX E:

United States Fish and Wildlife Service: National Wetland Inventory Map 659
SJVH Blankenship Development Project
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected]
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
January 21, 2025
0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 km
1:15,047
This page was produced by the NWI mapper
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.
660

Page 58 of 59 ends

APPENDIX F:

Project Site Plan
661

76.0'

38.4'

29.7' 4.4'

58.3'

62.7'

46.3'

59.6' 31.4'

28.9' 35.4' 60.0' 51.3' 60.0' 60.0' 40.0' 31.4' 124.7' 124.7'

32.9'38.6' 9.0' 23.7' 29.3' 41.1'

41.1'

25.3'21.6' 14.4'

60.0'

43.6'

16.4'

60.0'

23.4'

36.6'

60.5'

17.8'

43.2'

70.6'

33.6'
116.7' 141.2'
115.0'

65.0'

62.7'

17.5'

45.2'

62.7'

32.7'

30.0'

32.7'

27.3'

35.4'

24.6'

38.1'

21.9'

40.8'

19.2'

43.5'

16.5'

46.2'

13.8'

48.9'

11.1'

51.6'

8.4'

54.4'

5.6'

74.4'
115.0'
115.0'
207.6'

60.0' 60.0' 60.0' 60.0' 60.4' 130.8' 144.7'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
144.7'
105.7'
116.3'
114.8'

92.0'
115.0'
144.7'
115.0'
123.9'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
134.8'
115.0'
115.0'
142.8' 144.7'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'

77.5'

36.8'

28.5' 5.6'

54.4'

60.0'

45.0'

92.3' 31.5'

92.3' 31.4'

45.0'

60.0'

32.2'

29.5' 4.6'
114.4'

65.0'

60.0'

81.2'
112.3' 112.3'
112.1' 112.3'
111.7' 112.3'

88.9' 103.9'

46.7'

66.6'

66.7'

66.6'

66.7'

66.6'

46.7'

31.4'

92.4' 93.5' 31.5'

46.6'

66.7'

46.7'

31.4'

92.4' 92.4' 31.4'
112.4' 112.9'

66.7'

66.6'

66.7'

66.6'

66.7'

66.7'
112.4' 113.0'
112.4' 113.1'
112.4' 113.3'
112.4' 112.8'
112.4' 113.4'
112.4' 112.7'
112.4' 112.5'

38.3'

58.6'

58.5' 66.0' 34.4'

93.1'

99.8'

43.7' 27.4'

58.5'

58.7'

13.4'

70.7'

80.8'

55.2' 55.1' 28.0' 55.1' 55.1' 42.0' 55.1' 31.4' 95.0' 95.0'

31.4' 42.0' 50.0' 50.0' 34.2'15.8' 50.0' 50.0'

50.0'

50.0' 12.8'
115.0'

62.0' 30.7' 18.9' 49.7' 2.6'

47.1' 24.3' 25.4' 46.1'

3.6'

49.7'

18.1'

31.6'

39.9' 9.8' 40.0'

22.6' 27.5'

12.3' 44.9'

55.2'

55.6' 2.2'

9.7'

21.3'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
135.3'
123.4'
115.0'

24.1'

10.1'

44.9'

5.1'

62.0' 50.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
116.1'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0' 115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
125.6'
115.1'
135.7'
115.0'

79.1' 2.0'

48.1'
105.2'

28.6'

46.5'

60.6'

60.4'

85.2' 36.3'

95.1'

4.8'
101.9'

27.1'
111.5'

76.1' 29.7'
140.5'

76.1'

50.0' 17.5'
121.3'
118.2'

33.3' 51.5'

60.0'
121.0'
123.5'
106.0' 106.0'
112.9'
105.7'
187.7' 50.0' 49.9' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 40.0' 31.4' 85.0'

31.4' 40.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 0.3' 49.7'
139.2'

31.0' 8.1' 65.4'

25.9'

92.8'
125.0'
125.0'
125.0'
125.0'
125.0'
125.0'

60.0' 68.7'
142.4'

48.3' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 47.2'

31.6'

97.1'

93.4'

35.4'

92.3'

30.2'

27.4' 14.7' 20.9' 44.2'

46.3'

41.0' 51.7'

46.3' 8.1'

35.6'

27.4'30.2' 78.1'
102.2' 27.5' 47.9' 60.0' 60.0' 95.0'

31.4'

54.4' 45.0' 54.4' 54.4' 54.4' 54.4' 54.4' 54.4' 95.6' 30.9' 115.0'

49.0' 50.0' 50.0'

14.3'

35.7' 50.0' 50.0' 25.1' 24.9' 50.0'

5.9'

44.1' 70.9'
115.0'

72.5'

60.0'

49.2'

88.1'
115.0'

93.3' 60.0' 60.0'
115.0'

57.6' 54.4' 20.9'33.5' 54.4' 54.4' 25.3'29.1'

4.4'

50.0' 65.0'
115.0'
115.0'
108.4'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
134.6'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
113.1'
115.0'
115.0'
158.2' 115.0'
115.0'
123.6'
115.0'

50.1' 42.4' 32.0' 99.0' 99.0'

50.1' 38.2' 31.0'
118.8' 118.5'

50.1' 60.3' 119.1' 118.5'

51.0' 44.8' 31.9' 98.5' 98.5'

50.9' 40.5' 31.0'

51.0' 51.2' 51.0' 51.0' 48.2' 51.0' 32.2' 98.7' 118.4' 118.7'

64.5' 51.0' 51.0' 51.0' 51.0' 51.1' 51.0' 62.6' 118.2' 118.8' 119.2' 119.0' 118.7' 118.6' 118.9'

22.6' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 0.0' 24.1'

29.0'

41.1'

41.1' 22.6'24.1'16.0' 57.0' 57.0' 57.0' 40.0' 31.4' 85.0'

57.0' 40.0' 31.4'

57.0' 57.0' 60.8' 154.3'
125.0'
125.0'
125.0'
125.0'
113.5'
172.6'

95.0' 95.0'

31.4'

67.3' 47.3' 43.7' 67.3' 30.6' 95.1' 95.1'

32.2' 51.0' 67.3' 67.3' 47.3' 31.4' 115.2' 114.8'

67.3' 67.3' 67.3' 67.3' 115.4' 114.6' 115.6' 114.4'
167.2'

51.2'

51.2'
615.0'
489.0'

50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 45.9'

10.0'
105.0'
105.0'
133.3'

50.0' 31.4'

50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 133.3'
105.0'
133.3'

93.6'
105.0'
133.3'
105.0'
133.3'
105.0'
133.2'
105.0'
133.2'
105.0'
133.2'

10.0'

40.9' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 45.0' 133.5'

45.0' 31.4'

50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 45.0' 50.0' 31.4' 133.5' 133.5' 133.5' 133.5' 133.5'
133.4'
133.4'

60.0' 60.0' 56.1' 66.1' 14.1' 103.6' 135.4'

31.4' 13.3' 42.9' 29.6' 37.0' 60.6' 60.6' 143.7' 151.9' 160.2'

15.2' 15.2'

10.9'
138.5' 138.0' 9.6' 10.9'
327.54 TREE 0.7'DIA.OAK TREE
326.94 TREE 2.3'DIA.OAK TREE
326.94 TREE 4'DIA.OAK TREE
327.97 TREE 4'DIA.OAK TREE
327.09 TREE 4'DIA.OAK TREE
329.12 TREE 5'DIA.OAK TREE
322.28 CONT_MON FD 3/4 DN 1.3 TAG NOT LEG
328.18 CONT_MON FD BCM FLUSH W/ AC LS 6859
327.18 CONT_MON FD BCM FLUSH W/AC PLS 9227
325.93 CONT_MON FD BCM FLUSH W/AC PLS 9227
323.93 CONT_MON FD BCM IN CONC DN 1.4
327.92 CONT_MON FD BM
327.85 CONT_MON FD BM
324.89 SIGN FIBER OPTIC SIGN
324.84 SIGN FIBER OPTIC SIGN
325.82 SIGN FIBER OPTIC SIGN
324.91 SIGN FIBER OPTIC SIGN
325.10 SIGN GAS PIPELINE SIGN
326.61 SIGN MERGE SIGN
327.05 CONT_X SET CHZ X
326.13 CONT_X SET CHZ X
327.42 CONT_X SET CHZ X ON MOW CURB
CONT_X SET CHZ X ON MOW CURB
327.20 CONT_X SET N/S
326.45 CONT_X SET N/S
325.00 SIGN T.S SIGN
327.14 SIGN T.SIGN
326.45 SIGN T.SIGN
326.52 SIGN T.SIGN
326.46 SIGN T.SIGN
LOT: 59
7210 SF
LOT: 51
7211 SF
LOT: 85
8221 SF
LOT: 71
6900 SF
LOT: 58
7210 SF
LOT: 50
7527 SF
LOT: 78
15651 SF
LOT: 70
6900 SF
LOT: 57
7211 SF
LOT: 79
10168 SF
LOT: 77
14300 SF
LOT: 69
6915 SF
LOT: 64
6413 SF
LOT: 56
7210 SF
LOT: 80
8683 SF
LOT: 76
6671 SF
LOT: 68
7169 SF
LOT: 63
7210 SF
LOT: 55
7211 SF
LOT: 81
8683 SF
LOT: 75
6900 SF
LOT: 67
7783 SF
LOT: 62
7211 SF
LOT: 54
7211 SF
LOT: 82
8683 SF
LOT: 74
6900 SF
LOT: 66
11380 SF
LOT: 61
7210 SF
LOT: 53
7210 SF
LOT: 83
8598 SF
LOT: 73
6900 SF
LOT: 60
7211 SF
LOT: 52
7210 SF
LOT: 84
8553 SF
LOT: 72
6900 SF
LOT: 32
6732 SF
LOT: 31
7214 SF
LOT: 40
7216 SF
LOT: 39
6740 SF
LOT: 38
6740 SF
LOT: 37
6665 SF
LOT: 34
5949 SF
LOT: 33
6725 SF
LOT: 44
7492 SF
LOT: 24
7544 SF
LOT: 45
7492 SF
LOT: 25
7536 SF
LOT: 46
7492 SF
LOT: 26
7528 SF
LOT: 47
7492 SF
LOT: 27
7520 SF
LOT: 48
7492 SF
LOT: 28
7512 SF
LOT: 49
7406 SF
LOT: 29
7504 SF
LOT: 42
7492 SF
LOT: 22
7474 SF
LOT: 30
7412 SF
LOT: 43
7492 SF
LOT: 23
7552 SF
LOT: 41
7407 SF
LOT: 122
6227 SF
LOT: 146
8729 SF
LOT: 138
9389 SF
LOT: 130
5750 SF
LOT: 121
6227 SF
LOT: 145
7462 SF
LOT: 137
9078 SF
LOT: 129
5750 SF
LOT: 120
6227 SF
LOT: 144
7485 SF
LOT: 136
6562 SF
LOT: 128
6067 SF
LOT: 119
6227 SF
LOT: 143
7485 SF
LOT: 135
6344 SF
LOT: 127
6758 SF
LOT: 118
6227 SF
LOT: 142
7485 SF
LOT: 134
6333 SF
LOT: 126
6758 SF
LOT: 117
6227 SF
LOT: 141
7485 SF
LOT: 133
6333 SF
LOT: 125
6759 SF
LOT: 116
6215 SF
LOT: 140
7186 SF
LOT: 132
7044 SF
LOT: 124
6763 SF
LOT: 115
8576 SF
LOT: 139
7859 SF
LOT: 131
7044 SF
LOT: 123
5795 SF
LOT: 152
7986 SF
LOT: 151
7609 SF
LOT: 150
6567 SF
LOT: 149
6521 SF
LOT: 148
6871 SF
LOT: 147
10113 SF
LOT: 153
14264 SF
LOT: 154
11418 SF
LOT: 164
7328 SF
LOT: 163
6250 SF
LOT: 162
6250 SF
LOT: 161
6250 SF
LOT: 160
6250 SF
LOT: 159
6250 SF
LOT: 158
6294 SF LOT: 157
12380 SF
LOT: 98
5750 SF
LOT: 106
7060 SF
LOT: 114
9904 SF
LOT: 93
6256 SF
LOT: 99
5750 SF
LOT: 107
12464 SF
LOT: 86
8851 SF
LOT: 94
6256 SF
LOT: 100
5750 SF
LOT: 108
7143 SF
LOT: 87
6900 SF
LOT: 95
6256 SF
LOT: 101
5750 SF
LOT: 109
5683 SF
LOT: 88
6900 SF
LOT: 96
6440 SF
LOT: 102
5750 SF
LOT: 110
12431 SF
LOT: 89
7389 SF
LOT: 97
7890 SF
LOT: 103
5750 SF
LOT: 111
15919 SF
LOT: 90
6256 SF
LOT: 104
5750 SF
LOT: 112
12690 SF
LOT: 91
6256 SF
LOT: 105
5750 SF
LOT: 113
12626 SF
LOT: 92
6256 SF
LOT: 198
5944 SF
LOT: 201
5967 SF
LOT: 200
7267 SF
LOT: 199
6915 SF
LOT: 190
6073 SF
LOT: 197
6056 SF
LOT: 189
6081 SF
LOT: 196
7510 SF
LOT: 188
7871 SF
LOT: 195
7162 SF
LOT: 194
6026 SF
LOT: 193
6062 SF
LOT: 192
6056 SF
LOT: 191
6064 SF
LOT: 170
11834 SF
LOT: 165
7328 SF
LOT: 166
7125 SF
LOT: 167
7125 SF
LOT: 168
7125 SF
LOT: 169
7350 SF
LOT: 183
7664 SF
LOT: 184
7651 SF
LOT: 185
7724 SF
LOT: 186
7711 SF LOT: 187
7367 SF
LOT: 180
7955 SF
LOT: 181
7776 SF LOT: 182
7763 SF
LOT: 176
5372 SF
LOT: 3
6738 SF
LOT: 177
5372 SF
LOT: 4
6739 SF
LOT: 178
5372 SF
LOT: 5
6740 SF
LOT: 171
10897 SF
LOT: 179
5372 SF
LOT: 6
6740 SF
LOT: 172
5058 SF
LOT: 7
6741 SF
LOT: 173
5372 SF
LOT: 8
8015 SF
LOT: 174
5372 SF
LOT: 1
6736 SF
LOT: 175
5372 SF
LOT: 2
6737 SF
LOT: 11
6672 SF
LOT: 12
6673 SF
LOT: 13
6674 SF
LOT: 14
6675 SF
LOT: 15
6676 SF
LOT: 16
6677 SF
LOT: 9
7352 SF LOT: 17
7410 SF
LOT: 10
6671 SF LOT: 20
8868 SF
LOT: 19
9205 SF
LOT: 18
8926 SF
LOT: 21
9365 SF
LOT: 155
9629 SF
LOT: 156
11878 SF
LOT: 35
7962 SF
LOT: 36
8856 SF
LOT: 65
8065 SF
S. TIPTON ST.

E. CAMERON AVE.

E. RUSSELL AVE.

E. LOYOLA AVE.

E. ELKORN AVE.

AVENUE '1'
E. PACKWOOD AVE.

COURT 'B'

COURT 'A'
E. JAMES AVE.

S. THOMAS ST.

S. MICHAEL DR.

S. CLARK DR.

S. CLARK ST.

E. CALDWELL AVE.

S. SANTA FE ST.

COMMERCIAL 6.85 AC.

PHASE 1
125 LOTS
PHASE 2 76 LOTS

30.00 60.00

60.00 30.00

30.00 60.00
OUT LOT: A
22299 SF
OUT LOT: B
6894 SF OUT LOT: C
6740 SF

99.2'

20.0'

13.8'

10.0'1195.9'

21.9'
897.0' 28.3' 103.4'

10.0'
107.7'

22.4' 444.1'

28.3'
103.4'

99.3'

20.0'

14.2'
103.6'

10.1'

14.1' 103.6'

10.0'
107.7'

22.4'
552.8'

PARK / POND
160.2'
52236 SF
179.9' 23.9' 101.6'

1.2'
236.1'
305.0'

30.00 60.00

30.00 60.00
"AE" / " X "
1 TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
AWE
810 Acequia Ave.

[email protected]
(559) 713-6139
Visalia, California 93291

TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
Vicinity Map
OWNERS:

GERALD B. BLANKENSHIP JR.
&
TRUSTEES OF THE BLANKENSHIP FAMILY TRUST UNDER TRUST AGREEMENT DATE FEBRUARY 8, 1996 GERALD BLANKENSHIP JR. & JEAN KRISTY BLANKENSHIP
RES.

AG/RES
AE-20
AE/X

CAL WATER

CITY OF VISALIA
123-400-001 & 005
NOTES:

A.P.N.:

SEWAGE:

FLOOD ZONE:

EXISTING PROPERTY USE:

PROPOSED PROPERTY USE:

ZONING (E).:

WATER:

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY HOMES
APPLICANT:

Visalia, California 93291
5607 AVE DE LAO ROBLES
ENGINEER:

ZONING (N).: R-1-5
STORM DRAIN: CITY OF VISALIA
AREA: 62.54 AC.

WATER: CAL WATER
PHASE 1: 125
PHASE 2: 76

LOT COUNT
CROSS SECTION - SANTA FE ST.

2.0%
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

PER CITY STD

BARRIER TYPE

PARKWAY

R/W R/W
31'
42' 110'
15'

R/W R/W

2.0%

PARKWAY

PER CITY STD

SIDEWALK

BARRIER TYPE

PER CITY STD
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

BARRIER TYPE
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

PER CITY STD

2.0%
6' SIDEWALK

PER CITY STD
11'
5' 6'
10'
42'
11' 31'
6' 5'

2.0%
C/L

PER CITY STD
6' SIDEWALK

PARKWAY

BARRIER TYPE

PER CITY STD
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER
P/L

SIDEWALK

PER CITY STD
5' 10'
12'
P/L
45'
C/L
TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER CITY STD P-3 TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER CITY STD P-4 CROSS SECTION - CALDWELL AVE.

TO BE INSTALLED UNDER CITY OF VISALIA CIP

TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH THIS

DEVELOPMENT

INTERIOR STREETS
TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER CITY STD P-1
C/L
20'
5'

PER CITY STD

SIDEWALK

2.0%

PER CITY STD
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

BARRIER TYPE
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

PER CITY STD

BARRIER TYPE

PARKWAY

2.0%

R/W R/W
10'
60'
5'
10' 20'
5' 5'

SIDEWALK

PER CITY STD

AS NOTED
---

J E S S
E
A . W I L L I A M
R
S

E G I S T E R E D P R O F E S S I O N A L E N G I N E E R

S T A T E O F C A L I F O R N I A

C I V I L
No. 64742
Exp.

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/30/26

CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS
810 W ACEQUIA AVENUE, VISALIA CA 93291
559-713-6139
AWE SCALE:

DATE:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

NO. REVISION INIT DATE APPROVED BY:

APPROVED BY:

FOR:

PROJECT:

SHEET TITLE:

JOB NUMBER
SHEET

FLOOD ZONE
JESSE ALLEN WILLIAMS R.C.E. 64742
DATE
DATE
X 24075

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY HOMES
5607 AVENIDA DE LOS ROBLES
VISALIA, CA 93291
---
11/19/24

BLANKENSHIP SUBDIVISION
CALDWELL AVE. AND SANTA FE ST.

VISALIA, CA 93245
TOTAL LOT COUNT: 201
662

Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710

Blankenship Housing Subdivision Development,
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
Visalia, CA 93292
Assessor Parcel Numbers
123-400-001 & 006
Tulare County, California
Prepared for
San Joaquin Valley Homes
5607 Avenida de los Robles
Visalia CA, 93291
Prepared by
1322 E Shaw Ave.

Fresno, CA 93710
Heather Froshour, M.A., R.P.A
Senior Archaeologist
January 17, 2025
663
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Soar Environmental Consulting, Inc. (Soar Environmental) has been retained by San Joaquin Valley Homes (SJVH) to prepare a Phase 1 Cultural Resources Assessment (Phase 1 CRA) for a Housing Subdivision Development Project (Project) in the city of Visalia (City), in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) prior to implementation of the proposed Project. The proposed project is to construct 201 housing units and a 6.85-acre lot zoned for commercial use on 62.54 acres on Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 123-400-001 and 006. The purpose of the CRA is to provide an inventory of the known and potentially significant cultural resources within the Project area through a California Historical Records Information search (CHRIS) using the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC), as well as a Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request through the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC).

The results of the records search indicate four (4) cultural resource(s) recorded within 0.50-mile of the Project area. The records searches indicate one (1) recorded resource within the Project area. The pedestrian survey identified no existing resources within the Project area. No site testing or mitigation measures are required, unless previously undiscovered cultural resources are detected during construction.
664
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
1 Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………………..

1.0 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………..........

1.1 Project Description………………………………………………………………........

1.2 Existing Conditions……………………………………………………………………

2.0 REGULATORY SETTING…………………………………………………………………...

2.1 Federal…………………………………………………………………………………

2.2 State of California……………………………………………………………………..

2.3 Local…………………………………………………………………………………...

3.0 SETTING……………………………………………………………………………………..

3.1 Environmental Setting…………………………………………………………………

3.2 Cultural Setting……………………………………………………………………….

3.2.1 Prehistoric Setting…………………………………………………………..

3.2.2 Ethnographic Setting………………………………………………………..

3.2.3 Historic Setting……………………………………………………………..

4.0 ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH…………………………………………………………..

4.1 Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center Records Search…………………...

4.2 Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request………………………..

4.3 National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Eligibility Evaluation……………..

5.0 PREVIOUS DISTURBANCES IN THE PROJECT AREA……………………………..........

6.0 FIELD SURVEY METHODS AND RESULTS……………………………………………...

7.0 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES………………………...

8.0 REFERENCES CITED………………………………………………………………………..
ii
3 3
4 4
4 5
8 10
11 11
11 12
14 15
16 17
18 20
21 22
24 FIGURES
Figure 1— Project Location, adapted from USGS 7.5’ series Visalia, California, 2021………….

Figure 2— Project Boundary Map adapted from USGS 7.5’ series Visalia, California, 2003…… Figure 3— Soil Types Occurring in the Project area…………..…………………………..……..

Figure 4— Proposed Site Plan..……………………………………………..……………….…… Figure 5— Overview of project area from north edge, facing south………………………..…… Figure 6— Overview of project area from northeast corner, east of 841 Caldwell Ave, facing southwest………………………………………………………………………………………….

Figure 7— Overview of project area from northeast corner, west of 841 Caldwell Ave, facing south………………………………………………………………………………………….…....

Figure 8— Overview of project area from east edge, facing west……………………………..… Figure 9— Overview of project area from southeast corner, facing northwest…………………..

Figure 10— Overview of project area from southwest corner, facing northeast…….…………...

Figure 11— Overview of project area from west edge, facing east…………………..…………..

Figure 12— Overview of project area from northwest corner, facing southeast………………… Figure 13— Overview of project area from center, facing north……….………………………..

Figure 14— Overview of project area from center, facing east……….……………...………..… Figure 15— Overview of project area from center, facing south……….……………………..… Figure 16— Overview of project area from center, facing west.……….………………..……… Figure 17— Overview of irrigation ditch east end, facing southwest.……….…………..……… Figure 18— Overview of irrigation ditch west end, facing northeast.……….…………..……… 29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
665
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
2 TABLES
Table 1: Survey Reports within the Project area…………………………………………………..

Table 2: Resources within the Project area………………………………..……………………....

Table 3: Survey Reports within 0.5 Mile of the Project area………………………………….….

Table 4: Resources within 0.5 Mile of Project area……………………………………………… 16 16
16 17

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Records Search from Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center…………..

Appendix B: Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request……………..……...

Appendix C: Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Form………………………………..….

Appendix D: Staff Resumes……………………………………………………………………...
47 60
68 76
666
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
3 1.0 Introduction
This report details the results of a Phase 1 Cultural Resources Assessment in support of the proposed housing subdivision development on 62.54 acres in Visalia, California, on Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 123-400-001 and 006 (Figures 1-2). This Phase 1 report is prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), PRC Sections 21082, 21083.2, and 21084.1, and California Code of Regulations 15064.5.

Heather Froshour completed the archival review and field survey and prepared this Phase 1 report. Ms. Froshour is Soar Environmental’s Senior Archaeologist who meets the professional standards of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior for Archaeology (36 CFR 61) and is certified by the Register of Professional Archaeologists.

Soar Environmental requested a records search from the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (CHRIS) for the Project area and a 0.50-mile buffer. The archival research for this Phase 1 report was positive for archaeological sites or historical resources within the Project area. The archival record search reported four (4) recorded resources within a 0.5-mile radius of the Project area. The records revealed three (3) previous cultural resources surveys had been conducted in the Project area. A total of five (5) additional cultural resource survey reports have been completed within a 0.50-mile radius of the Project area.

As part of the background research, Soar Environmental also requested a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The results of the records review and SLF search were negative. The NAHC suggested contacting seven (7) individuals representing five (5) Native American tribal groups to determine if they have additional information about the Project area. The Lead Agency, Tulare County, will send outreach letters to the recommended tribal individuals.

Soar Environmental conducted an intensive pedestrian survey of the project on January 6, 2025.

This field survey was negative for surface archaeological resources within the Project area. As currently designed, the proposed project will not impact any known in situ archaeological sites or historical resources.

It is recommended, however, in the event that cultural resources are encountered during grounddisturbing activities associated with the Project, a qualified archaeologist shall be obtained to assess the significance of the find in accordance with the criteria outlined in CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(f). In addition, Health and Safety Code 7050.5, CEQA 15064.5(e), and Public Resources Code 5097.98 mandate the process to be followed in the unlikely event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery.

1.1 Project Description
The Project proposes to construct a 201-unit housing subdivision development bounded by East Caldwell Ave, South Santa Fe Street, and South Burke St in the city of Visalia (Figures 1-4). The 667
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
4 proposed construction lies within the 62.54-acre area on APNs 123-400-001 and 006, which are comprised of agricultural fields on the outskirts of the city.

The project will require the development of roads and sidewalks around and throughout the property. This proposed housing subdivision development project's tentative subdivision plan will be implemented in two phases. The first phase will be the construction of 125 single-family housing units in the upper north half of the Project area. Phase 2 of the tentative subdivision plan includes constructing an additional 76 single-family housing units on the lower south portion of the Project area. The subdivision plan also includes constructing a 6.85-acre commercial lot in the southwest corner and a 5.22-square-foot park and pond in the southeast corner of the Project area (Figure 4). Project activities will be limited to the property boundary. The development site will be bordered by decorative landscaping around the parcel boundary's perimeter upon completion. The orchard currently within the Project area would be removed, and the entire property will be graded for housing and commercial development during construction activities (Figures 5-18). Grading of the area will be accomplished using a backhoe and grader.

1.2 Existing Condition
The Project area is located in the San Joaquin Valley on 62.54 acres located on East Caldwell Ave/Ave 280 in the city of Visalia, California, at Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 123-400-001 and 006 (Figure 1-4). The Project area is approximately 297 meters north of Cameron Creek and

3.9 miles south-southwest from St John’s River. The Project area is in Tulare County within Section 8 Township 19 South Range 25 East, Mount Diablo Base Meridian, as shown on the Visalia, CA 7.5’ U.S Geological Survey (USGS) topographical quadrangle (Figure 1-2). The elevation of the Project area is fairly level and ranges from 327-331 feet above mean sea level.

The Project area contains walnut orchards and is permeated by non-native grasses. The Project is surrounded by paved roadways, East Caldwell Ave/Ave 280 to the north, South Burke St to the east, and South Santa Fe St/Rd 128 to the west. The south boundary is bordered by an irrigation canal and vineyards. Large, sparsely distributed valley oak trees line the project site on the south and eastern borders of the project. Surrounding vegetation includes both native and non-native ornamental trees and shrubs, as well as ruderal weeds associated with urbanized landscapes.

2.0 REGULATORY SETTING
Federal, State and local governments have developed laws and regulations designed to protect significant cultural resources that may be affected by actions that they undertake or regulate. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) are the basic federal and state laws governing preservation of historic and archaeological resources of national, regional, State and local significance.

2.1 Federal
Federal regulations for cultural resources are governed primarily by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966. Section 106 of NHPA requires Federal agencies to 668
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
5 consider the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and affords the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings. The Council's implementing regulations, "Protection of Historic Properties", are found in 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800. The goal of the Section 106 review process is to offer a measure of protection to sites which are determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The criteria for determining National Register eligibility are found in 36 CFR Part 60. Amendments to the NHPA (1986 and 1992) and subsequent revisions to the implementing regulations have, among other things, strengthened the provisions for Native American consultation and participation in the Section 106 review process. While federal agencies must follow federal regulations, most projects by private developers and landowners do not require this level of compliance. Federal regulations only come into play in the private sector if a project requires a federal permit or if it uses federal money.

2.2 State
California Register of Historical Resources
In California, the term “historical resource” includes “any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California” (California PRC § 5020.1[j]) (State of California 2021).

In 1992, the California legislature established the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) “to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change” (California PRC § 5024.1(a)). The criteria for listing resources on the CRHR, enumerated in the following text, were developed to be in accordance with previously established criteria developed for listing in the NRHP. According to California PRC § 5024.1(c) (1– 4), a resource is considered historically significant if it (i) retains “substantial integrity,” and (ii) meets at least one of the following criteria:
1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
2) It is associated with the lives of people important in our past. 3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.
4) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history To understand the historic importance of a resource, sufficient time must have passed to obtain a scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resource. A resource less than 50 years old may be considered for listing in the CRHR if it can be demonstrated that sufficient time has passed to understand its historical importance (14 CCR 4852[d][2]). 669
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
6 The CRHR protects cultural resources by requiring evaluations of the significance of prehistoric and historic resources. The criteria for the CRHR are nearly identical to those for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and properties listed or formally designated as eligible for listing in the NRHP are automatically listed in the CRHR, as are state landmarks and points of interest. The CRHR also includes properties designated under local ordinances or identified through local historical resource surveys.

California Health and Safety Code, §7050.5
California law protects Native American burials, skeletal remains, and associated grave goods, regardless of their antiquity, and provides for the sensitive treatment and disposition of those remains. California Health and Safety Code, §7050.5, requires that if human remains are discovered in any place other than a dedicated cemetery, no further disturbance or excavation of the site or nearby area reasonably suspected to contain human remains can occur until the County Coroner has examined the remains (California Health and Safety Code, §7050.5b).

California PRC §5097.98, also outlines the process to be followed in the event that remains are discovered. If the County Coroner determines or has reason to believe the remains are those of a Native American, the County Coroner must contact the California NAHC within 24 hours (California Health and Safety Code, §7050.5c)(State of California 2021). The NAHC will notify the most likely descendant. With the permission of the landowner, the most likely descendant may inspect the site of discovery. The inspection must be completed within 48 hours of notification of the most likely descendant by the NAHC. The most likely descendant may recommend means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and items associated with Native Americans.

California State Assembly Bill 52
Assembly Bill (AB) 52 of 2014 amended California PRC § 5097.94, and added California PRC §21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2, and 21084.3. AB 52 established that tribal cultural resources must be considered under CEQA and also provided for additional Native American consultation requirements for the lead agency. California PRC §21074, defines tribal cultural resources as follows:
(a) Section 21074 of the Public Resources Code states that “tribal cultural resources” are either of the following:
(1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
(A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources.
(B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of §5020.1.
670
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
7 (2) 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 §5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of §5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision:
(a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape. (b) A historical resource described in §21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of §21083.2, or a “nonunique archaeological resource” as defined in subdivision (h) of §21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a).

AB 52 formalizes the lead agency–tribal consultation process, requiring the lead agency to initiate consultation with California Native American tribes located on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). This includes California Native American groups that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project, including tribes that may not be federally recognized. Lead agencies are required to begin consultation prior to the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report (EIR).

Section 9 of AB 52 establishes that “a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” Section 6 of AB 52 added §21080.3.2 to the California PRC, which states that parties may propose mitigation measures “capable of avoiding or substantially lessening potential significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource or alternatives that would avoid significant impacts to a tribal cultural resource.” Further, if a California Native American tribe requests consultation regarding Project alternatives, mitigation measures, or significant effects to tribal cultural resources, the consultation shall include those topics (California PRC §21080.3.2[a]). The environmental document and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (where applicable) shall include any mitigation measures that are adopted (California PRC §21082.3[a]).

Native American Human Remains
State law (California PRC §5097 et seq.) addresses the disposition of Native American burials in archaeological sites and protects such remains from disturbance, vandalism, or inadvertent destruction; establishes procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered during construction of a project; and established the NAHC.

In the event that Native American human remains, or related cultural material are encountered, §15064.5(e) of the CEQA Guidelines (as incorporated from PRC §5097.98) and California 671
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
8 Health and Safety Code, §7050.5, defines the subsequent protocol. In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, excavation or other disturbances shall be suspended on the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains or related material. Protocol requires that the County Coroner or Countyapproved Coroner represented be contacted in order to determine if the remains are of Native American origin. Should the coroner determine the remains to be Native American, the coroner must contact the NAHC within 24 hours. The most likely descendant may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work for means of treating, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in California PRC §5097.98 (14 CCR 15064.5(e)) (State of California 2021).

2.3 Local
Tulare County
Chapter 8.6 of the Tulare County General Plan of 2012 promotes the preservation of cultural and historic resources through managing and protecting sites of cultural and archeological importance for the benefit of present and future generations (County of Tulare 2012). Some of the measures implemented by the County are:

ERM-6.1 Evaluation of Cultural and Archaeological Resources The County shall participate in and support efforts to identify its significant cultural and archaeological resources using appropriate State and Federal standards.

ERM-6.2 Protection of Resources with Potential State or Federal Designations The County shall protect cultural and archaeological sites with demonstrated potential for placement on the National Register of Historic Places and/or inclusion in the California State Office of Historic Preservation’s California Points of Interest and California Inventory of Historic Resources. Such sites may be of Statewide or local significance and have anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific, religious, or other values as determined by a qualified archaeological professional.

ERM-6.3 Alteration of Sites with Identified Cultural Resources When planning any development or alteration of a site with identified cultural or archaeological resources, consideration should be given to ways of protecting the resources. Development can be permitted in these areas only after a site specific investigation has been conducted pursuant to CEQA to define the extent and value of resource, and mitigation measures proposed for any impacts the development may have on the resource.

ERM-6.4 Mitigation
If preservation of cultural resources is not feasible, every effort shall be made to mitigate impacts, including relocation of structures, adaptive reuse, preservation of facades, and thorough documentation and archival of records.
672
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
9 ERM-6.5 Cultural Resources Education Programs
The County should support local, State, and national education programs on cultural and archaeological resources.

ERM-6.6 Historic Structures and Sites
The County shall support public and private efforts to preserve, rehabilitate, and continue the use of historic structures, sites, and parks. Where applicable, preservation efforts shall conform to the current Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings.

ERM-6.7 Cooperation of Property Owners
The County should encourage the cooperation of property owners to treat cultural resources as assets rather than liabilities, and encourage public support for the preservation of these resources.

ERM-6.8 Solicit Input from Local Native Americans
The County shall continue to solicit input from the local Native American communities in cases where development may result in disturbance to sites containing evidence of Native American activity and/or to sites of cultural importance.

ERM-6.9 Confidentiality of Archaeological Sites
The County shall, within its power, maintain confidentiality regarding the locations of archaeological sites in order to preserve and protect these resources from vandalism and the unauthorized removal of artifacts.

ERM-6.10 Grading Cultural Resources Sites
The County shall ensure all grading activities conform to the County’s Grading Ordinance and California Code of Regulations, Title 20, § 2501 et. seq..

City of Visalia
Under Chapter 3, the City’s Role and Tools for Preservation, in the General Plan of the City of Visalia defines a “cultural resources” as:

Chapter 3.3: Sites, structures, or any other physical evidence associated with human activity considered important to be culturally important. This includes archaeological resources and contemporary Native American resources in addition to the historic resources that are the subject of this chapter. Impacts of development on cultural resources of all kinds must be avoided to the greatest extent possible, as described by policies in Chapter 6: Open Space and Conservation.

Under Chapter 6, Open Space and Conservation, within the General Plan of the City of Visalia the following policies are outlined for the preservation of cultural resources:

Chapter 6.5: OSC-P-39 Establish requirements to avoid potential impacts to sites suspected of 673
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
10 being archeologically, paleontologically, or historically significant or of concern, by:
• Requiring a records review for development proposed in areas that are considered archaeologically or paleontologically sensitive.
• Determining the potential effects of development and construction on archaeological or paleontological resources (as required by CEQA).
• Requiring pre-construction surveys and monitoring during any ground disturbance for all development in areas of historical and archaeological sensitivity. • Implementing appropriate measures to avoid the identified impacts, as conditions of project approval.

In the event that previously unidentified historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources are discovered during construction, grading activity in the immediate area shall cease and materials and their surroundings shall not be altered or collected. A qualified archaeologist or paleontologist must make an immediate evaluation and avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation should be completed, according to CEQA Guidelines. The State Office of Historic Preservation has issued recommendations for the preparation of Archaeological Resource Management Reports that will be used as guidelines. (City of Visalia 2014).

3.0 SETTING
This section of the report summarizes information regarding the physical and cultural setting of the Project area, including prehistoric, ethnographic, and historic contents of the general area.

Several factors; including topography, biological resources, and available water sources; affect the nature and distribution of the cultural periods of activity of an area. This background provides a context for understanding the nature of the cultural resources identified within the project's region.

3.1 Environmental Setting
The Project area is located in west Tulare County, approximately 3.4 miles north-northeast of Tulare, California, within the San Joaquin Valley. The San Joaquin Valley is a long, narrow, northwest-trending, alluvial valley between the Sierra Nevada Range to the east and the Coast Ranges to the west (Wagner, 2002). The region was historically covered with native annual and perennial grasses including San Joaquin saltbush, valley oak savanna, riparian forest, and tule marsh (McNab and Avers, 1996; Munz and Keck, 1973). The climate consists of hot, dry summers with cool, moist winters that provide the best climate for neighboring pomegranate, citrus orchards, and vineyards.

Surface soils throughout the project area consist of the Nord soil series (Figure 3). The Nord soil series is typically very deep, well-drained, and formed in mixed alluvium, predominantly from granite and sedimentary rocks. This soil consists of grayish-brown fine sandy loam at the surface 674
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
11 and brown fine sandy loam below (United States Department of Agriculture, 2024).

The Project area is best historically characterized as a rural ranching and agricultural region with large populations of large and small mammals. Prehistorically, the larger mammals inhabiting the Project area would have included mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus californicus), black-tailed deer (O. hemionus columbianus), tule elk (Cervus elaphus nannoides), pronghorn antelope (Antilocarpa Americana), mountain lion (Felis concolor), and black bear (Ursus americanus) (Jameson and Peeters 1988). The small mammals that historically inhabited the Project area included rabbit (Sylvilagus sp.), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), western gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus), coyote (Canis latrans), and gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus).

3.2 Cultural Setting
Cultural resources include prehistoric-era archaeological sites, historic-era archaeological sites, Native American traditional cultural properties, sites of religious and cultural significance, and historical buildings, structures, objects, and sites. The importance of any single cultural resource is defined by the context in which it was first created, current public opinion and modern yet evolving analysis. From the analytical perspective, temporal and geographic considerations help to define the historical context of the Project area. The importance or significance of a cultural resource is in part described by the context in which it originated or developed. National Park Service Bulletin 16a (1997) describes a historic context as “information about historic trends and properties grouped by an important theme in prehistory or history of a community, state, or the nation during a particular period of time.” A context links an existing property to important historic trends, and this allows a framework for determining the significance of a property. Given this, a major goal of the historian is to determine accurate themes of analysis, a task that can only be undertaken by a thorough review of previous researchers’ thoughts and ideas, as well as reviewing the literature of the resources.

In California, historians have divided the past into broad categories based on climate models, archaeological dating and written histories. Paleontologists divide time into much larger segments, with defined and named periods of time shortening in timespan as the modern era is reached. For the purposes of this analysis, these periods in history have been summarized below.

3.2.1 Prehistoric Setting
During the Early Holocene epoch (9700 to 4000 B.C.), large game hunting societies populated the area. Culturally significant surface finds in the Tulare Basin have yielded some projectile points similar to particular Paleoindian varieties (i.e., Western Clovis), suggesting an initial occupation pre-dating approximately 11,300 years before present (B.P.). The Middle Holocene epoch (4000 to 1000 B.C.) is characterized by Pinto-like points and groundstone tools, although the association between the epoch and specific societies is not certain.

Olsen and Payen (1968) developed a chronology of four temporally distinct complexes for sites found within the southern San Joaquin Valley. The first complex, the Positas Complex, ranges from 3300 to 2600 B.C. and is characterized by small, shaped mortars, short cylindrical pestles, 675
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
12 milling stones, perforated flat cobbles, and sea snail shell beads.

The second complex is the Pacheco Complex which ranges from approximately 2600 B.C. to 300 A.D. This complex is divided into Phase B and Phase A. Phase B ranges from 2600 B.C. to 1600 B.C. and is characterized by biface arrow points, abalone shell ornaments, and sea snail shell beads. Phase A ranges from 1600 B.C. to 300 A.D. and is represented by more variation in shell bead types, perforated canine teeth, bone awl, whistles, grass saws, large stemmed and sidenotched points, and an abundance of milling stones, mortars, and pestles.

The third complex, the Gonzaga Complex, ranges from 300 to 1000 A.D. and is characterized by extended burials, bowl mortars, shaped pestles, squared and tapered stem projectile points, bone awls, grass saws, and a shell industry composed of distinctive shell ornaments and beads.

Lastly, the Panoche Complex ranges from 1500 A.D. to European contact (mid to late 1700 A.D.) and is characterized by the presence of fewer milling stones, varied mortars and pestles, small side-notched arrow points, clamshell disc beads, bone awls, whistles, saws, and tubes.

3.2.2 Ethnographic Setting
Penutian-speaking Yokuts tribal groups occupied the southern San Joaquin Valley region and much of the nearby Sierra Nevada. Ethnographic information about the Yokuts was collected primarily by Powers (1971, 1976 [originally 1877]), Kroeber (1925), Gayton (1930, 1948), Driver (1937), Latta (1977) and Harrington (n.d.). For a variety of historical reasons, existing research information emphasizes the central Yokuts tribes who occupied both the valley and particularly the foothills of the Sierra. The northernmost tribes of the Yokuts people experienced a decline in population due to the influx of Euro-Americans during the Gold Rush prior to the initiation of ethnographic studies in the early twentieth century. On the other hand, the southernmost tribes were relocated by the Spanish to missions and later integrated into multitribal communities on various reservations, such as the Sebastian Indian Reservation, Tule River Reservation, and Santa Rosa Rancheria. As a result, there is a notable lack of ethnographic information on the southern Valley tribes compared to the central foothills tribes, where Yokuts dialects are still spoken by native speakers. Regardless, the general details of indigenous lifeways were similar across the broad expanse of Yokuts territory, particularly in terms of environmentally influenced subsistence and adaptation and with regard to religion and belief, which were similar everywhere.

This scarcity of specific detail is particularly apparent in terms of southern valley tribal group distribution. The Project area is located within the San Joaquin Valley floor, which was occupied by these southern Valley Yokuts speakers, themselves divided into a series of autonomous “tribelets,” the boundaries of which are not well defined. The Yauelmani Yokuts lived from the Kern River area to the southeast corner of the valley, thus likely including the Project area. The Hometwali were centered around Kern Lake, while the Tulamni occupied the west side of Buena Vista Lake and the foothills of the Temblors, at least to McKittrick. The territory of the Tuhohi extended from the Kern River delta in the north to the Goose Lake area and from west to the sloughs near Buttonwillow. Yokuts villages were observed to reach up to the mouths of canyons 676
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
13 on the northern and western sides of the Tehachapi Mountains, as well as into the foothills and lower elevations of the Sierra Nevada range to the east, and up to the summit of the Temblor Range in the west.

The settlement pattern of the Yokuts was generally uniform across different tribes. During the winter, villages were commonly found alongside lakeshores and major streams that existed around the year AD 1800. Additionally, family camps during the dispersal phase were situated at higher elevations on the valley floor and in proximity to gathering areas in the foothills.

Yokuts groups, regardless of tribal affiliation, were typically recognized as organized and distinct tribelets. Tribelets were land-owning groups centered around a main village, connected by shared territory and lineage from a common ancestor. The population of most tribelets ranged from approximately 150 to 500 individuals (Kroeber 1925).

These individual tribelets were headed by a chief who was assisted by a variety of assistants. The winatum, a herald or messenger, was the most important assistant to the tribal chief.

Additionally, a shaman held the role of religious officer within the tribelet. Despite lacking direct political power, as demonstrated by Gayton (1930), shamans held significant sway over their tribelet.

Shamanism, found among most Native American tribes, encompasses a religious system characterized by a direct and intimate connection between individuals and the supernatural realm. This connection is typically established through entering a trance or hallucinatory state, often induced by consuming psychotropic plants like jimsonweed or traditional tobacco.

Shamans, possessing extraordinary supernatural abilities, fulfilled the roles of healers, diviners, and wielders of natural forces like rain and thunder. According to Whitley (1992, 2000), Shamans also produced the rock art of this region, depicting the visions they experienced in vision quests believed to represent their spirit helpers and events in the supernatural realm.

The significance of shamanism to the religious and spiritual life of the Yokuts was most evident through the pivotal role of shamans in the yearly ceremonial round. The ceremonial cycle, which repeated every year, commenced in spring with the jimsonweed ceremony, followed by the rattlesnake dance and, if applicable, the first salmon ceremony. Subsequent fall rituals, starting in late summer after the return from seed camps, included the mourning ceremony, followed by the first seed and acorn rites, and culminated with the bear dance (Gayton 1930:379). Throughout these ceremonies, shamans functioned as ceremonial authorities responsible for specific dances that showcased their extraordinary supernatural abilities (Kroeber 1925).

Subsistence practices varied among triblets based on the environment of residence. Throughout Native California, and Yokuts territory in general, the acorn was a primary dietary component, along with a variety of gathered seeds. Valley tribes supplemented their diet with lacustrine and riverine foods, notably fish and wildfowl. Similar to other Native California tribes, communities would gather in large villages during the winter to consume stored resources such as acorns before dispersing into smaller camps where seasonally available resources were gathered and 677
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
14 consumed by extended families.

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

3.2.3 Historic Setting
In California, the historic era is divided into three general periods: the Spanish or Mission Period (1769 to 1821), the Mexican or Rancho Period (1821 to 1848), and the American Period (1848 to present). The mission system, which ultimately established 21 missions between 1796 and 1822, consisted of missions, presidios, and pueblos, and was designed to convert the indigenous peoples of California to Christianity and assimilate them under Spanish rule (Gudde 1998).

The Spanish Period saw exploration and the establishment of the San Diego Presidio and missions at San Diego (1769) and San Luis Rey (1798), and Asistencia (chapels) to the San Diego Mission at Santa Ysabel (1818) and to the San Luis Rey Mission at Pala (1816). Horses, cattle, agricultural foods and weed seeds, and a new architectural style and method of building construction were also introduced. Spanish influence continued after 1821 when California became a part of Mexico, yet the missions continued to operate for a short time longer and laws governing the distribution of land were retained.

In 1821, Mexico won independence and control of the Spanish American colonies from Spain.

Land was redistributed, and the native neophytes were freed from church jurisdiction due to the Secularization Act of 1833. During this secularization period, the Mexican authorities in Alta California made numerous large land grants on former mission properties in the area; many became private ranches, or ranchos; the vast majority were the result of land grants from the Mexican government (Robinson 1979). The Mexican Period ended in 1848 as a result of the Mexican American War.

The American period began when the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed between Mexico and the United States in 1848. As a result of the treaty, the former Mexican province of Alta California became part of the United States as the territory of California. Rapid population increase occasioned by the Gold Rush of 1849 allowed California to become a state in 1850.

Most Mexican land grants were confirmed to the grantees by U.S. courts, but usually with more restricted boundaries which were surveyed by the U.S. Surveyor General’s office.

When California became a state, the government divided California into counties. One of the largest of these was named Mariposa County and it covered the entirety of the middle of the state.

In 1852, Mariposa County was divided, and the southern part was named Tulare County. Later, Tulare County was again divided, thereby creating Fresno, Kern, Kings, and Inyo counties.

Tulare County has an interesting history that dates to 1770. The first settlers to visit what is now 678
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
15 the San Joaquin Valley came after 1800. The first settlement in Tulare County was where the old Indian trail crossed the Kaweah River, about ten miles east of Visalia.

The county is named for Tulare Lake, once the largest freshwater lake west of the Great Lakes.

Drained for agricultural development, the site is now in Kings County, which was created in 1893 from the western portion of the formerly larger Tulare County.

The name Tulare is derived from the giant sedge plant called tule (too-lee), schoenoplectus acutus, in the plant family Cyperaceae, native to freshwater marshes that once lined the shores of Tulare Lake. These native grasses are ecologically important as they help buffer against weather forces and help reduce erosion along with allowing for the propagation of other plant species.

There were many marsh areas in Tulare County before land speculators drained Tulare Lake in the 20th century and settlers began cultivating the land. What was formerly Tulare Lake is dry and the agriculturally rich soil is used for farming, the total gross production value of which in 2019 was $7,505,352,100. (County of Tulare California 2024).

Visalia, then called Four Creeks, was settled in 1852. In this same year Tulare County was officially formed from parts of Mariposa County. Visalia was incorporated into John Butterfield's Overland Stage route from St. Louis to San Francisco by 1858. Initially serving as a supply center for the nearby gold mining operations along the Kern River, the town's agricultural economy revolved around livestock. The construction of train tracks by the Southern Pacific Railroad throughout the San Joaquin Valley in 1872 marked a significant shift towards field crops as the primary agricultural focus in Visalia. By 1874, Visalia was officially incorporated as a city in Tulare County. The introduction of irrigation water led to the transformation of large grain fields into small farms cultivating citrus, grapes, olives, and deciduous fruits, further diversifying the town's agricultural landscape. These crops are a mainstay of the region’s economy today (City of Visalia 2023).

4.0 ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH
The record search area included the Project area and a 0.5-mile radius surrounding the buffer.

This study reviewed the following resources: the California Archaeological Inventory Records, the National Register of Historic Places, the California Historic Landmark Registry, California Points of Historical Interest, and the Inventory of Historic Structures. Additionally, all relevant historic maps, an in-house review of historic aerial photographs, previously recorded archaeological site records, and previously conducted surveys for past projects were reviewed.

4.1 Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
The Project area is within the USGS Visalia, CA 7.5’ Series Quadrangle (USGS 2021). On December 11, 2024, Soar submitted a records search request to the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) at the California State University, Bakersfield, CA. The records search included a 0.5-mile buffer around the Project area. The results from the records search 679
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
16 received on January 13, 2025, indicate that three (3) cultural resource studies have been conducted within the Project area (Table 1). According to the information on file, one (1) resource is within the Project area (Table 2). This resource, however, was identified as not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). These resources will not affect the proposed project subdivision construction and staging activities.

Table 1. Survey Reports within the Project area
Report No. Year Author(s)/ Affiliation Title
TU-00041 1995
Self, William; William Self
Associates
Class I Overview, Santa Fe Pacific Pipeline
Partners, L.P., Proposed Concord to Colton
Pipeline Project
TU-01190 1957 Mitchell, Annie R.;
Westernlore Press Jim Savage and the Tulareño Indians
TU-01659 2009
Haley, Kathryn and
O’Brien, Traci; ICF Jones
& Stokes (for Cal Trans)
Historic Property Survey Report for Avenue
280 Road Widening Project, Tulare County,
California; Avenue 280 Road Widening Project
Archaeological Survey Report
Table 2. Resources within the Project area
Primary # Type Description
P-54-005061 Building 841 E. Caldwell Avenue
There are four (4) recorded resources within the 0.5-mile record search radius (Table 3). Five (5) reports were identified within a 0.5-mile radius of the Project area (Table 4).

Table 3. Survey Reports within 0.5 Miles of the Project area Report No. Year Author(s)/ Affiliation Title
TU-00103 1997
Wickstrom, Brian and
Anderson, Emily; KEA
Environmental, Inc.

Cultural Resource Survey for the Selma to
Bakersfield Fiberoptic Line, Southern San
Joaquin Valley, California
TU-01079 2001
Busby, Colin I.; Basin
Research Associates
Supplement to Archaeological Evaluation
Report - South Packwood Creek Specific
Plan and Phase I Regional Retail Development,
City of Visalia and Vicinity, Tulare County
TU-01200 2004
Losee, Carolyn;
Archaeological Resources
Technology
Cultural Resources Analysis for Cingular
Wireless Site CC-565-03 Caldwell/West
680
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
17 TU-01215 2004
Billat, Lorna; EarthTouch,
Inc.

Request for SHPO Review of FCC
Undertaking: Burke Road/CA-1369A
TU-01235 2005
Billat, Scott; EarthTouch,
Inc.

Request for SHPO Review of FCC
Undertaking: Burke Road/CA-1369B
Table 4. Resources within 0.5 Mile of the Project area
Primary # Type Description
P-54-004632 Structure - Object Atchison, Topeka, Santa Fe Railroad Branch Line Segment P-54-005062 Building 1309 E. Caldwell Avenue
P-54-005063 Building 1345 E. Caldwell Avenue
P-54-005296 Building Tulare Irrigation District Canal; CWA20-221-1; SB-97-H1; SB97-H2; SB-97-H3; Old 99 Ditch of the Tulare Irrigation District; North Branch of the Kaweah Canal; Main Canal, Section 29
There are no recorded cultural resources within the Project area or radius listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Historical Interest, the California Inventory of Historic Resources, or the California State Historic Landmarks.

4.2 Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request The California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted on December 11, 2024, to conduct a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and to obtain a list of tribes culturally and geographically affiliated with the Project area (Appendix B). On December 18, 2025, the NAHC indicated no Native American traditional cultural places or sacred sites within or near the Project area. The NAHC provided a list of seven (7) Tulare County Native American groups and individuals affiliated with the local tribes. Tulare County will be coordinated with further outreach required for the Project.

When this report was completed, Tulare County had not received comments from the Tulare County Native American groups or affiliated individuals regarding the proposed development at the project location.
681
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
18 4.3 National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Eligibility Evaluation Properties Identified
One (1) property in the Project area was formally identified in this study and was evaluated in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(2- 3), using criteria outlined in California Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. For eligibility evaluations for the evaluated property, refer to the Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Forms (DPR) in Appendix C.

The single building evaluated within the Project area, 841 East Caldwell Avenue (APN 123-400- 006, Primary # P-54-005061), a 1957 residential house, does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP, either individually or as a district. Similarly, none of these properties are historical resources for CEQA purposes.

Development and Regional Architecture in the San Joaquin Valley The architectural development in the San Joaquin Valley was largely influenced by costs, function, and the region's mild climate. Early 20th-century residences in the Central Valley were typically simple wood-frame buildings with modest facades, often showcasing variations of the National Folk style or elements of the Craftsman style. With the introduction of quick railroad shipping, homes that were once built using local materials could now be constructed from kits made from distant locations, featuring light balloon framing and wood sheathing.

During the post-World War II years, advancements in building materials and fireproofing techniques led to the increased adoption of stucco, concrete blocks, and prefabricated structural components in house construction. The predominant house design of this era prioritized comfort, simplicity, and affordability. Houses often incorporated inexpensive factory-made plywood or prefabricated wood siding and stucco to reduce costs. Single-story homes with varied designs, such as Ranch and Minimal Traditional styles, became prevalent in urban areas, particularly in post-war subdivisions near California cities like Tulare and Visalia.

The agricultural development in the proposed Project area aligned closely with trends seen statewide. Farmers in the early stages of development followed government guidelines outlined in agricultural assistance publications or borrowed designs from neighboring farms. Economic, sociological, and technological changes served as the driving force behind the evolution of farmbuilding designs. The emergence of specialized markets, advancements in communication, electrification, motorized equipment, and improved construction techniques all shaped national and local farm design changes (Teter and Giese 1960:218).

The southeast area of Visalia is still comprised mostly of agricultural, residential, and some commercial buildings and structures. Overall, the single-family residences within this area of Visalia are modest examples of nationally popular architectural styles dating from the period between 1900 and the mid-1960s, including National Folk, Craftsman, Minimal Traditional, and Ranch houses surrounded by larger plots of land featuring agricultural enterprises. 682
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
19 The single-family residence within the Project area, 841 East Caldwell Avenue, is at the northeast section of APN 123-400-006, a large parcel containing an orchard. The house was constructed in 1957 by an unknown architect and is topped with a gable on the hip roof with composition shingles. The main entry, a single four-panel wood and bottle glass door, is centrally located on the sprawling ranch-style building. A covered walkway leads to a detached single-car garage at the east end of the building. The house is sheathed in a combination of board and batten wood siding and stucco. Fenestration consists of wood-framed windows accented by wood shutters. The detached garage is clad in stucco and has a modem metal roll-up garage door on the south elevation. The landscaping surrounding the residence consists of grass and various shrubs and trees. No additions or relocations are documented for the building. As a Ranch-style single-family home, the building fits the post-World War II era patterns in not only Visalia but also Tulare County and throughout California as a whole.

Period of Significance
841 East Caldwell Avenue is significant since 1957. The year is based on the latest possible date of construction, as identified in the existing Department of Parks and Recreation documentation.

Significance
841 East Caldwell Avenue is not significant under Criterion A. The building is a residential home associated with the Blankenship family, who owned the property from about the mid1880s through the present day. This house was constructed in 1957, most likely by the Blankenship family, its current owners. The property does not appear to be associated with important historical events in the area, as the subject building is representative of continued postwar residential and agricultural development that occurred locally and nationwide during the 1950s and 1960s. The residence does not represent a unique association with rural residences in Tulare County at the local, state, or national levels for the period of significance. The residence is not associated with events that have significantly contributed to the broad patterns of our history. 841 East Caldwell Avenue is not significant under Criterion B because the residence is not associated with the lives of significant persons in our past. Any individual or individuals did not do the design, construction, and modifications with particular significance at the local, State, or national levels. 841 East Caldwell Avenue is not significant under Criterion C because ranchstyle houses have been common throughout the agricultural region of Visalia and California since the style gained popularity in the mid-to-late 20th Century. The residence does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or construction method, nor does it represent the work of a master, possess high artistic values, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The residence is constructed of common materials and has been repaired and modified using typical methods and technology. 841 East Caldwell Avenue is not significant under Criterion D because the residence is not a significant or likely source of important information about the construction of ranch-style houses or the materials or technologies employed in their construction and operation. 683
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
20 Integrity
Overall, 841 East Caldwell Avenue likely appears much as it did when it was originally constructed, and thus, it appears to retain historic integrity. However, lacking historical and architectural significance, the property does not appear to meet the NRHP criteria on a national or local level and, therefore, does not appear eligible for the NRHP.

Determination of Eligibility
Given this analysis, and in accordance with Section 15064.5 (a)(2)-(3) of CEQA Guidelines and using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code, SOAR finds 841 East Caldwell Avenue lacks significance and is not eligible for the NRHP.

Finding of Effect
The proposed Project is a 201-unit housing development, and a 6.85-acre lot zoned for commercial use on 62.54 acres in Visalia, California, on Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 123- 400-001 and 006. 841 East Caldwell Avenue is not NRHP eligible. The Project area is not located within any known historic districts or landscapes. The proposed housing development would be the proposed footprint. As a result, SOAR finds No Historic Properties Affected (800.4[d][1]) for this undertaking.

5.0 PREVIOUS DISTURBANCES IN THE PROJECT AREA
The Project area is located within an area that has undergone anthropogenic modifications, primarily from activities related to residential development and agricultural activities. Likewise, the surface of the Project area has undergone surface grading and intense subsurface disturbance from previous residential construction and agricultural plowing. In certain cases, the graded surface could exceed 24 inches (60 centimeters). This disturbance could exceed 5 feet (1.524 meters) in some areas.

In summary, the following previous disturbances have occurred within or immediately adjacent to the Project area:
• Surface grading and subsurface disturbance for construction of residential buildings (1) and one paved road (East Caldwell Ave/Ave 280).
• Surface grading and maintenance of current dirt roads. • Agriculture (Walnut Orchard).
• Direct feed irrigation.
684
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
21 6.0 FIELD SURVEY METHODS AND RESULTS
The basic criteria for determining the presence of prehistoric and historic cultural resources in local urban and rural settings generally include:
• Presence of flaking debris derived from stone tool manufacturing • Presence of marine shell and/or other faunal remains
• Occurrence of material culture artifacts
• Surface expressions of cultural features
• Bedrock mortars and related milling features/components • Soil discolorations or atypical soil manifestations
• Stone/adobe features associated with structural remains • Diagnostic ceramics derived from Spanish, Mexican, or later periods • Historic iron and glassware, cans, privy pits, domestic occupational debris This investigation included the following tasks:
• Review of regional history and previous cultural resource sites and studies within the Project area and the vicinity.
• Examination of archival topographic maps and aerial photographs for the Project area and the general vicinity.
• Request for a California Historical Resources Information System data request of the Project area and 0.50-mile radius through the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
• Request an NAHC Sacred Lands File Search for the Project area and 0.50-mile radius. • Evaluate the potential for the proposed Project to result in significant impacts to cultural resources, including the potential to impact buried cultural resources with no surface expression.
• Intensive Phase 1 pedestrian survey with transect intervals of 49-98 feet (15-30 meters) of the Project area.
685
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
22 • Develop recommendations associated with impacts on cultural resources following the guidelines as outlined in the Regulatory Setting.

Ms. Froshour conducted the field survey of the Project area on January 6, 2025. The subject area was examined by systematic pedestrian inspection of the ground surface. Transect intervals varied from 49 to 98 feet (15 to 30 meters). This variance was due to the heavy ground disturbance caused by the feeling of the existing walnut orchard, which did not allow for 49-foot (15-meter) intervals throughout the Project area.

The approximately 62.54-acre Project area is located on APNs 123-400-001 and 006, with agricultural industry as its primary use (Figures 1-3). The surface visibility of the Project area, defined as the approximate percentage of native soils visible during the field survey of a given project component, was estimated at 30-40% within APN 123-400-006 both in the north section and the northern portion of APN 123-400-001 in the south section of the Project area. The ground surface consisted of felled walnut trees within APN 123-400-006, with the landowner actively removing felled trees, grinding the remaining tree stumps, and leveling the ground in the south portion of APN 123-400-001. Due to this activity, a survey in the lowest 15% of the south section of the Project area was impossible.

In summary, no in situ cultural resources or isolated materials potentially derived from primary or secondary archaeological contexts were observed on the surface of the Project area.

7.0 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
There is a low possibility for subsurface cultural resources in the Project area, based on the results of the archival research and the fact that only one (1) known resource has been detected during previous disturbances within the construction footprint of the Project area. No recorded cultural resources within the 0.5-mile buffer radius are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Historical Interest, the California Inventory of Historic Resources, or the California State Historic Landmarks. No site testing or mitigation measures are recommended or required unless previously undiscovered cultural resources are detected during construction.

The potential exists to encounter previously undetected cultural resources. If cultural materials (prehistoric and/or historic artifacts) are detected during the course of ground disturbances associated with this project, all work in the immediate area of the find shall be halted until a qualified archaeologist can inventory and assess the significance of the find(s). At that point, the resources shall be evaluated in accordance with the procedures set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 21083.2, sections 15064.5 and 15126.4, and the criteria regarding resource eligibility to the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR).

If a resource cannot be avoided, then the resource must be examined vis-à-vis the provisions in the County Guidelines, and CEQA Sections 15064.5 and 15126.4 and the eligibility criteria as an “important” or “unique archaeological resource,” as appropriate. In many cases, the 686
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
23 determination of a resource’s eligibility can only be made through extensive research and archaeological testing.

Human remains are addressed by the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5.

This code section states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has determined the origin and disposition of the remains, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the finding immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric/ethnohistoric Native American remains, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 24 hours of notification, and may potentially recommend scientific removal, reburial, nondestructive analysis of human remains, and/or specific treatment of associated burial goods. 687
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
24 8.0 REFERENCES CITED
California Department of Parks and Recreation
2024 Electronic Reference: https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=1081. Accessed:

December 11, 2024.

California Geological Survey
2002 California Geomorphic Provinces. California Geologic Survey Note 36.

California Department of Conservation.

Cook, Sherburne F.
1955 The Aboriginal Populations of the San Joaquin Valley, California. University of California Press Anthropological Records 16(2). Berkeley. 1978 Historical Demography. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California, R. F. Heizer, editor, pp. 91-98. Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institute.

Diamond, Jared.
2005 Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. Norton, New York.

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

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

Google Earth Pro 7.3.6.9345.
2022 Visalia Region, Visalia, California. 36.295089, -119.285086. Borders and labels; places layers. Electronic Reference: http://www.google.com/earth/index.html.

Accessed: December 11, 2024.

City of Visalia
2014 Electronic Reference:
https://www.visalia.city/depts/community_development/planning/gp.asp.

Accessed: December 11, 2024.
2023 Electronic Reference: https://www.visalia.city/about/history_of_visalia.asp.

Accessed: December 11, 2024.

688
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
25 County of Tulare California
2012 Electronic Reference: https://generalplan.co.tulare.ca.us/. Accessed: December 11, 2024.
2024 Electronic Reference:
https://tularecounty.ca.gov/county/about/#:~:text=Tulare%20County%20has%20a n%20interesting,ten%20miles%20east%20of%20Visalia. Accessed: December 11, 2024.

Grunsky, C.E.
1989 Pathfinders of the Sacramento Region: They were There Before Sutter.

Sacramento Historical Society, Sacramento, California.

Gudde, Erwin G.
1969 1000 California Place Names. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.

Guidesly.
2024 Electronic Reference: https://guidesly.com/fishing/waterbodies/Deep-Creek- Tulare-California. Accessed: December 11, 2024.

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

Isenberg, Andres C, Richards, Thomas Jr.
2017 The Myth of Manifest Destiny. Pacific Historical review 86 (1): 4-17. Accessed March 8, 2024.

Kroeber, Alfred L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. California Book Company Limited, Berkeley, California.
1939 Cultural and Natural Areas of Native North America. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 38:1–240. Berkeley, California.

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

McNab, W. Henry, and Peter E. Avers
1996 Ecological Subregions of the Unites States. U.S. Forest Service.

Munz, Phillip, and David D. Keck
1973 A California Flora with Supplement. University of California Press, Berkley. 689
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
26 Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC
2020 Electronic Reference: www.historicaerials.com. Accessed: December 11, 2024.

Native American Heritage Commission.
2024 Electronic Reference: https://nahc.ca.gov/. Accessed: December 11, 2024.

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

Robinson, W.W.
1979 Land in California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California.

State of California.
2021 Electronic Reference: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/home.xhtml.

Accessed: December 11, 2024.

Tachi Yokuts Tribe.
2024 Electronic Resource: . https://www.tachi-yokut-nsn.gov/about. Accessed:

December 11, 2024.

Teter, N.C. and H. Giese
1960 New Barns for Old. In The US Department of Agriculture, Yearbook of Agriculture. The United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

The Sun Gazette Staff.
2010 Electronic Reference:
https://thesungazette.com/article/education/2010/09/29/farmersville-school-was- one-of-the-first-in-the-county/. Accessed: December 11, 2024.

United States Congress.
2016 Electronic Reference: https://ncshpo.org/resources/national-historic-preservationact-of-1966/. Accessed: December 11, 2024.

United States Department of the Interior
1997 Guidelines for Completing National Register of Historic Places Forms: Part A How to Complete the National Register Registration Form. National Park Service, National Register of Historic Places, Washington DC.
690
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
27 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1980 Soil Survey of Tulare, California. Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service.

In cooperation with the University of California Agricultural Experiment Station.

United States Geological Survey (USGS)
2021 Visalia Quadrangle, California. 1:24,000 scale. United States Geological Survey, Denver. Map on file, California Division of Mines and Geology Library, Sacramento, California.

Wagner, D.L.
2002 California Geomorphic Provinces. California Geological Survey Note 36.

Whitley, D.S.
1992 Shamanism and Rock Art in Far Western North America. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 2(1):89-113.
2000 The Art of the Shaman: Rock Art of California. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
691
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
28 FIGURES
692
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
29 Figure 1— Project Location, adapted from USGS 7.5’ series Visalia, California, 2021 693
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
30 Figure 2— Project Boundary Map adapted from USGS 7.5’ series Visalia, California, 2003 694
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
31 Figure 3— Soil Types Occurring in the Project area
695
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
32 Figure 4— Proposed Site Plan
696
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
33 Figure 5— Overview of project area from north edge, facing south 697
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
34 Figure 6— Overview of project area from northeast corner, east of 841 Caldwell Ave, facing southwest
698
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
35 Figure 7— Overview of project area from northeast corner, west of 841 Caldwell Ave, facing south 699
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
36 Figure 8— Overview of project area from east edge, facing west 700
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
37 Figure 9— Overview of project area from southeast corner, facing northwest 701
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
38 Figure 10— Overview of project area from southwest corner, facing northeast 702
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
39 Figure 11— Overview of project area from west edge, facing east 703
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
40 Figure 12— Overview of project area from northwest corner, facing southeast 704
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
41 Figure 13— Overview of project area from center, facing north 705
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
42 Figure 14— Overview of project area from center, facing east 706
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
43 Figure 15— Overview of project area from center, facing south 707
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
44 Figure 16— Overview of project area from center, facing west 708
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
45 Figure 17— Overview of irrigation ditch east end, facing southwest 709
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
46 Figure 18— Overview of irrigation ditch west end, facing northeast 710
47 APPENDIX A
Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center Records Search Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
711
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
Soar Environmental Consulting, Inc. A Certified DVBE Corporation Cultural Resources Records Search Request
Wednesday, December 11, 2024
Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
California State University Bakersfield
Mail Stop: 72DOB
9001 Stockdale Highway
Bakersfield, CA 93311-1022
Tel: 661.654.2289
[email protected]
RE: San Joaquin Valley Homes Blankenship CEQA Cultural Resource Assessment for a proposed housing development bounded by E. Caldwell Ave. and Santa Fe St. in Tulare County, Visalia, CA 93292. APNs 123-400-001 & 005.

Dear Celeste,
Please find attached one project location map, shapefiles, and the SSJVIC/CHRIS Data Request Form for the proposed housing development project in Visalia, California. The proposed project is situated on the Visalia, California (2021), USGS 7.5’ Series Quadrangle, T 19S, R 25E, S 8. The 62.54-acre project area is located on APNs 123-400-001 & 005 and is bounded by E. Caldwell Ave and Santa Fe St., Visalia, California. The project is for a proposed housing development with a center at approximately 36.295089, -119.285086.

Please conduct a normal rate records search, including no more than a 0.50-mile radius buffer, of the project location illustrated on the attached map. Please provide the following information:
• PDF of all site records and associated survey reports (Note: PDF/photocopy only those site reports that appear to be pertinent to the immediate project location and search area; surveys and other site/resources can be listed, with full reports requested later if necessary). • A list of all previous sites and surveys within the search area. • A confirmation of any sites, structures, or linear features on local, state, and/or federal registers/lists in the project location or the 0.50-mile search area that are not yet mapped on the GIS.

If the normal records search costs will exceed $500.00, or if you have any questions or comments, please e-mail me at [email protected]. Please contact me as soon as possible if there will be any delays with the records search, as the client may request an expedited search. Please email the encrypted search results in PDF format to:
[email protected].

Many thanks in advance for your assistance with this project.

Most Sincerely,
Heather Froshour, M.A., R.P.A.

Sr. Archaeologist
Soar Environmental Consulting, Inc.
207.232.8912
712

_________________________________________________________________________________________ California Historical Resources Information System
CHRIS Data Request Form
ACCESS AND USE AGREEMENT NO.:_______________ IC FILE NO.:________________________ To: ___________________________________________________________________ Information Center Print Name: ____________________________________________________ Date: _____________________ Affiliation: ________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________________________________ City: _________________________________________ State: ________________ Zip: __________________ Phone: __________________ Fax: __________________ Email: ____________________________________ Billing Address (if different than above): _________________________________________________________ Billing Email: _______________________________________________ Billing Phone: ___________________ Project Name / Reference: ___________________________________________________________________ Project Street Address: ______________________________________________________________________ County or Counties: ________________________________________________________________________ Township/Range/UTMs: _____________________________________________________________________ USGS 7.5’ Quad(s): ________________________________________________________________________ PRIORITY RESPONSE (Additional Fee): yes / no
TOTAL FEE NOT TO EXCEED: $___________________________
(If blank, the Information Center will contact you if the fee is expected to exceed $1,000.00) Special Instructions:

Information Center Use Only
Date of CHRIS Data Provided for this Request: ___________________________________________________ Confidential Data Included in Response: yes / no
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________ 1 of 3
2-29-2020 Version 713
California Historical Resources Information System
CHRIS Data Request Form
Mark the request form as needed. Attach a PDF of your project area (with the radius if applicable) mapped on a

7.5’ USGS topographic quadrangle to scale 1:24000 ratio 1:1 neither enlarged nor reduced and include a shapefile of your project area, if available. Shapefiles are the current CHRIS standard for submitting digital spatial data for your project area or radius. Check with the appropriate IC for current availability of digital data products.
• Documents will be provided in PDF format. Paper copies will only be provided if PDFs are not available at the time of the request or under specially arranged circumstances. • Location information will be provided as a digital map product (Custom Maps or GIS data) unless the area has not yet been digitized. In such circumstances, the IC may provide hand drawn maps. • In addition to the $150/hr. staff time fee, client will be charged the Custom Map fee when GIS is required to complete the request [e.g., a map printout or map image/PDF is requested and no GIS Data is requested, or an electronic product is requested (derived from GIS data) but no mapping is requested].

For product fees, see the CHRIS IC Fee Structure on the OHP website.

1. Map Format Choice:

Select One: Custom GIS Maps  GIS Data  Custom GIS Maps and GIS Data  No Maps  Any selection below left unmarked will be considered a "no. " Location Information:

Within project area Within ______ radius
ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Locations1 yes / no yes / no
NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Locations yes / no yes / no Report Locations1 yes / no yes / no
“Other” Report Locations2 yes / no yes / no

3. Database Information:
(contact the IC for product examples, or visit the SSJVIC website for examples) Within project area Within radius ______ ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Database1 List (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no
NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Database
List (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no
Report Database1
List (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Detail (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Excel Spreadsheet yes / no yes / no
Include “Other” Reports 2 yes / no yes / no

4. Document PDFs (paper copy only upon request):

Within project area Within radius ______
ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Records1 yes / no yes / no
NON-ARCHAEOLOGICAL Resource Records yes / no yes / no
Reports1 yes / no yes / no
“Other” Reports2 yes / no yes / no
2 of 3
2-29-2020 Version
714
California Historical Resources Information System
CHRIS Data Request Form

5. Eligibility Listings and Documentation:

Within project area Within radius ______
OHP Built Environment Resources Directory3:

Directory listing only (Excel format) yes / no yes / no Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no
OHP Archaeological Resources Directory1,5:

Directory listing only (Excel format) yes / no yes / no Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no
California Inventory of Historic Resources (1976):

Directory listing only (PDF format) yes / no yes / no
Associated documentation4 yes / no yes / no

6. Additional Information:

The following sources of information may be available through the Information Center. However, several of these sources are now available on the OHP website and can be accessed directly. The Office of Historic Preservation makes no guarantees about the availability, completeness, or accuracy of the information provided through these sources. Indicate below if the Information Center should review and provide documentation (if available) of any of the following sources as part of this request.

Caltrans Bridge Survey yes / no
Ethnographic Information yes / no
Historical Literature yes / no
Historical Maps yes / no
Local Inventories yes / no
GLO and/or Rancho Plat Maps yes / no
Shipwreck Inventory yes / no
Soil Survey Maps yes / no
1 In order to receive archaeological information, requestor must meet qualifications as specified in Section III of the current version of the California Historical Resources Information System Information Center Rules of Operation Manual and be identified as an Authorized User or Conditional User under an active CHRIS Access and Use Agreement. 2 “Other” Reports GIS layer consists of report study areas for which the report content is almost entirely non-fieldwork related (e.g., local/regional history, or overview) and/or for which the presentation of the study area boundary may or may not add value to a record search.
3 Provided as Excel spreadsheets with no cost for the rows; the only cost for this component is IC staff time. Includes, but not limited to, information regarding National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, California State Historical Landmarks, California State Points of Historical Interest, and historic building surveys. Previously known as the HRI and then as the HPD, it is now known as the Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD). The Office of Historic Preservation compiles this documentation and it is the source of the official status codes for evaluated resources. 4 Associated documentation will vary by resource. Contact the IC for further details. 5 Provided as Excel spreadsheets with no cost for the rows; the only cost for this component is IC staff time. Previously known as the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, now it is known as the Archaeological Resources Directory (ARD).

The Office of Historic Preservation compiles this documentation and it is the source of the official status codes for evaluated resources.
3 of 3
2-29-2020 Version 715
-·-··
.·
7 • I
•
I
I
I
I
•
•
..
•
'
•
D
E Caldwell A
Higby
• I
-·
..
31 M 322
. . 4
SJVH - San Joaquin
Valley Homes
II
D
ft
II
•
II
I
fl
2 0 2 4
• I

PACIFIC
=-=---
TSIOE
N
A
0 0.4
:::::::::::::::::=:::J::: Miles
Coordinate System: WGS 1984; USGS, Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society 716
1/13/2025
Heather Froshour
Soar Environmental Consulting, Inc.
1322 East Shaw Ave., Suite 400
Fresno, CA 93710
Re: San Joaquin Valley Homes Blankenship CEQA CRA
Records Search File No.: 24-559
The Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center received your record search request for the project area referenced above, located on Visalia USGS 7.5’ quad. The following reflects the results of the records search for the project area and the 0.5 mile radius:

As indicated on the data request form, the locations of resources and reports are provided in the following format: ☒ Custom GIS Maps ☐ GIS Data ☐ Hand Drawn Maps (Inyo County Only) Resources within project area: P-54-005061
Resources within 0.5 mile radius: P-54-004632, 005062, 005063, 005296 Reports within project area: TU-00041, 01190, 01659
Reports within 0.5 mile radius: TU-00103, 01079, 01200, 01215, 01235 NOTE: Report locations were omitted, per the CHRIS Data Request Form.

Resource Database Printout (list): ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed Resource Database Printout (details): ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Resource Digital Database Records: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Database Printout (list): ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Database Printout (details): ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Report Digital Database Records: ☐ enclosed ☒ not requested ☐ nothing listed Resource Record Copies: ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed ☐ not available Report Copies: ☒ enclosed ☐ not requested ☐ nothing listed ☒ not available Note:

OHP Built Environment Resources Directory: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility: ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed CA Inventory of Historic Resources (1976): ☐ enclosed ☐ not requested ☒ nothing listed 717
Caltrans Bridge Survey: Not available at SSJVIC; please see https://dot.ca.gov/programs/environmental-analysis/cultural-studies/california-historical-bridges-tunnels Ethnographic Information: Not available at SSJVIC
Historical Literature: Not available at SSJVIC
Historical Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see
http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/
Local Inventories: Not available at SSJVIC
GLO and/or Rancho Plat Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/search/default.aspx#searchTabIndex=0&searchByTypeIndex=1 and/or http://www.oac.cdlib.org/view?docId=hb8489p15p;developer=local;style=oac4;doc.view=items Shipwreck Inventory: Not available at SSJVIC; please see https://www.slc.ca.gov/shipwrecks/
Soil Survey Maps: Not available at SSJVIC; please see
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Please forward a copy of any resulting reports from this project to the office as soon as possible. Due to the sensitive nature of archaeological site location data, we ask that you do not include resource location maps and resource location descriptions in your report if the report is for public distribution. If you have any questions regarding the results presented herein, please contact the office at the phone number listed above.

The provision of CHRIS Data via this records search response does not in any way constitute public disclosure of records otherwise exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act or any other law, including, but not limited to, records related to archeological site information maintained by or on behalf of, or in the possession of, the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation, State Historic Preservation Officer, Office of Historic Preservation, or the State Historical Resources Commission.

Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area. Additionally, Native American tribes have historical resource information not in the CHRIS Inventory, and you should contact the California Native American Heritage Commission for information on local/regional tribal contacts.

Should you require any additional information for the above referenced project, reference the record search number listed above when making inquiries. Invoices for Information Center services will be sent under separate cover from the California State University, Bakersfield Accounting Office.

Thank you for using the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS).

Sincerely,
Celeste M. Thomson
Coordinator
718
Primary No. Trinomial
Resource List
Other IDs Type Age Attribute codes Recorded by Reports
SSJVIC Record Search 24-559
P-54-004632 CA-TUL-002885H Other - JTU-204;
Resource Name - Atchison,
Topeka, Santa Fe Railroad
Branch Line;
Other - Historic Railroad
Segment;
Resource Name - Santa Fe
Railroad Grade
TU-01889, TU01929, TU-01991Structure,
Object, Site
Historic AH04; AH07; HP19;
HP37
1995 (Carrie D. Wills, Allen Estes,
William Self Associates);
2001 (S. Ashkar, C. Fish, Jones &
Stokes);
2007 (M. Armstrong, R. Ottenhoff,
P. Paramoure, L. MacDonald,
Pacific Legacy, Inc.);
2009 (Steven J. Melvin, Rebecca
Flores, JRP Historical Consulting,
LLC.);
2012 (M. O'Neill, M. Walton, Pacific
Legacy, Inc.);
2019 (Denise Ruzicka, CAL FIRE);
2019 (Robert Azpitarte, ASM
Affiliates, Inc.);
2020 (R. Azpitarte, ASM Affiliates,
Inc.)
P-54-005061 Resource Name - 841 E. Caldwell
Avenue
Building Historic HP02 2008 (Kathryn Haley, ICF Jones & TU-01659 Stokes)
P-54-005062 Resource Name - 1309 E.

Caldwell Ave
Building Historic HP02 2008 (Kathryn Haley, ICF Jones & TU-01659 Stokes)
P-54-005063 Resource Name - 1345 Caldwell
Avenue
Building Historic HP02; HP04 2008 (Kathryn Haley, ICF Jones & TU-01659 Stokes)
P-54-005296 CA-TUL-003103H Resource Name - Tulare Irrigation District Canal;
Resource Name - CWA20-221-1;
SB-97-H1; SB-97-H2; SB-97-H3;
Resource Name - Old 99 Ditch of
the Tulare Irrigation District;
Resource Name - North Branch of
the Kaweah Canal;
Resource Name - Main Canal,
Section 29
Structure Historic AH06; HP20 1997 (Emily Anderson, David TU-01837, TU-01936 Livingstone, KEA Environment);
1997 (Emily Adnerson, David
Livingstone, KEA Environment);
1997 (Emily Anderson, David
Livingstone, KEA Environment);
2007 (Matthew Armstrong, Randy
Ottenhoff, Pacific Legacy, Inc.);
2009 (Rebecca S. Orfila, RSO
Consulting);
2016 (Alberto Foglia and Annemarie
Cox, PanGIS, Inc.);
2017 (Randy Baloian, Applied
EarthWorks, Inc);
2022 (Karana Hattersley-Drayton,
Taylored Archaeology)

Page 1 of 1 ends

719
Report List
Report No. Other IDs Year Author(s) Title Affiliation Resources SSJVIC Record Search 24-559
TU-00041 1995 Class I Overview, Santa Fe Pacific Pipeline Partners, L.P., Proposed Concord to Colton
Pipeline Project
BLM - Permit No. CA- Self, William William Self Associates 95-01-0004;
NADB-R - 1141258
TU-00103 1997 Cultural Resource Survey for the Selma to Bakersfield Fiberoptic Line, Southern San
Joaquin Valley, California
Wickstrom, Brian and KEA Environmental, Inc.

Anderson, Emily
54-003608, 54-003914, 54-003915,
54-003916, 54-003917
TU-01079 2001 Supplement to Archaeological Evaluation
Report - South Packwood Creek Specific
Plan and Phase I Regional Retail
Development, City of Visalia and Vicinity,
Tulare County
Busby, Colin I. Basin Research Associates
TU-01190 1957 Mitchell, Annie R. Jim Savage and the Tulareño Indians Westernlore Press TU-01200 2004 Cultural Resources Analysis for Cingular
Wireless Site CC-565-03 Caldwell/West
Archaeological Resources
Technology
Losee, Carolyn
TU-01215 2004 Request for SHPO Review of FCC
Undertaking: Burke Road/CA-1369A
Billat, Lorna EarthTouch, Inc.

TU-01235 2005 Request for SHPO Review of FCC
Undertaking: Burke Road/CA-1369B
Billat, Scott EarthTouch, Inc.

TU-01659 2009 Historic Property Survey Report for Avenue 280 Road Widening Project, Tulare County,
California
Haley, Kathryn ICF Jones & Stokes 54-002179, 54-004887, 54-005056, 54-005057, 54-005058, 54-005059,
54-005060, 54-005061, 54-005062,
54-005063, 54-005064, 54-005065,
54-005066, 54-005067, 54-005068,
54-005069, 54-005070, 54-005071,
54-005072, 54-005073, 54-005074,
54-005075, 54-005076, 54-005077,
54-005078, 54-005079, 54-005080,
54-005081, 54-005082, 54-005083,
54-005084, 54-005085, 54-005086,
54-005087
Agency Nbr - EA
4C1214/4C1564
TU-01659A 2009 Avenue 280 Road Widening Project Historic Resources Evaluation Report
ICF Jones & Stokes (for Cal
Trans)
Haley, Kathryn
TU-01659B 2009 Avenue 280 Road Widening Project
Archaeological Survey Report
ICF Jones & Stokes (for Cal
Trans)
O'Brien, Traci

Page 1 of 1 ends

720
721
722
723
60 APPENDIX B
Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
724
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
Soar Environmental Consulting, Inc. A Certified DVBE Corporation Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request Wednesday, November 11, 2024
Native American Heritage Commission
1550 Harbor Blvd., Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
Tel: 916.373.3710
Fax: 916.373.5471
[email protected]
RE: San Joaquin Valley Homes Blankenship CEQA Cultural Resource Assessment for a proposed housing development bounded by E. Caldwell Ave. and Santa Fe St. in Tulare County, Visalia, CA 93292. APNs 123-400-001 & 005.

Dear Sir/Madam,
Please find attached one project location map, Sacred Lands File NA Contact Form, and Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request for the proposed housing development project in Visalia, California. The proposed project is situated on the Visalia, California (2021), USGS 7.5’ Series Quadrangle, T 19S, R 25E, S

8. The 62.54-acre project area is located on APNs 123-400-001 & 005 and is bounded by E. Caldwell Ave and Santa Fe St., Visalia, California. The project is for a proposed housing development with a center at approximately 36.295089, -119.285086.

This letter is intended to inform you of the project and to help ensure compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As part of the Cultural Resources Study for the project, we are requesting your insights on potential Native American cultural properties and resources in and/or near the project.

Please respond at your earliest convenience if you have any information to consider for this study.

Also, we would greatly appreciate if you could review the attached map and indicate to us if there are any concerns you might have or input regarding potentially sensitive cultural heritage values in the project area and vicinity.

Feel free to contact me by email at [email protected] or phone at 207.232.8912.

Most Sincerely,
Heather Froshour, M.A., R.P.A.

Sr. Archaeologist
Soar Environmental Consulting, Inc.
207.232.8912
725
Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request
Native American Heritage Commission
1550 Harbor Blvd, Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
916-373-3710
916-373-5471 – Fax
[email protected]
Type of List Requested
☐ CEQA Tribal Consultation List (AB 52) – Per Public Resources Code § 21080.3.1, subs. (b), (d), (e) and 21080.3.2 ☐ General Plan (SB 18) - Per Government Code § 65352.3.

Local Action Type:
___ General Plan ___ General Plan Element ___ General Plan Amendment ___ Specific Plan ___ Specific Plan Amendment ___ Pre-planning Outreach Activity Required Information
Project Title:____________________________________________________________________________ Local Government/Lead Agency: ___________________________________________________________ Contact Person: __________________________________________________________________________ Street Address: ___________________________________________________________________________ City:_____________________________________________________ Zip:__________________________ Phone:____________________________________ Fax:_________________________________________ Email:_____________________________________________
Specific Area Subject to Proposed Action
County:________________________________ City/Community: ___________________________ Project Description:

Additional Request
☐ Sacred Lands File Search - Required Information:

USGS Quadrangle Name(s):____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Township:___________________ Range:___________________ Section(s):___________________ 726
Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request Native American Heritage Commission
1550 Harbor Blvd, Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
916-373-3710
916-373-5471 – Fax
[email protected]
Information Below is Required for a Sacred Lands File Search Project: ______________________________________________________________________ County:______________________________________________________________________ USGS Quadrangle Name:_______________________________________________________ Township:__________ Range:__________ Section(s):__________ Company/Firm/Agency:_________________________________________________________ Street Address:________________________________________________________________ City:______________________________________________ Zip:______________________ Phone:_____________________________________________
Fax:_______________________________________________
Email:_____________________________________________
Project Description:
727
-·-··
.·
7 • I
•
I
I
I
I
•
•
..
•
'
•
D
E Caldwell A
Higby
• I
-·
..
31 M 322
. . 4
SJVH - San Joaquin
Valley Homes
II
D
ft
II
•
II
I
fl
2 0 2 4
• I

PACIFIC
=-=---
TSIOE
N
A
0 0.4
:::::::::::::::::=:::J::: Miles
Coordinate System: WGS 1984; USGS, Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society 728
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Page 1 of 2 ends

December 18, 2024
Heather Froshour
Soar Environmental Consulting Inc.

Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Native American Tribal Consultation, Pursuant to the Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014), Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 (m), 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2 and 21084.3, San Joaquin Valley Homes Blankenship CEQA CRA Project, Tulare County Dear Ms. Froshour:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (c), attached is a consultation list of tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the above-listed project. Please note that the intent of the AB 52 amendments to CEQA is to avoid and/or mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources, (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)) (“Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource.”) Public Resources Code sections 21080.3.1 and 21084.3(c) require CEQA lead agencies to consult with California Native American tribes that have requested notice from such agencies of proposed projects in the geographic area that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribes on projects for which a Notice of Preparation or Notice of Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration has been filed on or after July 1, 2015. Specifically, Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (d) provides:

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

The AB 52 amendments to CEQA law does not preclude initiating consultation with the tribes that are culturally and traditionally affiliated within your jurisdiction prior to receiving requests for notification of projects in the tribe’s areas of traditional and cultural affiliation. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) recommends, but does not require, early consultation as a best practice to ensure that lead agencies receive sufficient information about cultural resources in a project area to avoid damaging effects to tribal cultural resources.

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

1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to:

CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

VICE CHAIRPERSON
Buffy McQuillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nomlaki

SECRETARY
Sara Dutschke
Miwok

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Wayne Nelson
Luiseño

COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Ohlone-Costanoan

COMMISSIONER
Stanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay

COMMISSIONER
Laurena Bolden
Serrano

COMMISSIONER
Reid Milanovich
Cahuilla

COMMISSIONER
Bennae Calac
Pauma-Yuima Band of
Luiseño Indians

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Raymond C.

Hitchcock
Miwok/Nisenan

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov
729

Page 2 of 2 ends

• A listing of any and all known cultural resources that have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE, such as known archaeological sites;
• Copies of any and all cultural resource records and study reports that may have been provided by the Information Center as part of the records search response; • Whether the records search indicates a low, moderate, or high probability that unrecorded cultural resources are located in the APE; and
• If a survey is recommended by the Information Center to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,
Pricilla Torres-Fuentes
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
730
County Tribe Name Fed (F)
Non-Fed (N)
Contact Person Contact Address Phone # Fax # Email Address Cultural Affiliation Kitanemuk & Yowlumne Tejon Indians N Delia Dominguez, Chairperson 115 Radio Street Bakersfield, CA, 93305
(626) 339-6785 [email protected] Kitanemuk
Southern Valley Yokut
Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe F Samantha McCarty, Cultural Specialist ll
P.O. Box 8
Lemoore, CA, 93245
(559) 633-3440 [email protected] Southern Valley Yokut Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe F Nichole Escalon, Cultural Specialist l
P.O. Box 8
Lemoore, CA, 93245
(559) 924-1278 Southern Valley Yokut
Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe F Shana Powers, THPO P.O. Box 8 Lemoore, CA, 93245
(559) 423-3900 Southern Valley Yokut
Table Mountain Rancheria F Michelle Heredia-Cordova,
Chairperson
P.O. Box 410
Friant, CA, 93626
(559) 822-2587 (559) 822-2693 [email protected] Yokut
Tule River Indian Tribe F Neil Peyron, Chairperson P.O. Box 589 Porterville, CA, 93258
(559) 781-4271 (559) 781-4610 neil.peyron@tulerivertribensn.gov Yokut
Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley
Band
N Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson 1179 Rock Haven Ct.

Salinas, CA, 93906
(831) 443-9702 [email protected] Foothill Yokut
Mono
Fresno,Kern,Kings,Madera,Monterey,San
Benito,San Luis Obispo,Tulare
12/21/2023
Alameda,Amador,Calaveras,Contra
Costa,Fresno,Inyo,Kern,Kings,Madera,Maripo
sa,Merced,Monterey,Sacramento,San
Alameda,Calaveras,Contra
Costa,Fresno,Inyo,Kings,Madera,Marin,Maripo
sa,Merced,Mono,Monterey,San Benito,San
6/19/2023
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1 for the proposed San Joaquin Valley Homes Blankenship CEQA CRA Project, Tulare County.

Record: PROJ-2024-006502
Report Type: AB52 GIS
Counties: Tulare
NAHC Group: All
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
Tulare County
12/18/2024
Counties Last Updated
Tulare Fresno,Kern,Kings,Los
Angeles,Madera,Monterey,San Benito,San
Luis Obispo,Tulare
Fresno,Kern,Kings,Merced,Monterey,San
Benito,San Luis Obispo,Tulare
10/3/2023
Fresno,Kern,Kings,Merced,Monterey,San
Benito,San Luis Obispo,Tulare
10/3/2023
Fresno,Kern,Kings,Merced,Monterey,San
Benito,San Luis Obispo,Tulare
10/3/2023
12/18/2024 04:13 PM
1 of 1
731
68 APPENDIX C
Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Form
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
732
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # P-54-005061 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date

Page 1 of 4 ends

P1. Other Identifier:
*P2. Location: Not for Publication X Unrestricted *a. County Tulare and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad Visalia Date 1949/69 T 19S; R 25E; NW ¼ of NE ¼ of Sec 8; M.D B.M. c. Address 841 East Caldwell Avenue City Visalia Zip 93292 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N , 294975 mE/ 4019398 mN e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, decimal degrees, etc., as appropriate) APN-123-400-006
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) 2008: The single-family residence located on this parcel carries the address of 841 E. Caldwell Ave. and is sited at the northeast comer of a large parcel containing an orchard. The house is topped with a gable on hip roof with composition shingles. The main entry which features a single four-panel wood and bottle glass door is centrally located on the sprawling Ranch style building. A covered walkway leads to a detached single car garage at the east end of the building.

The house is sheathed in a combination of board and batten wood siding and stucco. Fenestration consists of wood framed windows that are accented by wood shutters. The detached garage is clad in stucco and has a modem metal rollup garage door on the south elevation. Landscaping surrounding the residence consists of grass, along with a variety of shrubs and trees.
2025 Update: The residence has maintained integrity from the 2008 DPR form, Currently all windows and doors have been mothballed. The surrounding walnut orchard has been felled, and the trees are in the process of being removed, the stumps ground, and the land leveled.
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List
attributes and codes)
HP2 – Single Family Property
*P4. Resources Present: X Building Structure Object Site District Element of District
Other (Isolates, etc.)
P5b. Description of Photo: (view,
date, accession #) Bearing: 217° SW
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: X Historic Prehistoric
Both 1957 - Tulare County
Assessor's Office
*P7. Owner and Address:

Gerald Blankenship Jr.

*P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation,
and address)
Heather Froshour, Sr. Archaeologist
Soar Environmental
1322 E. Shaw Ave.

Fresno, CA 93710
*P9. Date Recorded:

January 6, 2025
*P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") 2025 Blankenship Housing Subdivision Development, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Visalia, CA 93292, Assessor Parcel Numbers 123-400-001 & 006, Tulare County, California.

P5a. Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.)
733
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # P-54-005061 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date

Page 2 of 4 ends

*P11. Report Citation (cont):
2008 280 Widening Project. District 6 Tulare County. Prepared for the Tulare County Resource Management Agency, Visalia, CA; Ornni-Means Roseville, CA, and the California Department of Transportation, District 6, Fresno, CA. *Attachments: NONE Location Map Continuation Sheet X Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List):
734
DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # P-54-005061 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)

Page 3 of 4 ends

B1. Historic Name: Unknown
B2. Common Name: Unknown
B3. Original Use: Single Family Residence B4. Present Use: Uninhabited (mothballed) *B5. Architectural Style: Ranch
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Constructed in 1957 *B7. Moved? X No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: None B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
*B10. Significance: Theme Community Development, Agriculture, Architecture Area Visalia, Tulare County Period of Significance 1957 Property Type Single Family Residence Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The residence located at 841 E. Caldwell Avenue sits on land historically associated with the Blankenship family who owned the property from about the rnid-1880s through the present day. This house was constructed in 1957 most likely by the Blankenship family, its current owners.

The property does not appear to be associated with important historical events in the area as the subject building is representative of continued post-war residential and agricultural development that occurred locally and nationwide during the 1950s and 1960s. Therefore, the property does not appear eligible under NRHP Criterion A. Research revealed little about the Blankenship family who the property has been associated with throughout its history. Consequently, the property is also not known to be associated with significant persons in the local area, California, or the Nation and therefore does not appear to qualify under NRHP Criterion B. Ranch style houses are commonly found throughout the agriculture region of Visalia and California as the architectural style gained popularity throughout the mid-to-late 20th Century. Architecturally this property does not appear to embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, nor does it appear to be the work of a master architect or possess high artistic value. Therefore, the property does not appear to meet NRHP Criterion C. Furthermore, the property does not appear to have the potential to yield information important to history and does not appear to qualify under NRHP Criterion D.

Integrity
Overall, the residence likely appears much as it did when it was originally constructed and thus it appears to retain historic integrity. However, lacking historical and architectural significance the property does not appear to meet the NRHP criteria on a nation or local1evel and therefore does not appear eligible for the NRHP. In accordance with Section 15064.5 (a)(2)-(3) of CEQA Guidelines and using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code, the building does not appear to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.

Determination of Eligibility
Given this analysis, and in accordance with Section 15064.5 (a)(2)- (3) of CEQA Guidelines and using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code, 841 East Caldwell Avenue lacks significance and is not eligible for the NRHP.

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References:
2025 Blankenship Housing Subdivision Development, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Visalia, CA 93292, Assessor Parcel Numbers 123-400-001 & 006, Tulare County, California. 735
DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # P-54-005061 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)

Page 4 of 4 ends

*B12. References (cont):
2008 280 Widening Project. District 6 Tulare County. Prepared for the Tulare County Resource Management Agency, Visalia, CA; Ornni-Means Roseville, CA, and the California Department of Transportation, District 6, Fresno, CA.

B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: Heather D. Froshour *Date of Evaluation: January 6, 2025 736
State of california -The Resour«:;es Agency
DEPARTMENn)F PAR~ AND RECREATION

PRIMARY RECORD
Primary# ~-S"\ ~ QQ 'JOlt\
HRI # ---,---------'-------. Trinomial ______________ __, __ NRHPStatusCode ____ ~6~Z~---~

Page 1 of 3 ends

Pl. Other Identifier: Map Reference No. 07
*P2. Location: D Not for Publication [8] Unrestricted *a. County Tulare and (P2b and P2c or P2d . Attach a Location Map as necessary.) b. USGS 7.5' Quad Visalia Date 1949/69 T 19S; R 25E; _ Y. of Sec 1i; B.M. c. Address 841 E. Caldwell Avenue City Visalia Zip 93292 d. UTM : (give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone , ___ -,-____ mE/ _ ______ mN e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel # , directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) APN: 126-100-011
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The single-family residence located on this parcel carries the address of 841 E. Caldwell Ave. and is sited at the northeast comer of a large parcel containing an orchard. The house is topped with a gable on hip roof with composition shingles. The main entry which features a single four-panel wood and bottle glass door is centrally located on the sprawling Ranch style building. A covered walkway leads to a detached single car garage at the east end of the building. The house is sheathed in a combination ofboard and batten wood siding and stucco. Fenestration consists of wood framed windows that are accented by wood shutters. The detached garage is clad in stucco and has a modem metal roll-up garage door on the south elevation. ' Landscaping surrounding the residence consists of grass, along with a variety of shrubs and trees. *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP2 - Single Family Property *P4. Resources Present: [8] Building D Structure D Object D Site D District D Element of District D Other (Isolates, etc.) PSb. Description of Photo: (View, date,
accession #) Camera facing south - October
28,2008
*P6. Date Constructed/ Age and Sources:
[8] Historic D Prehistoric D Both
1957 - Tulare County Assessor's Office
*P7. Owner and Address:

Gerald Blankenship, Jr.
*PS. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, address)
Katnryn Haley, Architectural Historian
ICF Jones & Stokes
630 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
*P9. Date Recorded: November 25, 2008
*PlO. Survey Type: (Describe)
Intensive
*Pll. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter " none.") ICF Jones & Stokes. 2009. HisiOrical Resources Evaluation Report Avenue 280 Widening Project. District 6 Tulare Counrv. Prepared for the Tulare Coun~ Resource M anagement Agency, Visalia, CA; Ornni-Means Roseville, CA, and the California Department ofTransportation, District 6, Fresno, CA. TU-0\\J S, *Attachments: NONE D Location Map D Sketch Map [8] Continuation Sheet [8] Building, Structure, and Object Record 0 Archaeological Record D District Record D Linear Feature Record D Milling Station Record D Rock Art Record D Artifact Record D Photograph Record D Other (list) ~...,--,---------- DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information 737 l

Page 2 of 3 ends

*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 841 E. Caldwell A venue Bl. Historic Name: Unknown
B2. Common Name: Unknown
B3. Original Use: Single Family Residence B4. Present Use: Single Family Residence *85. Architectural Style: Ranch
*86. Construction History: (Construction date, alteration, and date of alterations) constructed- 1957 *87. Moved? [RJ No 0 Yes 0 Unknown Date: Original Location:
*88. Related Features: None
B9. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
*810. Significance: Theme Community Development, Agriculture, Architecture Area Visalia, Tulare County Period of Significance 1957 Property Type Single Family Residence Applicable Criteria N/ A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) The residence located at 841 E. Caldwell Avenue sits on land historically associated with the Blankenship family who owned the property from about the rnid-1880s through the present day. This house was constructed in 1957 most likely by the Blankenship family, its current owners. The property does not appear to be associated with important historical events in the area as the subject building is representative of continued post-war residential and agricultural development that occurred locally and nationwide during the 1950s and 1960s. Therefore the property does not appear eligible under NRHP Criterion A. Research revealed little about the Blankenship family who the property has been associated with throughout its history. Consequently, the property is also not known to be associated with significant persons in the local area, California, or the Nation and therefore does not appear to qualify under NRHP Criterion B. Ranch style houses are commonly found throughout the agriculture region of Visalia and California as the architectural style gained popularity throughout the mid-to-late 20th Century. Architecturally this property does not appear to embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, nor does it appear to be the work of a master architect or possess high artistic value. Therefore, the property does not appear to meet NRHP Criterion C. (See Continuation Sheet)
811. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *812. References: For a complete list of references see ICF Jones & Stokes. 2009. Historical Resources Evaluation
Report Avenue 280 Widening Project, District 6 Tulare
County
813. Remarks:
*814. Evaluator: Patricia E. Ambacher
*Date of Evaluation: November 25, 2008
(This space reserved for official comments.)
DPR 523L {1/95)
?
*Required Information
738

Page 3 of 3 ends

*Recorded by Kathryn Haley
BlO. Significance (cont.)
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 841 E. Caldwell A venue * Date November 25, 2008 [2] Continuation D Update
Furthermore the property does not appear to have the potential to yield information important to history and does not appear to qualify under NRHP Criterion D. Overall, the residence likely appears much as it did when it was originally constructed and thus it appears to retain historic integrity. However, lacking historical and architectural significance the property does not appear to meet the NRHP criteria on a nation or local1evel and therefore does not appear eligible for the NRHP. In accordance with Section 15064.5 (a)(2)-(3) of CEQA Guidelines and using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code, the building does not appear to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQ A.

DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information
739
Statewide in Sacramento, Pasadena, Bakersfield,
and Corporate Headquarters: 1322 E. Shaw Avenue #400,
Fresno, California 93710
76 APPENDIX D
Staff Resume
740
1322 E. Shaw Avenue, Suite 400, Fresno, CA 93710
www.soarhere.com ● 559.547.8884
Practical Experience
Ms. Froshour is a registered professional archaeologist and cultural resources specialist with extensive experience in field and technical work. This experience including cultural resources monitoring, site survey, phase 1-3 excavations, and anthropology on various projects throughout the United States. She has a combined 8 years of experience in academic, consulting, museum, and public archaeology, and has worked in CRM since 2013 throughout various regions of the United States. Primary states of focus have included Maine, Massachusetts, Louisiana, Georgia, Virginia, Arizona, and California. She routinely assesses cultural resources for project related effects and their significance, provides cultural resource mitigation services, directs archaeological surveys of both excavation and pedestrian methods, and prepares documents for Section 106 of the NHPA, CEQA, and NRHP. Ms. Froshour also has experience working alongside trial monitors through survey within the Colorado River and Mendocino National Forest regions. She has worked alongside the USDA Forest Service to provide post-fire monitoring and mitigation recommendations.

Ms. Froshour is certified by the Register for Professional Archeologists (Registrant ID: 5457).

Highlighted Projects
California High-Speed Rail Authority Construction Package 1, Fresno and Madera Counties, Cultural Resources Support, March 2023-Present Heather is the Cultural Resources Support for this construction package. As such, she oversees staff archaeologist cultural reporting, monitoring, and artifact processing on the 33- mile right of way between Madera and Fresno.

SOAR Environmental Consulting, Senior Archaeologist, January 2023-Present Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessments, CDFW, Various California Locations in Butte, Lassen, Orange, Plumas, Sacramento, San Diego, and Sierra Counties, California
Provided desktop research, supervised site pedestrian surveys, co-wrote full Phase 1 reports, and tribal consultation for 8 separate mitigation management projects throughout California.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Ivanhoe, Tulare County, California
Provided desktop research, supervised site pedestrian survey, full Phase 1 report, and tribal consultation for well replacement project.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Terra Bella, Tulare County, California
Provided desktop research, supervised site pedestrian survey, full Phase 1 report, and tribal consultation for aggregate quarry construction project.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Dixon, Solano County, California
Provided desktop research, site pedestrian survey, cultural resources portion of full Environmental Assessment, and tribal consultation for ranch subdivision.

Heather Froshour
Senior Archaeologist
12 Years of Relevant Experience
Biography
Ms. Froshour’s background emphasises
archaeology, anthropology, and cultural
resources monitoring.

Education
• M.A. in Historical Archaeology, November
2014. University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
• B.A. in Anthropology/Geography, June 2010.

University of Southern Maine,
Gorham/Portland, ME.

Professional Development
• 8 hr training in Wilderness Firest Aid (Sierra
Rescue International)
• Adult, Child, Infant CPR & First Aid Training
• Driver/Operator
Professional Affiliations
• Register of Professional Archaeologists
• CHRIS Qualified Archaeologist
• Society of American Archaeology – SAA
• Society of Historical Archaeology – SHA
• Society of California Archaeology – SCA
Technical Expertise
• Lithic Analysis
• Technical Report Writing
• Lab analysis
• Cultural Monitoring
• Site Surveying – Phases 1-3
• Excavation
• Metal Detection
• Auguring
• Research
• MS Office and Excel
• Collector and Survey 123 for ArchGIS
741
1322 E. Shaw Avenue, Suite 400, Fresno, CA 93710
www.soarhere.com ● 559.547.8884
Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Lone Pine, Inyo and Mono Counties, California
Provided desktop research, site pedestrian survey, full Phase 1 report/ cultural resources section of full Initial Study report, and tribal consultation for broadband fiber optic project.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Lindsay, Tulare County, California
Provided desktop research, supervised the 2-person crew site pedestrian survey, full Phase 1 report, and tribal consultation for highline pipeline replacement project.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment/Evaluation, Farmersville, Tulare County, California
Provided desktop research, supervised the 2-person crew site pedestrian survey, full Phase 1 report, and tribal consultation, Cultural Resources Initial Study/Environmental Assessment for roundabout and road extension construction project.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Wildomar, Riverside County, California
Provided desktop research, site pedestrian survey, full Phase 1 report, and tribal consultation for two small retail construction projects.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Visalia, Tulare County, California
Provided desktop research, supervised the 2-person crew site pedestrian survey, full Phase 1 report, and tribal consultation, Cultural Resources Initial Study for two rezoning and housing subdivision construction projects.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Evaluation, Yokuts Valley, Fresno County, California
Provided desktop research, tribal consultation, and full Phase 1 report for the construction a new saber transmission tower to accompany existing USACE and CAL FIRE structures on a 100 square feet area on top of Bear Mountain.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Evaluation, Shirley Meadows, Kern County, California
Provided desktop research, tribal consultation, and full Phase 1 report with DPR forms for the construction a new saber transmission tower, and concrete masonry shelter enclosed in an 8 foot tall wire fence on a 100 square feet area on top of Shirley Peak.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Evaluation, Mountain Ranch, Calaveras County, California
Provided desktop research, tribal consultation, and full Phase 1 report with DPR forms for the construction a new saber transmission tower, and propane tank enclosed in an 8 foot tall wire fence on a 100 square feet area on top of Quiggs Mountain.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Glennville, Kern County, California
Provided desktop research, site pedestrian survey, tribal consultation, and full Phase 1 report for the construction a new saber transmission tower, CMU block shelter, and parking lot enclosed in a wire fence on a 100 square feet area on top of Mount Pheasant. 742
1322 E. Shaw Avenue, Suite 400, Fresno, CA 93710
www.soarhere.com ● 559.547.8884
Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Bakersfield, Kern County, California
Provided desktop research, site pedestrian survey, and full Phase 1 report for rezoning project and multiple family residence construction project located in downtown Bakersfield.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Fresno, Fresno County, California
Provided desktop research, site pedestrian survey, and full Phase 1 Historic Resources Identification Report for mobile home park wastewater collection and disposal project located in downtown Fresno.

Senior Archaeologist, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Joshua Tree, California
Provided desktop research, site pedestrian survey, and full Phase 1 report for upscale yurt campground construction project located in San Bernadino County.

Post Fire Fuels and Priority Heritage Asset Assessment Surveys, Grindstone Region, Tehama & Glenn Counties, CA (June 2022-December 2022). The Great Basin Institute, Archaeological Crew Lead.

Phase I pedestrian surveys and site recording on post-wildfire burned landscapes within the Mendocino National Forest. Overseeing a small crew in the field survey, site recording, and completion of extensive USDA Forest Service site reports and mapping of cultural resources in the area. Ensured that all pertinent data is documented and reported to Forest Services standards with specific attention to current field conditions, disturbances, vegetation, terrain, and geospatial data of cultural resources. Provided day to day support of the crew and worked as a liaison between the Great Basin Institute and Mendocino National Forest personnel.

Conducted Section 106 and Section 110 Priority Heritage Asset assessments of archaeological resources throughout the eastern region of the Mendocino. Assisted in final Phase 1 survey report writing.
2021-2022
Various Cultural Resource Management Survey Projects, GA & NC (June 2021- April 2022). TerraXplorations, Inc., Archaeology Field Director.

Phase I shovel testing in various locations throughout Georgia, in addition to a single project just outside of Raleigh, NC. These projects include road, bridge, and culvert improvement surveys as well as solar tract, farm, and generator surveys. All projects were conducted in 30m intervals along transect within the ESB of the survey area. All positive shovel tests were then delineated in 15m interval cruciform to determine site boundaries. Several projects required the use of metal detection grids in order to thoroughly survey areas of known Civil War activity.

A number of projects for the Georgia Department of Transportation also required the probing of areas within the project ESB that were located within 1km from a known cemetery, with potential anomalies delineated and all results fully recorded. Duties include overseeing and directing field crews in locating, collecting, recording, and interpreting data from the survey.

The supervision of personnel, including aiding in hiring and firing, performance reviews, training, work allocation, and problem resolution. Ensuring safe work practices and directing morning safety meetings to address potential hazards and safety concerns in the areas scheduled for fieldwork that day. Participation in field and office meetings with PIs and company owners to address scheduling and management procedures based on client needs as well as those of state and federal regulations and requirements. 743
1322 E. Shaw Avenue, Suite 400, Fresno, CA 93710
www.soarhere.com ● 559.547.8884
Cultural Resource Management Survey Project, VAM-1 and Glasgow Pipeline Replacement, VA (May 2021-June 2021). TerraXplorations, Inc., Archaeology Crew Chief.

Phase I shovel test excavations from the replacement of the VAM-1 and Glasgow natural gas pipelines in the Blue Ridge Mountains, near the Appalachian Trail. Evaluated and conducted field work in various conditions in primarily mountainous terrain. Under direct supervision helped to manage and organize field crew in order to complete the project in a timely and efficient manner. Maintained field equipment and assisted in the writing and compilation of all field paperwork. Personally in charge of the majority of all mappings of and oversight of field crew for sites throughout the project area.

Various Cultural Resource Management Survey Projects, LA & MS (August 2020-May 2021). TerraXplorations, Inc., Archaeology Field Technician.

Phase I shovel test excavations for bank mitigation in Northeastern Mississippi along the Buttahatchee River. Phase III survey of two projects; the historic St. Amelia Plantation in Welcome, Louisiana and an unnamed prehistoric village in Plaquemine, Louisiana. The phase III projects both required excavating the foundations of various structures, and in the case of the prehistoric site excavating and mapping postholes within pits. The projects also required drawing plan views, and stratigraphic profiles, as well as feature and level write-ups. Unit excavations included 1mx1m to 3mx3m units, with a few requiring the extension of existing units to chase out observed features and artifact clusters.

Various Cultural Resource Management Survey Projects, ID & WI (June 2020 -July 2020). Tetra Tech, Inc., Archaeology Field Technician.

Phase I pedestrian surveying of various wind and solar farm projects throughout corn and soybean fields.

Cultural Resource Management Survey, Acadiana to Gillis, LA (January 2020-March 2020). BGE, Inc., Archaeology Field Technician.

Phase I shovel test excavations of proposed natural gas pipeline between Acadian and Gillis, Louisiana. This project entailed the excavation of 30mx30m units with distance varying based on HPA and LPA guidelines (a spacing of 30m to 50m respectively). A requirement of the survey was to maintain daily investigation point forms for individual shovel test units. In addition to this, it was required to aid in recording artifacts and photos of sites found throughout the project.

Various Cultural Resource Management Survey Projects, MN & IA (November 2019- December 2019). In Situ Archeological Consulting LLC, Archaeology Field Technician.

Phase I pedestrian surveying of various natural gas and cellular tower projects, as well as Phase II field work entailing the excavation of 45cmX45cm test units and GPS data collection. The projects also occasionally required the writing of site forms, and research for future projects at the Minnesota SHPO collections.

Cultural Resource Management Survey, Ten West Link Project, CA & AZ (August 2019-October 2019). POWER Engineers Inc., Archaeology Field Technician.

Phase I pedestrian survey of the proposed 500 kV transmission line connecting electrical substations in Tonopah, Arizona and Blythe, California. This project entailed working in one of five teams, and often included 1-2 tribal monitors from the Colorado River Indian Tribes. The right of way crews used a 400ft buffer for the corridor, with each team using a 15m spread to survey the proposed transmission line. This survey required the use of a Trimble GPS system to navigate the corridor and plot both isolate and site locations for GIS and recording crew use.

As part of the recording crew later in the survey, it was also required to conduct thorough site 744
1322 E. Shaw Avenue, Suite 400, Fresno, CA 93710
www.soarhere.com ● 559.547.8884
analysis and recordation via site forms and Trimble points of each observed artifact and feature, both historic and prehistoric.

Authored Publications
2024 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: Well No. 6 Replacement Project, Ivanhoe, California.”
2024 Froshour, Heather, and Jamie Neitenbach. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment:

Terra Bella Aggregate Quarry Construction Project, Terra Bella, California.” 2024 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: Realized Dreams Ranch Subdivision Project, Dixon, California.”
2024 Froshour, Heather, and Rowland, Kevin. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment:

Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation District Highline Pipeline Replacement Project, Lindsay, California.”
2024 Froshour, Heather, and Rowland, Kevin. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment/ Evaluation: Rd 168 & E Walnut Ave Roundabout Project, Farmersville, California.”
2024 Froshour, Heather, and Rowland, Kevin. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment:

Cameron Ranch Housing Subdivision Project, Visalia, California.” 2024 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Cake House Cannabis Small Retail Centers, Wildomar, California.”
2024 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: Lagomarsinio Housing Subdivision Project, Tulare, California.”
2024 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: Elliot Housing Subdivision Project, Visalia, California.”
2023 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Evaluation: 30811 Bear Mountain Rd., Yokuts Valley, California.”
2023 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Evaluation: Shirley Peak, Rd. 622, Kern County, California.”
2023 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Evaluation: Sierra Vista Lookout., Quiggs Mountain, Mountain Ranch, California.”
2023 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Evaluation: Granite Rd., Mount Pheasant, Glennville, California.”
2023 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: 4415 Wilson Rd., Bakersfield, California.”
2023 Froshour, Heather. “Cultural Resources Desktop Assessment: 1941 N. Golden State Blvd., Fresno, California."
2023 Froshour, Heather. “Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: 3174 Bonair Ave., Joshua Tree, California.”
2023 Froshour, Heather. “Cultural Resources Desktop Assessment: 3200 Rio Linda Blvd., Sacramento, California."
2023 Hawley, Maria and Froshour, Heather. “Cultural Resources Assessment, 18644 16th Ave., Stratford, California.”
2022 Lashway, Nick, Hovis, Chad, and Froshour, Heather. “Upper Thomes Forestwide Fuels Phase I Report: U.S.D.A. Forest Service Mendocino National Forest Covelo and Grindstone Ranger Districts, California.”
Academic Publications
2024 Harvey, Amanda R., Atherton, Heather, MacKinnon, Amy, Rushing, Brett, Zimmer, Paul, Froshour, Heather D., & Kubal, Kathleen. “Over a Decade of Design-Build Archaeology on the California High-Speed Rail, Construction Package 1 from Madera to Fresno, California.”
745
1322 E. Shaw Avenue, Suite 400, Fresno, CA 93710
www.soarhere.com ● 559.547.8884
2013 Hamilton, Nathan D. and Froshour, Heather D (presenter). “Explore 5,000 Years of History in Danvers, Massachusetts.”
2013 Froshour, Heather D. “Preserving the Past: Public and Historical Archaeology at the Rebecca Nurse Homestead, Danvers, Massachusetts.”
2012 Froshour, Heather D (presenter). “17th-18th Century Occupations in Danvers, Massachusetts.”
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755

REPORT TO CITY OF VISALIA PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARING DATE: April 28, 2025
PROJECT PLANNER: Colleen A. Moreno, Assistant Planner
Phone: (559) 713-4031
Email: [email protected]
SUBJECT: Annexation No. 2024-05: A request by San Joaquin Valley Homes to annex two parcels totaling approximately 62.53 acres into the City limits of Visalia. Upon annexation, approximately 55.49 acres of the site would be zoned R-1-5 (SingleFamily Residential, 5,000 square foot minimum site area) and approximately 7.04 acres of the site will be zoned C-MU (Mixed Use Commercial), which is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation.

Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602: A request by San Joaquin Valley Homes to subdivide two parcels totaling 62.53 acres into 203 lots for singlefamily residential use, the site is zoned R-1-5 (Single-Family Residential, 5,000 square foot minimum site area) and C-MU (Mixed Use Commercial). Development of the single-family homes will be restricted to the R-1-5 (Single-Family Residential, 5,000 square foot minimum site area) zone. Commercial development of the area within the project site zoned for commercial use is not part of this project and is a remainder.

Location: The site is located on the southeast corner of South Santa Fe Street and East Caldwell Avenue (APNs: 123-400-005 and 123-400-001).

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Annexation No. 2024-05
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that City Council approve Annexation No. 2024-05, as conditioned, based on the findings and conditions in Resolution No. 2024-77.

Staff’s recommendation is based on the conclusion that the request is consistent with the Visalia General Plan.

Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602
Staff recommends approval of Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602, as conditioned, based upon the findings and conditions in Resolution No. 2024-76. Staff’s recommendation is based on the conclusion that the request is consistent with the Visalia General Plan, Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance.

RECOMMENDED MOTION
I move to recommend approval of Annexation No. 2024-05, based on the findings and conditions in Resolution No. 2024-77.

I move to approve Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602, based on the findings and conditions in Resolution No. 2024-76.
756

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant, San Joaquin Valley Homes, has filed two entitlement applications, one for the annexation of two parcels totaling 62.53 acres and the second for a tentative subdivision map for 203 single-family residential lots.

Annexation No. 2024-05 is a
request to annex 62.53 acres
located outside of the city
limits, in the Tier II Urban
Development Boundary
(Exhibit “A”). Upon
annexation, the Zoning
designations for the project
area will include
approximately 7.04 acres
zoned C-MU (Mixed Use
Commercial) and
approximately 55.49 acres
zoned R-1-5 (Single-Family
Residential, 5,000 sq. ft.
minimum site area), which is
consistent with the underlying
General Plan land use
designation. The area zoned
for commercial use is not part of this project submittal and will not be developed at this time.

The Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602 is a request to subdivide the annexed 55.49 acres into a 203-lot single-family residential subdivision. The subdivision will be developed in two phases, with the first phase developing 123 lots and the second phase developing the last 80 lots of the 203-lot subdivision (Exhibit “B”), with a remainder of 7.04 acres of C-MU (Mixed Use Commercial) zoning, not to be developed with this project. The project will adhere to the R-1-5 zoning district for lot sizes of 5,000 square feet or greater, ensuring compatibility with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision will be developed at a density of 3.65 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the Residential Low Density land use designation for the site of 2 to 10 units per acre.

The proposed subdivision is located on the southeast corner of South Santa Fe Street and East Caldwell Avenue and is bounded by South Santa Fe Street on the west and South Burke Street on the east. The project also includes construction of streets, extension of sewer lines and sewer laterals, connection to the storm drainage system and extension of other utilities and services (e.g. electricity, gas, water, etc.). Additional major street improvements include the widening of the Santa Fe roadway, improvements along Caldwell Avenue including curb, gutter and sidewalk, as well as completing remaining frontage improvements, along Burke Street. 757

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

RELATED PROJECTS
None.

ADJACENT PROJECTS
Diamond Oaks Subdivision was a request to subdivide 55.9 acres of R-1-6 zoned property into a 180-lot Planned Residential Development (PRD). The PRD consisted of 168 single-family residential lots, 12 multi-family lots and six out-lots for the purpose of Landscaping and Lighting Lots. The project included the construction of 168 single-family residential homes, the construction of eight triplex units (24 total units) on eight lots, and the future construction of a large multi-family development on the remaining four lots abutting Caldwell Avenue. DR Horton is currently developing the single-family residential homes. The subdivision was approved by the Planning Commission on September 23, 2013.

PROJECT EVALUATION
Staff supports the annexation based on the project’s consistency with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Specifically, Annexation No. 2024-05 will facilitate a new community on a 55.49-acre site in a manner that is consistent with the General Plan land use designations that exist within the project site and will complement existing development to the north, east, and west.

Furthermore, staff recommends approval of the Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602, as conditioned, based on the project’s consistency with the Land Use Element of the Visalia General Plan, Housing Element, Housing Accountability Act (Government Code section 65589.5), Zoning, and Subdivision Ordinances. The subdivision map proposes to develop a parcel of land that is designated for residential development at a density prescribed in the 2030 Visalia General Plan.

General Plan Land Use Designation: Mixed Use Commercial / Residential Low Density Zoning: County Zoning – Outside of the City limits
Zoning Upon Annexation: C-MU (Mixed Use Commercial) & R-1-5 (Single-Family Residential 5,000 sq. ft. min. site area)
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: North: C-MU (Mixed Use Commercial) & R-M-3 (Multi-Family, 1,200 sq. ft. min. site area) /
Vacant Parcel
South: X (County) – Outside of City limits
East: R-1-5 (Single-Family Residential 5,000 sq. ft.
min. site area) / Diamond Oaks Subdivision
West: C-MU (Mixed Use Commercial) / Commercial
business, mini-storage
Environmental Review: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2024-63 Special Districts: None
Site Plan Review: SPR No. 2024-177-1
758
Annexation No. 2024-05
The applicant has filed an application to initiate the annexation of two parcels totaling 62.53 acres (Annexation No. 2024-05) to facilitate the development of the 203-lot subdivision. This is required in order to annex the project site into the City’s land use jurisdiction. The annexation can be supported on the basis that the proposed use is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-P-21, which allows for annexation and development of residential land to occur within the Urban Development Boundary (Tier II) consistent with the City’s Land Use Diagram. The site can be serviced with all the requisite utilities and infrastructure available to serve the site upon development. Cities can approve tentative maps prior to final approval of the annexation by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) but cannot approve a final subdivision map until after the land is annexed and the annexation recorded through the Tulare County Recorder. Staff has included this requirement as Condition No. 2 of Annexation No. 2024-05.

General Plan Consistency
The proposed 203-lot single-family residential subdivision is located within the Tier II Urban Development Boundary. The stated purpose of the Urban Development Boundaries are to guide the timing, type, and location of growth, to preserve resource lands, natural features, and open space, and to promote infill and redevelopment. The Visalia General Plan Policy LU-P-21 includes phasing thresholds based on the issuance of building permits for allowing annexation and development of urban land within the Urban Development Boundary Tier II. The threshold of issuing building permits for 5,850 housing units since April 1, 2010, that is necessary to expand from Tier I to Tier II has been met. As of July 1, 2021, the City has issued permits for 5,868 housing units. Due to meeting this threshold, the Urban Development Boundary expanded from Tier I to Tier II by Resolution No. 2021-38 at the July 19, 2021, City Council meeting. The Blankenship annexation and subdivision area lies within Tier II which aligns with the General Plan Policy.

Furthermore, the annexation and development of the subdivision allows for “balanced growth amongst Visalia’s four quadrants,” which is a longstanding “tenet of the city’s approach to land use planning.” Per the General Plan, “the quadrant that sees that highest percentage of development is the Northwest, owing to several new neighborhoods and buildout of the Industrial Park.

Development of the Southeast quadrant, where this project is located at, should “develop in roughly equal proportion in the Second and Third Tiers” (General Plan, pg. 2-28).

The project is consistent with General Plan Policy LU-P-19 of the General Plan, which states “ensure that growth occurs in a compact and concentric fashion by implementing the General Plan’s phased growth strategy.”. In addition, the project is also consistent with General Plan Policy LU-P55 which supports the development of R-1-5 zoned properties with single-family subdivisions.

Existing utility infrastructure (i.e. sewer, storm, and water) can be extended from nearby urban development to accommodate the project build out. The proposed 203-lot single family residential will be compatible with existing residential development surrounding the site.

Staff supports the project because the project meets the overall intent of the General Plan and its policies.

Street Connectivity and Improvements
The developer of the subdivision will be required to widen and install South Santa Fe Street roadway, located to the west of the project site, to a standard Collector Road as well as remaining frontage improvements along South Burke Street to the east. Additionally, there will be street block connectivity within the subdivision with local city standard streets. Improvements on all streets located within and surrounding the subdivision include curb, gutter, sidewalks, parkway landscaping, and street lighting.
759
The developer of the subdivision is also required to coordinate with the City of Visalia’s Capital Improvements (CIP) Engineering Division for improvements along Caldwell Avenue, regarding the Caldwell Avenue Improvement Project, which is located north of the project site. These improvements along Caldwell Avenue including the remainder commercial parcel include but are not limited to curb, gutter, sidewalks, parkway landscaping and street lighting. This area of the project site is part of a larger project, the Avenue 280 corridor widening project sponsored by the City of Visalia, Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG), the County of Tulare, the City of Farmersville, and the City of Exeter1. The project aims to upgrade existing pavement to carry increased traffic loads as well as median islands to improve safety. When completed, the Avenue 280 project will provide a four-lane divided roadway from State Route 99 to the City of Exeter.

The Site Plan Review comments for this project are attached and conditioned as part of the project which notes the above requirements of improvements.

Development Standards
All of the proposed lots will meet the standard R-1-5 zoning (Single-Family Residential, 5,000 square foot minimum site area) standards for lot size and setbacks.

The average lot size for the subdivision is approximately 7,395 square feet, with the minimum lot size being 5,111 square feet (Lot 175) and the maximum lot size being 18,407 square feet (Lot 80).

Each lot within the subdivision will conform to the development standards of the Visalia Municipal Code Chapter 17.12 Single-Family Residential which requires the following minimum lot area and setbacks:

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 25-ft
Infrastructure Improvements (Storm Drainage & Sanitary Sewer) Water Service
Staff has included Condition No. 3 that requires a valid Will Serve letter from the California Water Service Company.

Storm Drainage
Storm water retention will be required with the subdivision. An additional storm drainage main installation is required in accordance with the City Master Plan on South Santa Fe Street. The applicant has been instructed to coordinate with City Engineer for conformance.

Sanitary Sewer
The project will have to connect to the existing sanitary sewer main located on South Santa Fe Street.

The Site Plan Review comments relating to storm drainage and sanitary sewer are attached and conditioned as part of the project which note the above requirements as well as subjecting the site to ongoing analysis and update of the City’s Storm Drain and Sewer master plans. 1 City of Visalia - Caldwell Improvement Project
760
Landscape and Lighting District (LLD) and Block Walls
An LLD will be required for the long-term maintenance of the landscaping, lighting, pocket park, outlot areas and block walls within the subdivision. The pocket park will be located along the Tulare Irrigation Canal, that is along the south of the project site with a required setback of 18-ft (15-ft minimum) from top of ditch of the Tulare Irrigation District. The outlot areas (A – F) are located along the perimeter of the subdivision along South Santa Fe Street and South Burke Street within the subdivision. City standard block walls shall be required along the major street frontages (South Santa Fe Street, East Caldwell Avenue and South Burke Street). The block wall height shall be reduced to three feet where the block wall runs adjacent to the front yard setback along the front yard areas of the adjoining residential lots (Lots 8, 9, 17, 18, 36, 68, 153, 166, and 167). Staff has included Condition No. 4 regarding the LLD for the above-mentioned areas within the subdivision.

Please note that a block wall will be required along the shared property lines between the commercial zoned property and properties zoned residential; however, the requirement to install this block wall will be deferred until the commercial zoned property is developed.

Oak Tree Preservation (VMC Chapter 12.24)
The City has a municipal ordinance in place to protect valley oak trees. Per the Biological study submitted by the applicant, the tentative subdivision map, and a staff visit on April 16, 2025, to the project site, oak trees are located along the perimeter of the site. All existing valley oak trees located near or within the project site are subject to the valley oak tree ordinance. The ordinance clearly provides the requirements for removal, pruning, as well as mitigation if the oak trees are to be removed. If the applicant requests to remove the valley oak trees, an Oak Tree Removal Permit shall be submitted and reviewed for approval or denial. Staff has added this as Condition No. 5 of the Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map.

Agricultural Land Preservation Program Ordinance (VMC Chapter 18) The 62.53-acre project site is located within the City’s Tier II growth boundary and is also defined as Prime Farmland per the Tulare County Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Based on the project’s location and designation, the development of this site is subject to the City’s Agricultural Preservation Ordinance.

The Agricultural Preservation Ordinance (APO) was effective, 30 days after ordinance adoption on May 15, 2023. The adoption of the ordinance is a necessary step for projects located within the Tier II growth boundary to move forward with development. The purpose and intent of the ordinance is to implement the goals of the City of Visalia General Plan and address the conversion of prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance through the adoption of an agricultural land preservation program. In addition, the ordinance established a process for the required preservation of agricultural land through the acquisition of agricultural conservation easements or the payment of an in-lieu fee for projects subject to the provisions on this ordinance.

The developer of the project is subject to comply with the requirements of the adopted ordinance.

The preserved land obligation shall be calculated at a ratio of one acre of preserved land for each acre converted land. Converted land acreage shall be calculated by determining the applicable project acreage less the acreage of exclusions. In addition, the preserved land obligation, as established in Section 18.04.070(A) of the APO, shall be preserved through acquisition of an agricultural easement in accordance with Section 18.04.080, unless eligible for payment of an in-lieu fee in accordance with Section 18.04.090 of the APO.
761
Please note that Great Valley Land Trust has obtained an agricultural easement for the developer of the Blankenship subdivision project that was approved to form by the City Council at their November 18, 2024, meeting. The agricultural easement was recorded on December 6, 2024, which satisfies the provisions of the City’s APO.

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.

The project is consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and single-family residential development standards. The lots proposed for the Blankenship 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 continue the development of the local street to the east, South Burke, which facilitates street connectivity within the neighboring subdivision (Diamond Oaks).

Subdivision Map Act Findings
California Government Code Section 66474 lists seven findings for which a legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a tentative map if it is able to make any of these findings. These seven “negative” findings have come to light through a recent California Court of Appeal decision (Spring Valley Association v. City of Victorville) that has clarified the scope of findings that a city or county must make when approving a tentative map under the California Subdivision Map Act.

Staff has reviewed the seven findings for a cause of denial and finds that all findings can be made for approving the project. The seven findings and staff’s analysis are below. Recommended findings in response to this Government Code section are included in the recommended findings for the approval of the tentative subdivision map.

GC Section 66474 Finding Analysis
(a) That the proposed map is not consistent with
applicable general and specific plans as specified in
Section 65451.

The proposed maps have been found to be
consistent with the City’s General Plan. This is
included as recommended Finding No. 1 of the
Tentative Subdivision Map. There are no specific
plans applicable to the proposed map.
(b) That the design or improvement of the proposed
subdivision is not consistent with applicable general
and specific plans.

The proposed design and improvement of the map
has been found to be consistent with the City’s
General Plan. This is included as recommended
Finding No. 1 of the Tentative Subdivision Map.

There are no specific plans applicable to the
proposed map.
(c) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.

The site is physically suitable for the proposed map
and its affiliated development plan, subject to City
Council approval of the General Plan for the
proposed Low Density Residential land use
designation. This is included as recommended
Finding No. 3 of the Tentative Subdivision Map.
(d) That the site is not physically suitable for the The site is physically suitable for the proposed map 762
proposed density of development. and its affiliated development plan, which is designated as Low Density Residential and
developed at a density of 3.65 units per acre. This is
included as recommended Finding No. 4 of the
Tentative Subdivision Map.
(e) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

The proposed design and improvement of the map
has not been found likely to cause environmental
damage or substantially and avoidable injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat. This finding is further
supported by the project’s determination of no new
effects under the Guidelines for the Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
included as recommended Finding No. 6 of the
Tentative Subdivision Map.
(f) That the design of the subdivision or type of
improvements is likely to cause serious public health
problems.

The proposed design of the map has been found to
not cause serious public health problems. This is
included as recommended Finding No. 2 of the
Tentative Subdivision Map.
(g) That the design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements will conflict with easements, acquired
by the public at large, for access through or use of
property within the proposed subdivision.

The proposed design of the map does not conflict
with any existing or proposed easements located on
or adjacent to the subject property. This is included
as recommended Finding No. 5 of the Tentative
Subdivision Map.

Environmental Review
An Initial Study was prepared for this project, consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2024-63 (SCH 2025040063) disclosed that environmental impacts are determined to be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation to address significant impacts to the following:
• The Biological Habitat Assessment prepared by Soar Environmental Consulting provided four (4) mitigation measures pertaining to Biological Resources to reduce impacts to Nuttall’s Woodpecker.
o The Nuttall’s Woodpecker (a species located on site) is a species listed as a United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC). This species was found during a site assessment of the project site nesting within oak tress located along the perimeter of the project site and in utility poles and shrubs.

Additionally, the City received one comment letter in response to the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration circulated for this project. This letter was shared with the project applicant. The letter was received from the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and is included with the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration. This letter was provided to the applicant. In addition, no structures, mixing/loading/storage, drainage ditches, farmhouses, outbuildings, smudge pots, or any other chemical of concerns were identified on the site. To further address the comments raised in DTSC’s letter the following Condition No. 7 of the Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map is incorporated in the project’s conditions of approval as follows:
763
a. That prior to site disturbance, the developer/homebuilder will consult with an appropriately licensed (CA-registered) individual or agency on recommendation for obtaining soil samples to test for OCP’s and arsenic. If suggested to be performed, developer/homebuilder shall have an appropriately licensed (CA-registered) individual or agency perform the soil sampling per DTSC’s Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Guidance Manual. The developer/homebuilder shall provide the Planning and Community Preservation Director with a copy of all correspondence between the developer/homebuilder and an appropriately licensed (CA-registered) individual or agency that details the required direction/recommendation on soil samples to test for OCP’s and arsenic. b. All imported soil and fill material shall be tested to ensure that any contaminants are with DTSC’s and the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) and reference the DTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet.

Based on the letter and the inclusion of the two additional project conditions as noted above, the City concludes that the findings and conclusions of the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration are still applicable. No other formal comments were received as of the publication of this report.

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
Annexation No. 2024-05

1. That the annexation is consistent with the policies and 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 62.53 acres if AE-20 (Agricultural Exclusive 20-acre) County zone district to R-1-5 (Single-Family Residential, 5,000 minimum square foot site area) and C-MU (Mixed Use Commercial) zone district, which will not impose new land uses or development that will adversely affect the subject site or adjacent properties.

3. That the parcels are not located within an Agricultural Preserve.

4. That the parcel will be annexed into Voting District 2 per the Council Election Voting District Map.

5. That an Initial Study was prepared for this project, consistent with the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA), which disclosed that environmental impacts are determined to be not significant with mitigation and that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2024-63, incorporating the Mitigation Monitoring Program included within, is hereby adopted.

Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602

1. That the proposed location and layout of the Blankenship Subdivision Map No. 5602 its improvement and design, and the conditions under which it will be maintained is consistent with the policies and intent of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance.

The 62.53-acre project site, which is the site of the proposed 203-lot single-family residential subdivision and a remaining 7.04-acre mixed use commercial lot, is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-P-19 of the General Plan. Policy LU-P-19 states “ensure that growth occurs in a compact and concentric fashion by implementing the General Plan’s phased growth strategy.” 764

2. That the proposed Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602, its improvement and design, and the conditions under which it will be maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, nor is it likely to cause serious public health problems. The proposed tentative subdivision map will be compatible with adjacent land uses.

3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed tentative subdivision map. The Blankenship Subdivision Map No. 5606 is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance, and is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project site is adjacent to land zoned for residential development, and the subdivision establishes a local street pattern that will serve the subject site.

4. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed tentative subdivision map and the project’s density, which is consistent with the underlying Low Density Residential and Mixed Use Commercial General Plan Land Use Designation. The proposed location and layout of the Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602, its improvement and design, and the conditions under which it will be maintained is consistent with the policies and intent of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. The 62.53-acre project site, which is the site of the proposed 203-lot single-family residential subdivision and remaining 7.04- acre mixed use commercial lot, is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-P-19 of the General Plan.

Policy LU-P-19 states “ensure that growth occurs in a compact and concentric fashion by implementing the General Plan’s phased growth strategy.”

5. That the proposed Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5606, the design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The 203-lot single-family residential subdivision and remaining 7.04-acre lot is designed to comply with the City’s Engineering Improvement Standards. The development of the site with a 203-lot singlefamily residential subdivision and remaining 7.04-acre mixed use commercial lot would extend local streets, infrastructure improvements, utilities, right-of-way improvements and a residential lot pattern consistent with existing residential development found in the surrounding area. The project will include the construction of local streets within the subdivision, frontage street improvements along East Caldwell Avenue.

6. That an Initial Study was prepared for this project, consistent with the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA), which disclosed that environmental impacts are determined to be not significant with mitigation and that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2024-63, incorporating the Mitigation Monitoring Program included within, is hereby adopted.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
Annexation No. 2024-05

1. Upon annexation, the territory shall be zoned R-1-5 (Single-Family Residential, 5,000 minimum square foot site area) and C-MU (Mixed Use Commercial) consistent with the pre-zoning designated by the General Plan Land Use Map.

2. 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 PreAnnexation Agreement is attached herein as Attachment “B” of Resolution No. 2024-77. The agreement is subject to final approval by the City Council of the City of Visalia. 765
Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602

1. That the project be developed consistent with the comments and conditions of the Site Plan Review No. 2024-177-1.

2. That the project shall be developed and maintained in substantial compliance with the site plan in Exhibit A, unless otherwise specified in the conditions of approval.

3. That prior to development, of the subdivision the applicant/developer shall obtain and provide the City with a valid Will Serve Letter from the California Water Service Company.

4. That a Landscape and Lighting District be established for the long-term maintenance of local roads, street lighting, block walls, pocket park, and any additional outlots and areas for public use. This includes the transition to three-foot height block walls within the 15-ft front yard setback areas if adjoining lots within the subdivision (Lots 8, 9, 17, 18, 36, 68, 153, 166, and 167).

5. That any oak trees located within or along the perimeter of the project site shall comply with the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance of the Visalia Municipal Code (Chapter 12).

6. That the developer shall inform and have future homeowners of the Blankenship subdivision sign and acknowledge the “Right to Farm” Act. This informs future residential owners that the surrounding farming operations are protected and cannot be declared a nuisance if operating in a manner consistent with proper and accepted customs and standards.

7. That the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and its mitigation measures adopted with the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2024-63 (State Clearinghouse 2025040063) and all conditions of the Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602, including the following conditions in response to DTSC’s comment letter be met during construction and upon final occupancy and ongoing operation of the project:
a. That prior to site disturbance, the developer/homebuilder will consult with Soar Environmental on recommendation for obtaining soil samples to test for OCP’s and arsenic. If suggested to be performed, developer/homebuilder shall have Soar Environmental perform the soil sampling per Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties from DTSC. The developer/homebuilder shall provide the Planning and Community Preservation Director with a copy of all correspondence between the developer/homebuilder and Soar Environmental that details the required direction/recommendation on soil samples to test for OCP’s and arsenic. b. All imported soil and fill material shall be tested to ensure that any contaminants are with DTSC’s and the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs).

8. That approval of the Blankenship Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602 shall not become effective unless Annexation No. 2024-05, placing the project site within the corporate limits of the City of Visalia, is approved by the Tulare County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and is fully executed to include all conditions contained in the Pre-Annexation Agreement for Annexation No. 2024-05.
766

9. That the setbacks for the single-family residential lots shall comply with the R-1-5 (Single-Family Residential 5,000 sq. ft. min. site area) zone district standards for the front, side, street side yard, and rear yard setbacks.

10. That all applicable federal, state, regional, and city policies and ordinances be met.

APPEAL INFORMATION
According to the City of Visalia Zoning Ordinance Section 17.02.145, an appeal to the City Council may be submitted within ten days following the date of a decision by the Planning Commission. An appeal with applicable fees shall be in writing and shall be filed with the City Clerk at 220 N. Santa Fe Street Visalia California. The appeal shall specify errors or abuses of discretion by the Planning Commission, or decisions not supported by the evidence in the record. The appeal form can be found on the city’s website www.visalia.city or from the City Clerk.

Attachments:
• Related Plans and Policies
• Resolution No. 2024-77 – Annexation No. 2024-05
• Resolution No. 2024-76 – Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602 • Exhibit "A" – Annexation Exhibit
• Exhibit "B" – Tentative Subdivision Map Site Plan & Phasing Plan • Exhibit “C” – Park Concept
• Site Plan Review Comments No. 2024-177-1
• Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2024-63 and DTSC Comments • Biological Habitat Assessment
• Cultural Resources Assessment
• General Plan Land Use Map
• Zoning Map
• Aerial Maps
• Vicinity Map
Minimum
Lot Area Front Side Street Side Rear
5,000 sq.
ft.
15-ft. to habitable
space. 22-ft. to
garage, except on
curvilinear lots 20-
ft. to garage.
5-ft. 10-ft.
25-ft. City standard rear yard
setbacks are 25 feet with allowance
for one-story structure to go to 20-
feet subject to open space
requirements.
767

RELATED PLANS AND POLICIES
General Plan and Zoning: The following General Plan and Zoning Ordinance policies apply to the proposed project:

General Plan Land Use Policies:

LU-P-19: Ensure that growth occurs in a compact and concentric fashion by implementing the General Plan’s phased growth strategy. The General Plan Land Use Diagram establishes three growth rings to accommodate estimated City population for the years 2020 and 2030. The Urban Development Boundary I (UDB I) shares its boundaries with the 2012 city limits. The Urban Development Boundary II (UDB II) defines the urbanizable area within which a full range of urban services will need to be extended in the first phase of anticipated growth with a target buildout population of 178,000. The Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) defines full buildout of the General Plan with a target buildout population of 210,000. Each growth ring enables the City to expand in all four quadrants, reinforcing a concentric growth pattern.

LU-P-21: Allow annexation and development of residential, commercial, regional retail, and industrial land to occur within the Urban Development Boundary (Tier II) and the Urban Growth Boundary (Tier III) consistent with the City’s Land Use Diagram, according to the following phasing thresholds:
• “Tier II”: Tier II supports a target buildout population of approximately 178,000. The expansion criteria for land in Tier II is that land would only become available for development when building permits have been issued in Tier I at the following levels, starting from April 1, 2010:

Residential: after permits for 5,850 housing units have been issued; and Commercial: after permits for 480,000 square feet of commercial space on designated Commercial Mixed Use, Downtown Mixed Use, Office, and Service Commercial land have been issued.

Regional Retail: New Regional Retail areas in the Tier II Growth Boundary shall be eligible for urban development upon satisfactory demonstration that the following criteria have been met:

1.Existing Regional Retail Commercial zoned land south of Caldwell Avenue. that was undeveloped as of the date of adoption of the General Plan has received at least 922,383sq.ft. of commercial building permits [formula: 121 acres @43,560sq. ft. per gross acre = 5,270,760sq.ft. x .25 (assumed FAR for Regional Retail development) x

0.7 (recommended flex factor)]

2.The uses and tenants proposed for the area will substantially further the community’s goal of providing high level regional retail goods and services.

3.That there is sufficient roadway capacity and adequate public facilities and infrastructure to accommodate the proposed development.

The regional retail zone classification shall provide for permitted and conditional uses that are of a regional draw only. Uses that are not exclusively of a regional draw may be allowed where a finding is made that such uses are ancillary or associated with the regional uses.

Uses of a neighborhood or convenience level draw only shall not be permitted. o “Tier III”: Tier III comprises full buildout of the General Plan. The expansion criteria for land in Tier III is that land would only become available for development when building permits have been issued in Tier I and Tier II at the following levels, starting from April 1, 2010:
768
Residential: after permits for 12,800 housing units have been issued.

Commercial: after permits for 960,000 square feet of commercial space space on designated Commercial Mixed Use, Downtown Mixed Use, Office, and Service Commercial land have been issued; and
Industrial: after permits for 2,800,000 square feet of commercial space space on designated Industrial, Light Industrial, and Business Research Park land have been issued.

Chapter 17.12

SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE

17.12.010 Purpose and intent.

In the R-1 single-family residential zones (R-1-5, R-1-12.5, and R-1-20), the purpose and intent is to provide living area within the city where development is limited to low density concentrations of one-family dwellings where regulations are designed to accomplish the following: to promote and encourage a suitable environment for family life; to provide space for community facilities needed to compliment urban residential areas and for institutions that require a residential environment; to minimize traffic congestion and to avoid an overload of utilities designed to service only low density residential use.

17.12.015 Applicability.

The requirements in this chapter shall apply to all property within R-1 zone districts.

17.12.050 Site area.

The minimum site area shall be as follows:

Zone Minimum Site Area
R-1-5 5,000 square feet
R-1-12.5 12,500 square feet
R-1-20 20,000 square feet
A. Each site shall have not less than forty (40) feet of frontage on the public street. The minimum width shall be as follows:

Zone Interior Lot Corner Lot
R-1-5 50 feet 60 feet
R-1-12.5 90 feet 100 feet
R-1-20 100 feet 110 feet
B. Minimum width for corner lot on a side on cul-de-sac shall be eighty (80) feet, when there is no landscape lot between the corner lot and the right of way.

17.12.060 One dwelling unit per site.

In the R-1 single-family residential zone, not more than one dwelling unit shall be located on each site, with the exception to Section 17.12.020(J).

17.12.080 Front yard.

A. The minimum front yard shall be as follows:

Zone Minimum Front Yard
R-1-5 Fifteen (15) feet for living space and side-loading garages and twenty-two (22) feet for frontloading garages or other parking facilities, such as, but not limited to, carports, shade canopies, or porte cochere. A Porte Cochere with less than twenty-two (22) feet of setback from property line shall not be counted as covered parking, and garages on such sites shall not be the subject of a garage conversion.
769
R-1-12.5 Thirty (30) feet
R-1-20 Thirty-five (35) feet
B. On a site situated between sites improved with buildings, the minimum front yard may be the average depth of the front yards on the improved site adjoining the side lines of the site but need not exceed the minimum front yard specified above.

C. On cul-de-sac and knuckle lots with a front lot line of which all or a portion is curvilinear, the front yard setback shall be no less than fifteen (15) feet for living space and side-loading garages and twenty (20) feet for front-loading garages.

17.12.090 Side yards.

A. The minimum side yard shall be five feet in the R-1-5 and R-1-12.5 zone subject to the exception that on the street side of a corner lot the side yard shall be not less than ten feet and twenty-two (22) feet for front loading garages or other parking facilities, such as, but not limited to, carports, shade canopies, or porte cocheres.

B. The minimum side yard shall be ten feet in the R-1-20 zone subject to the exception that on the street side of a corner lot the side yard shall be not less than twenty (20) feet.

C. On a reversed corner lot the side yard adjoining the street shall be not less than ten feet.

D. On corner lots, all front-loading garage doors shall be a minimum of twenty-two (22) feet from the nearest public improvement or sidewalk.

E. Side yard requirements may be zero feet on one side of a lot if two or more consecutive lots are approved for a zero lot line development by the site plan review committee.

F. The placement of any mechanical equipment, including but not limited to, pool/spa equipment and evaporative coolers shall not be permitted in the five-foot side yard within the buildable area of the lot, or within five feet of rear/side property lines that are adjacent to the required side yard on adjoining lots. This provision shall not apply to street side yards on corner lots, nor shall it prohibit the surface mounting of utility meters and/or the placement of fixtures and utility lines as approved by the building and planning divisions.

17.12.100 Rear yard.

In the R-1 single-family residential zones, the minimum yard shall be twenty-five (25) feet, subject to the following exceptions:

A. On a corner or reverse corner lot the rear yard shall be twenty-five (25) feet on the narrow side or twenty (20) feet on the long side of the lot. The decision as to whether the short side or long side is used as the rear yard area shall be left to the applicant's discretion as long as a minimum area of one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of usable rear yard area is maintained. The remaining side yard to be a minimum of five feet.

B. Accessory structures not exceeding twelve (12) feet may be located in the required rear yard but not closer than three feet to any lot line provided that not more than twenty (20) percent of the area of the required rear yard shall be covered by structures enclosed on more than one side and not more than forty (40) percent may be covered by structures enclosed on only one side. On a reverse corner lot an accessory structure shall not be located closer to the rear property line than the required side yard on the adjoining key lot. An accessory structure shall not be closer to a side property line adjoining key lot and not closer to a side property line adjoining the street than the required front yard on the adjoining key lot.

C. Main structures may encroach up to five feet into a required rear yard area provided that such encroachment does not exceed one story and that a usable, open, rear yard area of at least one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet shall be maintained. Such encroachment and rear yard area shall be approved by the city planner prior to issuing building permits. 770

17.12.110 Height of structures.

In the R-1 single-family residential zone, the maximum height of a permitted use shall be thirty-five (35) feet, with the exception of structures specified in Section 17.12.100(B).

17.12.120 Off-street parking.

In the R-1 single-family residential zone, subject to the provisions of Chapter 17.34.

17.12.130 Fences, walls and hedges.

In the R-1 single-family residential zone, fences, walls and hedges are subject to the provisions of Section

17.36.030.

Chapter 12.24

OAK TREE PRESERVATION
Article 1. Purpose and Definitions

12.24.010 Purpose.

A. In order to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, to enhance the beauty of Visalia and to complement and strengthen zoning, subdivision and land use standards and regulations, while at the same time recognizing individual rights to develop private property, the city council finds it necessary to establish basic standards, measures and compliance requirements for the preservation and protection of native Valley oak trees and landmark trees.

B. The provisions of this chapter are enacted to:

1. Enhance natural scenic beauty;

2. Assist in the overall goal of preservation, maintenance and regeneration of a healthy urban forest and tree cover;

3. Promote the conservation of energy resources and regulation of temperature through the provision of shade, evaporative cooling and wind break provided by trees;

4. Improve the quality of air, water, and soil resources;

5. Sustain and enhance property values;

6. Promote the well-being of the community;

7. Provide for recreational settings, wildlife habitat, and ecological balance;

8. Provide for safety through responsible and safe standards for the trimming and/or removal of oak trees;

9. Promote Visalia's unique identity. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.020 Definitions.

As used in this chapter, the following terms are defined in this section:
“City Manager” means the city manager of the city or his or here designated representative. "Crown-drip-line" means the outer perimeter of an oak tree's canopy. "Oak tree" means Valley Oak Tree (Quercus lobata). "Oak tree" may also mean a "landmark tree." "Landmark tree" means any native or non-native tree recognized by city council resolution for its age, size, location, outstanding habitat value, superior beauty, historical, and/or cultural significance. "Person" means individuals, associations, corporations, public agencies, joint ventures, partnerships, independent contractors, and other agents and employees. "Pruning standards" means those pruning standards established by the Western Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture dated 1995, as revised by the Society from time to time, and as amended by this chapter.
(Ord. 2021-03 § 2, 2021; Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 2003-07 § 1, 2003; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999) Article 2. Destruction Prohibition - Removal Permit Requirements

12.24.025 Willful destruction of oak trees prohibited.

It is unlawful for any person to willfully remove, destroy, damage, mutilate, poison, or attempt to kill an oak tree in the city, except as may be allowed pursuant to a removal permit as provided for in Section 12.24.030 of this Chapter, or as designated in a notice to prune an oak tree that satisfies of 771
YPERLINK "https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/visalia/latest/visalia_ca/0-0-0-28711" \l "JD_Title12Ch.12.24Art.3"Article 3 of this Chapter. As used in this section, the term "damage" shall include the pruning of an oak tree in a manner that is inconsistent with the pruning standards as established by section 12.24.070. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007)

12.24.030 Oak tree removal permit required.

A. Any person desiring to destroy or remove an oak tree with a trunk diameter of eighteen (18) inches or greater at a point 4.5 feet above the root crown (also referred to as "18 inches Diameter Breast Height (D.B.H.)") on private or public property must first apply for and obtain a removal permit. Such application shall be in writing to the city clerk, who shall forward such application to the city manager of the city or their designee. The application shall contain the number, size and location of the oak trees and a brief statement of the reason of the requested action.

B. Within five calendar days of receipt of such application, the city manager or their designee shall post a notice on the subject tree, in a manner reasonably intended to inform the general public, stating that an application for removal of the tree has been filed and is pending with the city manager or their designee.

Within fourteen calendar days of receipt of such application, the city manager or their designee shall inspect the premises whereon such oak trees are located, and shall issue an intended decision in writing as to whether or not the application will be approved, and if so, what mitigation shall be required as a condition to approval, consistent with Section 12.24.035 below; provided, however, that failure to render an intended decision within such period shall not be deemed approval.

C. The city manager or their designee shall not grant a removal permit unless one of three findings enumerated in Section 12.24.035 can be made based on substantial evidence and, where necessary, expert advice of a certified arborist. The applicant may submit his or her own supporting material, including a report of an independent certified arborist, for consideration by the city manager. However, the city manager or their designee shall retain the discretion for determining the weight and value to be given to such independent reports.

D. Upon determination that one of the three findings enumerated in Section 12.24.035 can be met and a removal permit may be granted, the city manager or their designee shall establish mitigation requirements in a manner consistent with the policy to be developed and implemented pursuant to Section 12.24.037. No mitigation shall be required for oak trees removed pursuant to subsections A. or C. of section 12.24.035, unless the city manager or their designee determines that the applicant's negligence or willful conduct contributed to the decline of the health of the oak tree. The mitigation requirements established by the city manager or their designee shall attach to the permit as conditions, and shall be enforceable as a lien against the applicant's real property. In no event shall the availability of mitigation measures, or the willingness of the applicant to agree to such measures, be a factor in determining whether removal of the tree is warranted. (Ord. 2021- 03 § 2, 2021; Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.035 Removal standards.

No removal permit shall be granted pursuant to section 12.24.030 of this Chapter unless the city manager determines that substantial evidence supports one of the following three findings:

A. The general health of the oak tree warrants removal. A removal permit may be granted based on the health of the tree only if one of the following tests can be satisfied:

1. The oak tree is in danger of falling or is deemed to be structurally unsound, according to generally accepted arboricultural standards, and is in proximity to existing or proposed structures; or

2. The oak tree is a host for plant, pest, or disease endangering other species of trees or plants with infection or infestations.

3. Protection of pre-existing improvements that have been interfered with by the oak tree, or otherwise allow the reasonable enjoyment of private property.

4. The oak tree is causing damage to a dwelling, building or structure, including foundational support for same, and/or damaging the essential utilities servicing the dwelling, building or structure. A professional evaluation by a certified arborist, licensed plumber, landscape architect or structural engineer detailing the damage being caused shall be required as part of the application for removal permit identified in Section 12.24.030.

B. Removal of the oak tree is necessary to allow construction of new improvements or the repair or protection of pre-existing improvements that have been interfered with by the oak tree, or otherwise allow 772
the reasonable enjoyment of private property. The city manager shall apply the following factors in determining the necessity of removal of an oak tree for purposes of this subsection:

1. The size and age of the oak tree to be removed, and its historic, aesthetic or cultural value; a larger, older and more historically, aesthetically, or culturally valuable tree may be removed only if each of the other factors weigh heavily in favor of removal.

2. The necessity of the removal of the oak tree for new construction or expansion of existing improvements.

3. The lack of any reasonable alternative to the proposed improvement that does not require removal of the oak tree. The availability of funds from the Oak Tree Maintenance Fund to assist the property owner in repairing or reconfiguring improvements in a manner to save an oak tree should be taken into account in determining whether reasonable alternatives to removal exist such that a permit on this grounds should not be granted.

C. Urban forestry or land management practices warrant removal of the oak tree. An oak tree may be removed based on urban forestry or land management practices if one of the following conditions exist:

1. Removal of the oak tree will substantially benefit the topography of the land and the soil retention, water retention, and diversion or increased flow of surface waters.

2. Removal of the oak tree will not be detrimental to the general public because the number, species, size, and location of existing trees in the area offset the removal of the oak tree, and the removal will not have an adverse effect on shade areas, air pollution, historic values, scenic beauty, and the general welfare of the city as a whole.

3. Removal of the oak tree is consistent with good urban forestry practices such as, but not limited to, the number of healthy trees the subject parcel of land will support.

4. The property owner proposing to remove the tree can establish by adequate proof that the subject tree did not exist prior to the current owner's purchase of the property; this provision shall only apply to trees with a DBH of six (6) inches or less.
(Ord. 2021-03 § 2, 2021; Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007)

12.24.037 Mitigation requirements.

In recognition and furtherance of the purposes of this Chapter, as enumerated in Section 12.24.010, it is the policy of the City of Visalia that property owners who are granted a permit to remove an oak tree pursuant to Subparagraph B. of section 12.24.035 offset the loss of the oak tree by either replacing the oak tree removed with new oak trees on the same property (in-kind mitigation) or by paying mitigation fees intended to be used for the establishment of new oak trees on other property or on public property for the benefit of the general public (in-lieu mitigation). In furtherance of this policy, the city manager shall develop an Oak Tree Mitigation Policy establishing in-kind and in-lieu mitigation measures to be required for oak tree removals. The Oak Tree Mitigation Policy, and any subsequent amendment thereto, shall be submitted to the city council for approval by resolution. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007)

12.24.040 Notice of action and appeals.

A. Notice of the city manager’s intended decision on a permit application submitted pursuant to section 12.24.030 shall be given by personal delivery or first class mail to the applicant and to any person filing a written request with the city manager for notice of all permit approvals under this ordinance. Further, notice of the intended decision shall be posted on the subject tree in a manner reasonably intend to inform the general public of the decision, and the right to appeal.

B. Any person aggrieved or affected by the city manager’s intended decision, or any member of the city council, may appeal the intended decision to the city council by filing a written notice of appeal with the city clerk within ten business days, excluding weekends and holidays, after the delivery or mailing of the notice.

Any such notice of appeal shall be accompanied by an appeal fee in the amount specified by the city council.

C. If no appeal is filed within such time, the city manager shall promptly implement the intended decision by denying or issuing the permit, with or without conditions. An appeal automatically stay execution of the implementation of the intended decision until the appeal has been considered and decided by the city council. (A member of the city council shall be exempt from the requirement of an appeal fee). 773
D. The city clerk shall place all such appeals on the agenda of the next regular council meeting and shall give notice to the applicant and/or appellant. The city council shall consider and decide all issues raised in the appeal, and the decision of the council shall be final. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.050 Emergencies.

A. In the case of emergency caused by the dangerous condition of an oak tree requiring immediate action for the protection of life or property, a tree may be cut down in whole or in part on the order of the city manager or any on-duty public works or public safety personnel.

B. Public utilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission of the state of California may also take such action as may be necessary to maintain a safe operation for their facilities. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)
Article 3. Pruning Standards and Requirements

12.24.060 Pruning notice required
A. Except in cases of emergencies as described in Section 12.24.050, no person shall prune or cause to be pruned any oak tree with a trunk diameter of ten (10) inches or greater at a point 4.5 feet above the root crown (also referred to as "10 inches Diameter Breast Height (D.B.H.)") within the city without first submitting a completed oak tree intent to prune notice with the city manager, as provided herein.

B. The notice shall be delivered to the city manager prior to the start of the work to be performed.

C. The notice shall be in a form as provided by the city manager and shall include the following information:

1. The name, address and telephone number of the property owner.

2. The name, address and telephone number of the person(s) intending to prune the tree.

3. The date(s) of the pruning.

4. A description of the tree(s) to be pruned including the approximate size and location of the tree with sufficient specificity to enable the city manager to precisely locate and identify the subject tree(s).

5. If the work is to be performed in any public right-of-way, proof of insurance coverage for general liability, property damage, and workers' compensation in case of injury or damage to person or property.

6. Proof of the possession of a valid city business license.

D. A copy of the notice must be in the possession of the person pruning the oak tree at all times during the course of the work being performed.
(Ord. 2021-03 § 2, 2021; Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.070 I.S.A. pruning standards.

That certain document known and designated as ANSI A300 Pruning Standards and the International Society of Arboriculture Best Management Practices for Tree Pruning, as amended from time to time, is adopted by the council of the city as the standards for pruning trees located within the city to all intents and purposes and to the same effect as if each and every section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, word, phase, clause or illustration contained therein were fully set forth herein except for the deletion of any provisions as provided for in the chapter. A copy of such standards shall be on file with the city clerk and shall be available for purchase in the office of the city clerk. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.080 Copies of standards on file.

Reference is made to three copies of said standards filed in the office of the city clerk of the city which are now so filed for full particulars of said pruning standards. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.090 Enforcement.

Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions of this chapter shall be administered and enforced by the director in his or her capacity as enforcement officer. In the enforcement of this chapter such enforcement officer and his or her deputies may enter upon private or public property to examine any oak tree, and may issue citations for any violations of this chapter. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.100 Public assistance for property owners.
774
A. If the city manager determines that a property owner, who has submitted a notice of intent to prune or remove an oak tree, cannot properly prune or remove his or her oak tree without the assistance of a professional tree trimmer, and that said property owner cannot afford to hire a professional tree trimmer because he or she does not have the financial resources to pay for such services, the city manager may provide financial assistance to said property owner for the purpose of pruning or removal of the tree or trees, if all the following conditions are met and funds are available:

1. The property owner uses the property where the tree(s) is located as his or her principal place of residence;

2. The aggregate gross income of all persons eighteen (18) years of age or older residing on the property does not exceed the minimum amount as may be set from time to time, by resolution of the city council, pursuant to this subdivision; and

3. The city manager determines that it is necessary to prune or remove the tree to remove hazardous conditions, remove disease, rot, pests, other harmful conditions, or promote healthy growth of the tree(s).

B. Such financial assistance may include, but not be limited to, low interest loans, work done by the city with the cost borne in part or in whole by the property owner, work done by the city with the cost borne by the city to be repaid by the property owner upon such terms as the city and property owner shall agree, or any combination thereof.
(Ord. 2021-03 § 2, 2021; Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.110 Oak maintenance fund.

For purposes of providing such financial assistance as described in Section 12.24.100, and for accomplishing the oak tree mitigation goals as described in the Oak Tree Mitigation Policy developed pursuant to Section 12.24.037, it is established the "oak maintenance fund" which shall be funded either in part or in whole by those portions of fines which may be assessed by the courts, or through the administrative penalty process, known as "civil penalty assessments" for violations of this chapter, and by mitigation fee payments ordered pursuant to the Oak Tree Mitigation Policy established pursuant to Section 12.24.037.

The Oak Tree Maintenance Fund shall be managed as described in the Oak Tree Mitigation Policy. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 §2 (part), 1999)
Article 4. Development proposals; protection of oak trees

12.24.120 Encroachment into drip-line of oak trees during construction.

A. With respect to any application for a building or development permit, all encroachment by permanent structures into the crown drip-line of a Valley Oak is prohibited unless approved by the City Manager or his/her designee. If encroachment into the crown drip line is approved, the city shall require special construction techniques to be employed, as determined by the city manager.

B. The existing ground surface within crown-drip-line (measured horizontally) of the trunk of any oak tree shall not be cut, filled, compacted or paved without the consent of the city manager. Tree wells may be used when advisable. Excavation adjacent to any oak tree shall not be permitted where material damage to the root system will result.

C. The city council shall, by resolution adopt guidelines for commercial, industrial, and residential development and construction on property within the city, and city-initiated projects, where any oak tree is located. Such guidelines adopted pursuant to this subsection shall be made a part of this subsection and shall be enforced as hereinafter set forth. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 2003-07 § 2, 2003; Res. 2003- 61 (part), 2003; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.130 Building permits.

A. When any building permit, grading permit, or development permit is applied for pursuant to the city code and a proposed structure or construction project would require the destruction, removal, or pruning of an oak tree, or encroachment into the crown-drip-line of an oak tree, said permit shall not issue until the city manager has confirmed that all requirements of this chapter, including the obtaining of a removal or pruning permit or the imposition of encroachment conditions, can be met In no event shall any disturbance of the premises, disturbance of the oak trees, or encroachment into the crow-drip-line be allowed until all requirements of the chapter are met and a building permit with appropriate conditions 775
and oak tree removal permit are issued. The issuance of a building permit notwithstanding this section shall in no event serve as a defense to a violation of any provision of this Chapter.

B. In the event a permit to destroy or remove an oak tree is issued in order to enable the applicant to carry out some project of development or improvement of the property, such permit shall be valid and effective only in connection with the actual accomplishment of such project.

C. In the event conditions related to removal or pruning of oak trees, or encroachment into the crown-dripline, are attached to a building, grading or development permit, a minimum $10,000 deposit (or amount deemed necessary by the city manager) shall be posted and maintained to ensure compliance with such conditions. The deposit shall be posted in a form approved by the City Attorney prior to any grading or movement of heavy equipment onto the site or issuance of any permits. Each violation of any condition regarding tree preservation shall result in forfeiture of a portion or the entirety of the deposit, at the discretion of the city manger. No deposit shall be required where the potential impacts to oak trees, and the required conditions to avoid such impacts, although present, are minimal. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.140 Willful destruction of oak trees.

It is unlawful for any person to willfully destroy, mutilate, poison, or attempt to kill an oak tree in the city.

Exceptions to this section are to be found in Section 12.24.050 which provides for emergency destruction, removal, or pruning of an oak tree. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.150 City projects.

City-initiated projects should comply with standards referred to in Section 12.24.120. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)
Article 5. Enforcement

12.24.155 Enforcement.

Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions of this chapter shall be administered and enforced by the city manager in his or her capacity as enforcement officer. In the enforcement of this chapter such enforcement officer and his or her deputies may enter upon private or public property to examine any oak tree, and may issue citations for any violations of this chapter. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007)

12.24.160 Nuisances.

A. It is declared a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge of any premises in the city which has one or more oak trees located thereon to intentionally, negligently accidentally, or otherwise maintain said premises in such a manner so as to cause harm to and of said oak trees, by reason of any of the following conditions:

1. Water saturation or deprivation;

2. Nailing, screwing, stapling, bolting, or otherwise attaching boards, fences, signs, placards, posters, or other material which might cause injury to the oak tree;

3. Neglect in the pruning or trimming of overgrown, diseased, decaying, dead, or rotting limbs, branches and foliage.

B. In addition to enforcing provisions of this code that constitute a public nuisance through criminal citations, civil action or administrative enforcement, the city manager may enforce against and abate any and all nuisances declared pursuant to this section in a manner consistent with applicable provisions of the Visalia Municipal Code pertaining to the procedure for abatement of nuisances, or absent such provisions, in a manner consistent with the laws of the State of California pertaining to abatement of nuisances. (Ord. 2007- 02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.170 Abatement.

All premises or oak trees declared to be such public nuisances and ordered to be abated may be abated by watering, conditioning the soil, constructing berms, pruning or trimming, or removing offending materials affixed to the tree which might cause injury to said tree, pursuant to the procedures set forth in this code. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)
776

12.24.180 Notice of hearing to abate.

A. Within thirty (30) days of the passage of said resolution, the city clerk shall cause to be conspicuously posted on the premises, where the oak tree(s) are located, a certified copy of the resolution of the city council, which said notices shall be titled: "NOTICE OF HEARING" in letters of not less than one inch in height and shall be substantially in the following form:

NOTICE OF HEARING

TO ABATE NUISANCE
Notice is hereby given that on the day of , , the City Council of the City of Visalia passed a resolution declaring that certain Oak Tree(s) located or standing upon that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situated in the City of Visalia, State of California, known and designated as, in said City, and more particularly described as Lot No., Tract No., or name of subdivision in said City, constitutes a public nuisance and must be abated by the rehabilitation of such premises by the watering, pruning, trimming, or other methods; otherwise said nuisance will be abated by the municipal authorities of the City, in which case the cost of such rehabilitation, watering, pruning or trimming will be assessed upon the land on which said Oak Tree(s) is or are located and such cost will constitute a lien upon such land until paid. (Reference is hereby made to said resolution for further particulars.)
B. The city clerk shall cause to be served upon the owner of each of the oak tree(s) declared to be a public nuisance and sought to be rehabilitated by watering, pruning or trimming one copy of said notice and a certified copy of the resolution of the city council, in accordance with these provisions.

C. Said notices and resolutions must be posted and served as aforesaid, at least thirty (30) days before the time fixed for the hearing before the city council and proof of posting and service of such notices and resolutions shall be made by affidavit which shall be filed with the city council. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.190 Form of proper service of notice.

Proper service of said notice and resolution shall be by personal service upon the person owning the property as such person's name and address appears on the last equalized assessment roll, if he is found within the city limits, or if he is not to be found within the city limits, by depositing a copy of said notice and resolution in the U.S. post office properly enclosed in a sealed envelope and with the posting thereon fully prepaid. Said mail shall be registered or certified and addressed to said owner at the last known address of said owner. The service is complete at the time of deposit. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.200 Hearing by city council.

A. At the time stated in the notices, the city council shall hear and consider all objections or protests, shall receive testimony and other evidence from owners, witnesses and parties interested relative to such alleged public nuisance and as to rehabilitation of such premises by the watering, pruning or trimming, or by other abatement thereof, and may continue the hearing from time to time.

B. Upon the conclusion of said hearing, the city council shall allow or overrule any or all of said protests. If the city council finds that good and sufficient cause does exist why said premises should be rehabilitated, or oak tree(s) should be watered pruned, trimmed, or treated, the city council shall prepare and file a report of such findings with the city clerk.

C. Following said public hearing, the city council may by resolution order the director to abate said nuisance, after a period of thirty (30) days, by having the oak tree(s) watered, pruned, trimmed, treated, or the nuisance otherwise abated, and the director and his or her authorized representatives are hereby expressly authorized to enter upon private property for that purpose. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.210 Service on owner of resolution to abate.

A copy of said resolution ordering the director to abate said nuisance shall be served upon the owner of said property in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and shall contain a detailed list of needed corrections. Any property owner shall have the right to have any such oak tree(s) watered, pruned, trimmed, treated, or the nuisance otherwise abated at his or her own expense, provided the same is completed prior to the expiration of the time set forth in said resolution. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999) 777

12.24.220 Record of cost for abatement.

The director shall keep an account of the cost (including incidental expenses) of abating such nuisance on each separate lot, or parcel of land where the work has been done and shall render an itemized report in writing to the city council showing the cost of watering, pruning, trimming, or treating said oak tree(s), and incidental expenses, on each separate lot or parcel of land; provided, that before said report is submitted to the city council, a copy of the same shall be posted for at least five days upon the premises or property upon which such oak tree(s) are situated, or the nuisance committed, together with a notice of the time when said report shall be submitted to the city council for confirmation; and a copy of said report and notice shall be served upon the owner of said property, in accordance with the provisions of this chapter at least five days prior to submitting the same to the council; proof of said posting and service shall be made by affidavit and filed with city clerk. The term "incidental expenses" shall include, but not be limited to the expenses and costs of the city in the preparation of notices, specifications and contacts, and in inspecting the work, and the costs of printing and mailing required hereunder. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.230 Hearing and proceedings.

At the date and time fixed for receiving and considering said report the city council shall hear and pass upon the report of the director, together with any objection or protests which may be raised by any of the owners of property liable to be assessed for the work of abating such nuisance any other interest persons.

Thereupon, the city council may make such revision, correction or modification in the report as it may deem just, after which by resolution the report, as submitted, or as revised, corrected or modified, shall be confirmed; provided that said hearing or consideration may be continued from time to time. The decision of the city council on all protests and objections which may be made, shall be final and conclusive. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.240 Assignment of costs against property--Lien.

The amount of the costs of abating such nuisance upon any lot or parcel of land, as confirmed by the city council, shall constitute a special assessment against the respective lot or parcel of land, and as thus keep a lien on said property for the amount of such assessment. After the confirmation of said report, a copy shall be turned over to the assessor and the tax collector of the county of Tulare, acting on behalf of the city, whereupon it shall be the duty of said assessor and tax collector to add the amounts of the respective assessments to the next regular bills of taxes levied against the said respective lots and parcels for land for municipal purposes, and thereafter said amounts shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as other municipal taxes are collected, and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure under foreclosure and sale in case of delinquency as provided for other municipal taxes. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.250 Authority.

Any and all nuisances declared and abated hereunder shall be processed pursuant to the authority set forth in Sections 38771 et seq., of the Government Code of the state of California, in the manner described herein above. (Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.260 Penalties.

A. Unless otherwise noted herein, a violation of any provision of this Chapter shall constitute a misdemeanor.

B. Any violation of any provision of Sections 12.24.060 and 12.24.070 shall be deemed an infraction and be punishable upon conviction as hereinafter set forth.

C. Any person convicted of a misdemeanor under this chapter shall be punished by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and/or six months in the county jail. Each day that a violation continues shall be regarded as a separate offense.

D. Any person convicted of an infraction of this chapter shall be punished by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00). Each day the violation continues shall be regarded as a new and separate offense.

E. Upon a person being convicted of any violation under this chapter, the court shall, in addition to, or in lieu of, the above penalties, or any other penalty provided and imposed under this chapter, order the 778
defendant to pay a civil penalty assessment to the City of Visalia to be used in the manner described in the Oak Tree Maintenance Fund, as described in Section 12.24.110 herein, which Civil Penalty is designed as restitution to compensate the city and the community for the loss or diminution of economic, aesthetic, environmental, and property values resulting from the loss of any oak tree or portion thereof, and for the city's costs and attorney's fees in prosecuting the matter. In cases of un-permitted removal of an oak tree in violation of Section 12.24.025, such civil penalty shall be calculated by doubling the in-lieu mitigation amount as indicated in the Oak Tree Mitigation Policy implemented pursuant to Section 12.24.037, which would have been imposed for the specific tree had a permit been obtained. In cases of purposeful damage to an oak tree in violation of Section 12.24.025, the civil penalty imposed shall be calculated by multiplying one half times the in-lieu mitigation amount as indicated in the Oak Tree Mitigation Policy implemented pursuant to Section 12.24.037, which would have been imposed for the specific tree had a removal permit been obtained.

F. Any violation of any provision of this chapter may result in the immediate suspension of any permit previously issued for the construction and/or development of property upon which said violation occurred, until compliance with all mitigation measures required by this ordinance is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the city manager.
(Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999)

12.24.270 Severability.

A. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this chapter is held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this chapter, or any part thereof.

B. If the application of any provision of this chapter or any person, property, or circumstance is found to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective in whole or in part by any court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction, the effect of such decision shall be limited to the person, property, or circumstance immediately involved in the controversy, and the application of any such provision to other persons, properties or circumstances shall not be affected. (Ord. 2007-02 § 2 (part), 2007; Ord. 9907 § 2 (part), 1999) 779
328.16 CONT_MAG FD MAG TIE
326.55 UTIL_SL SERV.POLE W/PANEL
325.79 UTIL_SL SERV.POLE W/PANEL
57 326.804
SS MH
134
326.227
SS MH
158
326.454
SS MH
213
326.806
SS MH
320
326.029
SS MH
357
325.871
SS MH
390
325.945
SS MH
1663
327.434
SS MH
605
646
324.829
SSMH
677
325.545
SSMH
714
325.758
SSMH
751
325.779
SSMH
5 327.122
SSMH

S TIPTON ST
E
C
A
M
E
R
O
N
A
V
E
E
R
U
S
S
E
L
L
A
V
E
E
L
O
Y
O
L
A
A
V
E
E
E
L
K
O
R
N
A
V
E
A
V
E
N
U
E ' 1 '
E
P
A
C
K
W
O
O
D
A
V
E
C
O
U

R T ' B '
C O

U R T ' A '
E JA
M
E
S
A
V
E

S THOMAS ST

S M I C H AE L D R

S C L A R K D R
S C L A R K S T E. CALDWELL AVE.

S SA N TA F E S T 30.00 60.00 30.00 60.00 30.00 60.00 30.00 60.00

30.00 60.00

60.00 30.00

30.00 60.00

60.00 30.00

BU R K S T R E E T

30.00 60.00

97.4'

42.4'
420.7' 42.1'

97.8'

10.0' 93.6'

33.8'

34.2' 93.3'
720.1'

42.7'

97.4'

10.0'

93.2'

34.4'

10.2'

13.8'
774.1'
129.3'
122.0'

22.7'

15.1' 22.7'
243.0' 8.1' 13.1'

14.2'

6.5'

18.5' 15.5' 14.6'

8.3'

13.0'
494.3'

10.0'
414.6' 42.4'

97.4'

10.0' 93.2'

34.1'
122.0'
129.3'

13.8'
407.6' 42.4'

51.7' 542.0'

10.0' 47.6'
107.0'
114.2'
745.6'

23.9'

23.9' 131.4'
189.2'
154.1'
487.2'
1256.0'
131.2'

65.0' 14.1' 93.2'

40.9' 34.1' 127.3'

30.7' 34.2' 93.3'

14.1' 10.0' 55.5' 127.4'

55.0' 14.1' 93.6'

31.1' 33.8'
129.3'

42.2' 22.8' 14.1' 93.2'

34.4' 40.6'

56.4'
151.4'

83.1' 24.5'
103.7'

15.6'
139.2'
206.9'

12.9'

55.0' 14.1'

10.0' 122.0'

55.0'
132.0'

67.0'

57.0' 14.1' 105.0' 105.0'

57.0' 14.1'
115.0' 115.0'

77.5'

71.5' 14.4' 104.7' 105.5'
115.0' 115.0'

52.0' 14.1' 105.0' 105.0'

14.1' 52.0'
115.0' 115.0'

62.0'

74.8'

4.9' 14.3' 35.1'

71.4'
107.8'

54.9' 12.8'
115.0'

64.9' 30.7'
115.0'

13.9'

63.4'

60.0' 14.1'

10.0'

60.0'
132.0'

63.2'

50.3'

13.9'
105.3'
115.0'

56.4'
115.0'

14.3' 12.6' 94.5' 65.2'

14.4'61.4' 108.3'

70.0'
118.5'
118.8' 119.0'

47.2'14.0' 109.0' 109.0'

14.3'

46.7'

57.0'

46.8' 14.3' 108.5' 108.5'

14.0'

47.2'
118.3' 118.8'
138.2'
125.7'

42.8'

65.4'

13.3' 13.8'
136.1'

69.6'

69.1'

59.1' 14.1'
115.0'
105.0'
113.9' 116.0'

60.0'

50.0'
105.0' 14.2'
105.0' 14.1'

50.0'
115.2' 115.0'

57.0'

14.1'
105.0' 105.1' 14.1'

57.0'

67.0'
116.0' 115.0'

65.0'

55.0'

14.1'
106.1' 105.0' 14.2'

55.0'
115.0'

63.9'

86.0' 9.0'
126.0'

57.1'

12.7'
110.6'

82.2'

13.8' 37.9'

21.3'
115.0'
143.7' 143.7'

65.0'

55.0' 14.1' 133.7' 137.0'

14.8'54.2'

80.4'

21.1'

47.5'
115.8'
110.6'
127.2'

50.6' 50.6' 20.0'30.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 127.2'

50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 50.6' 127.2' 127.3' 127.3' 127.3' 127.3' 127.3'

50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 31.5'18.5' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 127.5'

50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.6' 127.5' 127.5' 127.5' 127.5' 127.4' 127.5'
127.4'
145.6'

62.0' 62.0' 62.0'
154.1'

14.8' 47.8' 62.6' 32.2' 30.3' 129.3' 137.0'

62.0'

0.1'42.1'

20.0'

62.4'

20.8'34.1'

19.3'

92.4'
131.4' 115.7'

57.5'

59.6'

1.5'

63.5'

30.0'

32.0'

62.0'

62.7'

66.5'

66.9'

92.0' 108.9'

52.8'

50.6' 0.7'

73.3'

22.7'
144.1' 98.9'

63.3'

67.7'

8.9'

58.8'

43.1'

33.3'
118.0'

24.5' 41.6' 45.4' 20.6' 66.3' 70.2'
151.4'
103.8' 103.2'
116.4'
131.3'

4.8' 50.3' 50.0' 45.2' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 132.0'

50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 171.0'

22.7'

73.3'

69.6' 67.0'
132.0'
132.0'
132.0'
132.0'
132.0'

62.0' 62.0'
115.0' 115.0'

62.0' 62.0' 115.0' 115.0'
115.0' 115.0'

50.0' 30.6'

19.4'

34.1'

15.9'

50.0' 50.0'

50.0'

50.0' 12.7' 38.4'

58.6'

58.5'
115.0' 115.0'

30.7' 18.9'

49.7' 2.6'

24.3' 47.1'

25.4' 46.1'

3.6' 49.7'

18.1' 31.6'

9.8' 39.9'

39.9' 27.5'

44.9' 22.6'

12.3' 55.1'

2.2' 55.6'

9.7'

21.3'

24.1'

10.1'

44.9'

5.1'

50.0'
115.0'
115.1'
115.1'
115.0'
115.1'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.1'
115.0'
115.1'
115.0'

58.5'

58.7'

58.8'

13.3' 18.6'

52.1'

80.8'

55.3' 55.1' 27.9' 55.1' 55.1' 55.1'
115.0'
115.0'
123.4'
116.1'
114.9'
115.0'
114.9'
115.0'
115.0'
125.6'
135.7'
135.2'
115.0'

62.0' 62.0'

54.5' 54.5' 54.5' 54.5' 131.7'

14.7'

9.6'

90.2' 69.6' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2'
104.5'

51.2' 51.2' 47.6'

3.5'

51.2' 51.2' 51.2' 51.2'

24.1' 29.0'

42.0'

43.0' 19.8'24.1'

12.5' 54.5' 54.5' 54.5'
103.1'
102.4'
120.7'
132.0'
101.7'
132.0'
101.0'
132.0'
100.3'
132.0'

99.5'

89.1'
103.8'
159.7'

56.4' 50.0' 50.0' 15.0' 35.0' 40.9' 9.1' 50.0' 50.0' 48.1' 1.9' 50.0' 63.2' 115.0'

50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 40.9' 9.1' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0' 50.0'
115.0'
115.0'

94.4'

40.0'

12.8'

57.6'

47.1'

40.9'

41.1'

52.0' 12.9'
149.2'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'

15.7'35.3' 51.0' 51.0' 51.0' 51.0' 51.0' 118.5'

51.0' 51.0' 51.0' 51.0' 51.0' 118.8'

51.0'
118.5'
118.4'
118.4'
118.5'
118.4'
118.8' 119.0'

51.0'

51.0'
118.8'

51.0' 51.0' 51.0'

51.0' 118.3' 118.8'
138.2'
125.7'
183.5'

10.2' 23.3'

28.3' 42.7'

42.7'

20.0'21.7'19.3' 6.4'

53.6'

60.0'

4.3'

55.7'

64.0'

40.2'

23.8'

64.4'

26.7'

38.4'

80.5'
105.6' 146.2'

67.0'

44.4'

31.9' 2.2'

68.8'

34.4'

35.0' 5.1'

61.0'

57.2'

3.8'

61.0'

55.0'

72.9' 14.1'

51.3' 32.2' 48.0' 12.0' 51.3' 60.0' 60.0'
108.3'

63.9'

61.0'

19.1'

35.3'

6.6'

61.0'

43.7'

17.3'

42.7'

18.3'

41.7'

19.3'

40.7'

20.3'

39.7'

21.3' 3.8'34.9'

22.3'

37.7'

23.3' 5.1' 21.5'14.2' 20.2'

44.3'

26.7'

37.7'

33.3'

31.2'

67.0'
115.0'
115.0'
104.3'
108.5'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'

92.7'
115.0'
112.1'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
105.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'

56.2' 53.0' 23.7'29.3' 34.1'18.9' 53.0' 32.1'

20.9'

7.1'

45.9'

69.1'
115.0'

53.0' 53.0' 53.0' 34.1'18.9' 53.0' 53.0' 53.0' 115.0'
112.9'
158.4'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
114.2' 113.0'
116.5' 116.5'
112.8' 117.0'
113.9' 116.0'
115.0'
115.3' 115.0'

61.0'

61.0'
115.2' 115.0'

61.0'

61.0'
115.0'
115.4' 115.0'
115.0'
115.6' 115.0'
115.7' 115.0'
115.0'
115.0'
115.8' 115.0'
115.0'
115.9' 115.0'
116.0' 115.0'

9.0' 60.0' 60.0'
115.0'

60.0' 60.0'
115.0'
126.0'
143.7'

60.0' 60.0' 60.0' 63.8' 143.7' 132.1' 143.7'
143.7' 143.7'

60.0'

80.4'
110.6'

30.7'

92.7'

PARK / POND
227284 SF
OUT LOT: B
6839 SF
OUT LOT: C
8509 SF
OUT LOT: E
14955 SF
OUT LOT: F
8882 SF
OUT LOT: A
5463 SF
OUT LOT: D
14537 SF
8 8037 SF
9 6789 SF 17
6779 SF
18 8072 SF
157
15464 SF
166
7310 SF
186
7655 SF
182
9109 SF
134
7080 SF
133
7080 SF
117
8999 SF
148
9062 SF
185
7655 SF
189
8605 SF
167
7970 SF
99 7036 SF
108
7975 SF
190
8351 SF
201
6722 SF
202
6736 SF
198
6715 SF
149
14489 SF
159
12725 SF
91 7902 SF
42 6817 SF
31 6879 SF
43 7666 SF
30 7655 SF
51 7494 SF
22 7425 SF
52 7413 SF
197
6695 SF
116
7949 SF
88 9019 SF
86 9394 SF
85 9293 SF
110
8344 SF
3 6439 SF
4 6440 SF
5 6441 SF
6 6442 SF
7 6443 SF
1 6437 SF
2 6438 SF
13 6374 SF
14 6375 SF
15 6376 SF
16 6377 SF
10 6412 SF
11 6372 SF
12 6373 SF
20 8759 SF
21 9290 SF
19 8237 SF
37 7029 SF
36 6765 SF
34 7184 SF
40 7065 SF
82 8624 SF
153
6675 SF
152
7235 SF
151
8224 SF
150
9601 SF
156
8684 SF
155
7374 SF
154
8866 SF
158
10378 SF
163
6600 SF
164
6600 SF
165
6600 SF 160
6684 SF
161
6600 SF
162
6600 SF
188
7130 SF
187
7130 SF
129
6727 SF
121
6233 SF
128
6728 SF
120
6242 SF
127
6742 SF
119
6244 SF
126
6746 SF
118
6221 SF
125
5803 SF
132
5750 SF
124
6235 SF
131
5750 SF
123
6246 SF
130
6065 SF
122
6242 SF
143
7471 SF
135
6333 SF
142
7196 SF
141
7862 SF
140
9403 SF
147
7444 SF
139
9108 SF
146
7468 SF
138
6594 SF
145
7468 SF
137
6346 SF
144
7465 SF
136
6333 SF
183
7130 SF
184
7130 SF
203
6060 SF
200
6058 SF
178
5220 SF
170
7194 SF
177
5184 SF
169
7194 SF
176
5147 SF
168
7194 SF
175
5111 SF
174
5564 SF
181
5329 SF
173
9689 SF
180
5293 SF
172
12228 SF
179
5256 SF
171
6979 SF
112
13563 SF
92 6095 SF
105
5750 SF
104
5750 SF
103
5750 SF
101
5750 SF
107
5750 SF
100
5750 SF
106
5750 SF
109
12046 SF
102
5750 SF
193
6041 SF
192
6043 SF
191
6045 SF
199
6056 SF
194
6040 SF
195
6038 SF
76 6900 SF
64 7799 SF
75 6900 SF
71 6935 SF
61 7015 SF
65 8165 SF
74 6900 SF
70 6656 SF
53 7015 SF
62 7015 SF
66 7222 SF
79 12702 SF
73 6900 SF
69 6825 SF
78 6792 SF
63 7015 SF
67 9690 SF
77 6900 SF
72 7321 SF
68 7876 SF
47 7052 SF
26 7015 SF
80 18407 SF
94 6095 SF
114
12371 SF
93 6095 SF
98 6278 SF
115
13720 SF
97 6095 SF
113
13814 SF
96 6095 SF
95 6095 SF
38 7364 SF
35 6832 SF
39 7151 SF
33 7269 SF
41 7028 SF
32 7222 SF
60 7015 SF
44 7032 SF
29 7015 SF
59 7015 SF
45 7039 SF
28 7015 SF
58 7015 SF
46 7046 SF
27 7015 SF
57 7015 SF
49 7066 SF
24 7015 SF
56 7015 SF
25 48 7015 SF
55 7059 SF
7015 SF
50 7073 SF
23 7015 SF
54 7015 SF
196
6036 SF
89 6900 SF
90 6900 SF
81 10580 SF
83 8624 SF
87 8301 SF
84 8624 SF
111
5828 SF

ADJUSTMENTS TO LANDSCAPE

LOT AND BLOCK WALL MAY NEED TO BE COORDINATED IN

FUTURE FOR ACCESS FOR DITCH COMPANY
1 TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

AS NOTED
---

J E S S
E
A . W I L L I A M
R
S

E G I S T E R E D P R O F E S S I O N A L E N G I N E E R

S T A T E O F C A L I F O R N I A

C I V I L
No. 64742
Exp.

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6/30/26

CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS
810 W ACEQUIA AVENUE, VISALIA CA 93291
559-713-6139
AWE SCALE:

DATE:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

NO. REVISION INIT DATE APPROVED BY:

APPROVED BY:

FOR:

PROJECT:

SHEET TITLE:

JOB NUMBER
SHEET

FLOOD ZONE
JESSE ALLEN WILLIAMS R.C.E. 64742
DATE
DATE
AE & X 24075
---
4/3/25

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY HOMES
5607 AVE. DE LAS ROBLES
VISALIA, CA 93291

BLANKENSHIP TRACT
S. SANTA FE ST. AND CALDWELL AVE.

VISALIA, CA 93277
AWE
810 Acequia Ave.

[email protected]
(559) 713-6139
Visalia, California 93291

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
Vicinity Map
OWNERS:

GERALD B. BLANKENSHIP JR.
&
TRUSTEES OF THE BLANKENSHIP FAMILY TRUST UNDER TRUST AGREEMENT DATE FEBRUARY 8, 1996 GERALD BLANKENSHIP JR. & JEAN KRISTY BLANKENSHIP
RES.

AG/RES
AE-20
AE/X

CAL WATER

CITY OF VISALIA
123-400-001 & 005
NOTES:

A.P.N.:

SEWAGE:

FLOOD ZONE:

EXISTING PROPERTY USE:

PROPOSED PROPERTY USE:

ZONING (E).:

WATER:

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY HOMES
APPLICANT:

Visalia, California 93291
5607 AVE DE LAO ROBLES
ENGINEER:

ZONING (N).: R-1-5
STORM DRAIN: CITY OF VISALIA
TOTAL AREA: 62.53 AC.

WATER: CAL WATER
PHASE 1: 123
PHASE 2: 80

LOT COUNT
CROSS SECTION - SANTA FE ST.

2.0%
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

PER CITY STD

BARRIER TYPE

PARKWAY

R/W R/W
31'
6' SIDEWALK

PER CITY STD
11'
5' 6'
10'
42'
11' 31'

2.0%
C/L

EXISTING LANDSCAPED
P/L
TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER CITY STD P-3

INTERIOR STREETS
TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER CITY STD P-1
C/L
20'
5'

PER CITY STD

SIDEWALK

2.0%

PER CITY STD
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

BARRIER TYPE
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

PER CITY STD

BARRIER TYPE

PARKWAY

2.0%

R/W R/W
10'
60'
5'
10' 20'
5' 5'

SIDEWALK

PER CITY STD
TOTAL LOT COUNT: 203
R/W

TYPICAL INTERIOR

STREET IMPROVEMENTS
PL

PARK BASIN
(WHERE NEEDED)

EXISTING IRRIGATION
DITCH
15' DITCH

ACCESS ROAD

VARIES'
(APPROX. 60' - 77')

PARK GRADING

TO VARY

VARIES'
(APPROX. 50' - 85')

PARK SECTION IRRIGATION DITCH ADJACENT

EXISTING STREET

CROSS SECTION - BURK STREET
C/L
20'

2.0%

R/W R/W
10'
VARIES
60' MIN
20'
VARIES
(10' MIN.)
5' 5'

SIDEWALK

PER CITY STD

EXISTING STREET

SECTION UNLESS

NOTED OTHERWISE
17'
LLD
P/L

SECTION
LINE
72' RAIL ROAD 28' TRAIL
100' RAIL ROAD 42' 24'
42'
P/L

CROSS SECTION - CALDWELL AVE (LOOKING EAST)

2.0%
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER

PER CITY STD

BARRIER TYPE

PARKWAY

R/W R/W
45'
60'
6' SIDEWALK

PER CITY STD
15'
5' 10'
10'
55'
10' 45'

2.0%
C/L

PER CITY STD
6' SIDEWALK

BARRIER TYPE

PER CITY STD
P.C.C. CURB & GUTTER
P/L
TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER CITY STD P-5
VARIES
(APPROX. 34' - 37')
VARIES
(APPROX. 33' - 36')
VARIES
(APPROX. 18' - 24')

TO BE INSTALLED UNDER CITY OF VISALIA CIP

TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH THIS

DEVELOPMENT

COMMERCIAL
(C-MU)

7.04 AC

7.04 AC. (COMMERCIAL_C-MU)

50.27 AC. (RESIDENTIAL_R-1-5)

3.59 AC. (PARK/BASIN AREA)

1.63 AC. (DITCH ACCESS ROAD)
REMAINDER:

COMMERCIAL
(C-MU)

7.04 AC
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
General Plan
Land Use Map
S Court St
S Santa Fe St
S Burke St
E Caldwell Ave
S Bridge St
S Bradley St
S Cotta St
E Reese Ave
E Russell Ave
E Arlen Ave
S Ben Maddox Way
S Thomas St
E La Salle Ave S Byrd St
E Visalia Pkwy
S Michael St
E Cameron Ave
E Parkview Ave
E Elkhorn Ave
S Tipton St
E Loyola Ave
E Paseo Ave
S Garden St E Dorothea Ave
E La Vida Ave
S Edison St
S Church St
E Packwood Ave
S La Mesa Ct
E Dorothea Ct
E Chestnut Ave
E Chestnut Ct
E Sunnyside Ave
S Bridge Ct
E Oak View Ave S Bradley Ct
S Garden St
E Chestnut Ct
E Arlen Ave
E Elkhorn Ave
E Chestnut Ct
E Reese Ave
E Cameron Ave
E Sunnyside Ave
Vicinity Map
Ben
Maddox
Riggin
Walnut
Goshen
St
Jo h ns
Demaree
Houston
Noble
Mooney
Hwy 99
Akers
Shirk
Lovers Lane
Pla
za
Betty
Hwy 198
.

Conservation
Commercia Mixed Use
Commercial Neighborhood
Office
Public Institutional
Parks/Recreation
Residential High Density
Residential Low Density
Residential Medium Density
Project Site
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Miles
803
Zoning Map
S Burke St
S Santa Fe St
E Caldwell Ave
S Bridge St
S Bradley St
S Thomas St
S Cotta St
E Reese Ave
S Ben Maddox Way
E Russell Ave
E Arlen Ave
E La Salle Ave S Byrd St
S Michael St
E Visalia Pkwy
E Cameron Ave
E Parkview Ave
E Elkhorn Ave
E Dorothea Ave
S Tipton St
E Loyola Ave
E Paseo Ave
S Garden St
E La Vida Ave
S Edison St
S Church St
S La Mesa Ct
E Packwood Ave
E Dorothea Ct
E Sunnyside Ct
E Chestnut Ave
SE Sunnyside Ct
E Chestnut Ct
S Tipton Ct
E Sunnyside Ave
S Bridge Ct
E Oak View Ave S Bradley Ct
E Cameron Ave
E Chestnut Ct
E Elkhorn Ave
E Sunnyside Ave
E Reese Ave
E Chestnut Ct
S Garden St
E Arlen Ave
Vicinity Map
Hwy 198
Ben
Maddox
Riggin
Houston
Mineral King
Main
Goshen
St
Jo h ns
DemareeNoble
Caldwell
Mooney
Akers Hwy 99 Shirk
Lovers Lane
Pla
za
Betty
.

C-N Neighborhood Commercial
C-MU Mixed Use Commercial
O-PA Professional / Admin Office
QP Quasi-Public
R-1-5 Single-family Residenital
R-M-2 Multi-family Residenital
R-M-3 Multi-family Residenital
County Areas
Project Site
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Miles
804
Aerial Map
Burke
Bradley
Arlen
Reese
Elkhorn
Russell
Cameron
Edison
Loyola
Garden
Packwood
Bridge
Oak View
Westmont
Oakhurst
Bradley
Garden
Elkhorn
Arlen
Bridge Bridge
S Santa Fe St
E Caldwell Ave
E Cameron Ave
E Visalia Pkwy
S Burke St
S Santa Fe St
E Caldwell Ave
S Bradley St
E Reese Ave
E Arlen Ave
E Elkhorn Ave
E Russell Ave
E Cameron Ave
TULARE IRRI. DIST.

Vicinity Map
Ben
Maddox
Riggin
Houston
Ma Mineral King in
Walnut
Goshen
St
Jo h ns
DemareeNoble Mooney
Akers Hwy 99
Lovers Lane
Pla
za
Shirk
Betty
Hwy 198
.

Project Site
0 0.04 0.09 0.17 Miles
805
Location Map
S Burke St
S Santa Fe St
E Caldwell Ave
S Bradley St
E Arlen Ave
E Reese Ave
E Russell Ave
E Elkhorn Ave
E Cameron Ave
E Loyola Ave S Edison St
E Packwood Ave
S Bridge St S Bridge Ct
E Visalia Pkwy
S Bradley Ct
E Cameron Ave S Bridge St
TULARE IRRI. DIST.

Vicinity Map
Hwy 198
Ben
Maddox
Riggin
Houston
Mineral King
Main
Goshen
St
Jo h ns
DemareeNoble
Caldwell
Mooney
Akers Hwy 99 Shirk
Lovers Lane
Pla
za
Betty
.

Project Site
0 100200 400 Feet
806

BLANKENSHIP PROJECT
ANNEXATION NO. 2024-05
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 5602
June 2, 2025
CITY

COUNCIL

HEARING
807

PROJECT

DESCRIPTION
Annexation No. 2024-05
Blankenship Subdivision - a request by SJVH
Annex two parcels into the City limits. Upon annexation, ~55.49 acres will be zoned R-1-5 and ~7.04 acres will be zoned C-MU.
• Recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on April 28, 2025 Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5602
Subdivide two parcels into 203-lot single-family subdivision. Commercial development of the area within project site zoned C-MU will be a remainder. • Approved at Planning Commission on April 28, 2025
808
Site is located at the southeast corner
of E Caldwell Ave & S Santa Fe St

LOCATION

DESCRIPTION
Currently undeveloped, existing vacant
single-family dwelling onsite
809
ANNEXATION NO. 2024-05
Outside of City Limits
R-1-5 & C-MU General Plan Designation
Within the Tier II Urban Development
Boundary
Tier II
C-MU
(Single-Family Residential, 5,000 sq.ft.)
(Mixed Use Commercial)
R-1-5
810
Development of a 203-lot single-family
residential subdivision, in two phases:
• Phase 1 - 123 lots
• Phase 2 - 80 lots
TSM NO. 5602
Each lot will conform to the development
standards for the R-1-5, which requires the
following minimum lot area and setbacks:

Developed at a density of 3.65 dwelling
units per acre
Remainder
811

SITE IMPROVEMENTS
N
812

SURROUNDING SUBDIVISIONS
813

PROJECT EVALUATION
General Plan Consistency
Project meets the overall intent of the General Plan and its policies. • LU-P-19: Compact & concentric growth pattern
• LU-P-21: Allow annexation & development of residential...to occur with the Tier II UDB Housing Accountability Act
Project consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and singlefamily residential development standards.

Project meets density standards for Low-Density Residential land use designation. 814

PROJECT EVALUATION
Subdivision Map Act Findings
Staff reviewed the seven findings for a cause of denial and finds that all findings can be made for approving the project.

Environmental Review - Initial Study & Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2024-63 An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for the proposed project. • Four (4) mitigation measures to address significant impacts pertaining to Biological Resources to reduce impacts to Nuttall’s Woodpecker.

Comment Letter provided by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) regarding proposed project. Staff included Condition #7 to address the comments. 815
Recommendation
The Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council initiate annexation proceedings for the subject site by taking the following actions:

RECOMMENDATION
Basis for Findings

1. Adopt Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2024-063

2. Initiate proceedings on Annexation No. 2024-05 with Tulare County LAFCO

3. Authorize the detachment of property from County Service Area No.1 in accordance with State and County requirements
• The project meets the overall intent of the General Plan and its policies • The project is consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, single-family residential development standards
• Environmental impacts are determined to be not significant with mitigation 816

QUESTIONS
817
Visalia City Council
Staff Report
Visalia City Council
707 W. Acequia
Visalia, CA 93291
File #: 25-0181 Agenda Date: 6/2/2025 Agenda #: 3.

Agenda Item Wording:

Ordinance Adoption - Public hearing and first reading of Ordinance No. 2024-16 to adopt Zoning Text Amendment No. 2025-01: A request by the City of Visalia to amend text within the Visalia Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) to clarify and facilitate City Council adoption of SingleFamily Residential Objective Design Standards and Planned Residential Development standards applicable to new single-family residential developments by Resolution rather than by Ordinance.

Prepared by: Brandon Smith, Principal Planner, [email protected], (559) 713-4636; Paul Bernal, Planning and Community Preservation Director, [email protected], (559) 713- 4025.

Department Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing and introduce the first reading of Ordinance No. 2024-16, to amend portions of Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance).

Summary:

On April 21, 2025, staff presented to the City Council a revised draft Objective Design Standards (ODS) Ordinance (Attachment 2 contains the original staff report presented to City Council). The Ordinance was intended to establish new sections in the Zoning Ordinance and finalize the Councildirected effort to prepare regulations pertaining to ODS and Planned Residential Development (PRD) Standards applicable to new single-family residential development. The effort is in response to current growth trends where developers have been utilizing smaller lot sizes and new design techniques. The standards address a range of topics that include appearance, landscaping, fences, off-street parking, and common open space areas within planned residential developments.

Following the public hearing, the City Council voted to adopt the Objective Design Standards and PRD Standards by resolution rather than by ordinance, since adoption by resolution allows for the standards to be modified or revised in the future without holding multiple public hearings. Resolution No. 2025-30 was subsequently adopted by the City Council on May 5, 2025.

As a result of the adoption of Resolution No. 2025-30, the ODS are only specified in the resolution without corresponding section numbers, and there is no mention in the Zoning Ordinance of the ODS requirement which is now in effect. This Zone Text Amendment and the accompanying Ordinance No. 2024-16 has therefore been initiated by staff to complete the necessary administrative revisions to the Zoning Ordinance related to the adoption of new ODS and to “close the loop” on the administrative enforcement of the ODS.

Background Discussion:

The new Ordinance is being conducted for the following purposes:
1) Complete the removal of redundant or obsolete objective design standards currently in the Zoning Ordinance for single-family residential lots with area less than 5,000 square feet Visalia City Council Page 1 of 4 Printed on 5/23/2025
powered by Legistar™818
File #: 25-0181 Agenda Date: 6/2/2025 Agenda #: 3.
(Section 17.12.135). The ODS work in tandem with other existing objective standards that address residential development standards in the review of eligible development applications.

Such development standards for traditional single-family residential lots, found in Chapter

17.12 Article 1, and for lots below 5,000 square feet in size, found in Section 17.12.135(B), are not affected by ODS (i.e. setbacks, height).

However, many objective design standards found in Section 17.12.135 that were intended to apply exclusively to lot sizes below 5,000 square feet have been superseded with the now-approved ODS standards that are applicable to all development in Single-Family Residential zone districts. As a result, certain objective standards in Section 17.12.135 are being removed. Below is a brief list of objective standards being removed from Zoning Ordinance Section 17.12.135 that pertain to lots less than 5,000 square feet:
· Primary frontage orientation · Garage protrusion
· Primary frontage entrance and window
requirement
· Common usable open space
requirement
· Garage width · Covered front porch requirement
2) Add implementing language at the end of Chapter 17.12 (i.e. Section 17.12.160) for the adopted-by-resolution ODS. The purpose of this language would be to explain how the adopted-by-resolution ODS is applicable to single-family residential development and how it will be administered. A similar example of Zoning Ordinance text that refers to a set of adopted -by-resolution regulations is Section 17.16.190 for the City’s Model Good Neighbor Policies that are applicable to Multi-family Residential development:
(link: <https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/visalia/latest/visalia_ca/0-0-0-34073>) The proposed implementing language proposed for inclusion in the Zoning Ordinance Chapter 17.12 for the ODS is stated as follows:

17.12.160 Objective Design Standards.

Project proponents of single-family residential developments that are subject to approval by the Site Plan Review Staff or the Planning Commission are required to adhere to the Objective Design Standards as specified by Resolution No. 2025-30 of the Visalia City Council passed on May 5, 2025, and may be subsequently amended by resolution. The purpose of the standards are to provide proponents with a clear understanding of the City’s expectations for all residential project design and streamline the construction of housing units by reducing subjectivity in the entitlement process.

Fiscal Impact: None.

Prior Council Action:
· On December 16, 2024, City staff introduced separate Ordinances to adopt new regulations pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and ODS / PRD standards. The City Council proceeded with introducing the 1st Reading of the ADU Ordinance (which was subsequently passed with the 2nd Reading on January 21, 2025), and delayed action on the ODS Visalia City Council Page 2 of 4 Printed on 5/23/2025
powered by Legistar™819
File #: 25-0181 Agenda Date: 6/2/2025 Agenda #: 3.
passed with the 2nd Reading on January 21, 2025), and delayed action on the ODS Ordinance to allow additional time for interested parties to meet with staff. · On April 21, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the first reading of a revised draft Ordinance for the ODS / PRD standards, and voted 3-2 to approve with an alternative motion to adopt by Resolution rather than Ordinance. · On May 5, 2025, the City Council approved a consent calendar item for the adoption by Resolution No. 2025-30 of Objective Design Standards in accordance with the City Council’s prior action taken on April 21, 2025.

Other: None.

Alternatives: The City Council may either approve or not approve the first reading of the Ordinance.

Not approving the Ordinance would result in no language contained in the Zoning Ordinance that directs a project proponent to the standards, together with conflicting objective standards for lots below 5,000 square feet in size. Therefore, this alternative is not recommended.

Recommended Motion (and Alternative Motions if expected):

I move to introduce for first reading Ordinance No. 2024-16 for Zone Text Amendment No. 2025-01 to amend text within the Visalia Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) to clarify and facilitate City Council adoption of Single-Family Residential Objective Design Standards and Planned Residential Development standards applicable to new single-family residential developments by Resolution rather than by Ordinance.

Environmental Assessment Status: The Zoning Text Amendment for the clarification and facilitation of the City Council adoption of the Objective Design Standards is exempt from CEQA per the CEQA Common Sense Exemption Section 15061(b)(3) that applies to projects which clearly do not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The project, in itself, does not allow construction of any building or structure, but sets forth design regulations that shall be followed. The regulations do not change allowable uses or building intensities. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and thus is not subject to CEQA review.

CEQA Review: The Zoning Text Amendment for the clarification and facilitation of the City Council adoption of the Objective Design Standards is exempt from CEQA per the CEQA Common Sense Exemption Section 15061(b)(3) that applies to projects which clearly do not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The project, in itself, does not allow construction of any building or structure, but sets forth design regulations that shall be followed. The regulations do not change allowable uses or building intensities. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and thus is not subject to CEQA review.

Deadline for Action: 6/2/2025
Attachments:

Visalia City Council Page 3 of 4 Printed on 5/23/2025
powered by Legistar™820
File #: 25-0181 Agenda Date: 6/2/2025 Agenda #: 3.
· Attachment 1: Draft Ordinance No. 2024-16
· Attachment 2: City Council staff report from April 21, 2025 · Attachment 3: City Council staff report from May 5, 2025 with Adopted Resolution No. 2025-30 Visalia City Council Page 4 of 4 Printed on 5/23/2025
powered by Legistar™821
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-16
FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2025-01
1 ST READING: 06/02/2025
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-16

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA APPROVING ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2025-01: A REQUEST BY THE CITY OF VISALIA TO AMEND TEXT WITHIN THE VISALIA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17 (ZONING

ORDINANCE) TO CLARIFY AND FACILITATE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF

SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AND PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO NEW SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS BY RESOLUTION RATHER THAN BY ORDINANCE.

WHREAS, Zoning Text Amendment No. 2025-01 is a request by the City of Visalia to amend text within the Visalia Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) to clarify and facilitate City Council adoption of Single-Family Residential Objective Design Standards and Planned Residential Development standards applicable to new single-family residential developments by Resolution rather than by Ordinance.; and, WHEREAS, the City of Visalia had previously initiated Zoning Text Amendment No. 2024-03 to establish new objective design standards pertaining to single-family residential development, including lots below 5,000 square feet in size, and pertaining to Planned Residential Developments, in response to an increase of utilization of smaller lot sizes and new design techniques by proponents, and in response from proponents seeking to have a clear set of reliable codified objective design standards form which to design a project and ensure support by City staff and officials, and in response to recent state legislation such as Senate Bill 9 (2021) and Senate Bill 35 (2017) that allows for ministerial approval of residential developments under certain provisions; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia, after duly published notice, held a public hearing before said Commission regarding Zoning Text Amendment No. 2024-03 on November 12, 2024; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia considered Zone Text Amendment No. 2024-03 in accordance with Section 17.44.070 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Visalia and on the evidence contained in the staff report and testimony presented at the public hearing, and recommended that the City Council approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 2024-03 by adopting the Revised Public Review Draft, as amended and presented to the Commission on November 25, 2024; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia, after duly published notice, held a public hearing before said City Council regarding Zoning Text Amendment No. 2024-03 on December 16, 2024, and delayed action to allow additional time for staff to meet with interested persons, stakeholders, and builders, to address concerns the standards and feasibility of the Revised Public Review Draft Ordinance; and 822
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-16
FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2025-01
1 ST READING: 06/02/2025
WHEREAS, the City of Visalia conducted additional consultation and meetings with persons, stakeholders, and builders, which included two virtual meetings held on January 30 and February 5, 2025, which resulted in a Revised Draft Ordinance that was circulated for a 15-day review period beginning on March 14, 2025, and then presented to the City Council without changes; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia, after duly published notice, held a public hearing before said City Council regarding Zoning Text Amendment No. 2024-03 on April 21, 2025, and approved the item by directing the preparation of a Resolution for the adoption of Objective Design Standards in lieu of the adoption of an Ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia adopted Resolution No. 2025- 30 on May 5, 2025, for the approval of Objective Design Standards applicable to singlefamily residential developments; and, WHEREAS, the City of Visalia has subsequently initiated Zone Text Amendment No. 2025-01 together with Ordinance No. 2024-16 to complete the necessary administrative revisions and enforcement within the Zoning Ordinance related to the adoption of new standards; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia, has held a public hearing before said City Council regarding Zoning Text Amendment No. 2025-01 on June 2, 2025, and has considered said Zone Text Amendment in accordance with Section

17.44.090 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Visalia on the premise that the Planning Commission of the City of Visalia had previously reviewed and recommended approval of an Ordinance through Zoning Text Amendment No. 2024-03 for the underlying Single-Family Residential Objective Design Standards and Planned Residential Development standards applicable to new single-family residential developments; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Visalia finds that the project is exempt from further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption), as the proposed zone text amendment will not in and of themselves have an effect on the environment, and that the affected sites will continue to allow for residential development consistent with the land use designations and the respective density ranges specified in the Visalia General Plan Land Use Element.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3).
823
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-16
FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2025-01
1 ST READING: 06/02/2025
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Visalia hereby makes the following specific findings regarding Zoning Text Amendment No. 2025-01:

1. That the Zoning Text Amendment 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 change is required to achieve the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance prescribed in Visalia Municipal Code Section 17.02.020, and therefore enacts this ordinance amending the regulations of Visalia Municipal Code Title 17.

3. That the City has determined that the amendments are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the CEQA Common Sense Exemption, Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3), since there would be no possibility of a significant effect on the environment.

NOW, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VISALIA, that Zoning Text Amendment No. 2025-01, is approved, as contained in Exhibit “A” of this Ordinance.

Severability. 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.

Construction. The City Council intends this Ordinance to supplement, not to duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this Ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent.

Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its adoption.

Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law. 824
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-16
FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2025-01
1 ST READING: 06/02/2025
Ordinance No. 2024-16
EXHIBIT “A”
Section 1. Visalia Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended, to read as follows, as specified by as specified by underline & italics for additions and strikeout for deletions:

Chapter 17.12 Single-family Residential Zone

17.12.13517.12.140 Lot area less than 5,000 square feet.

17.12.13717.12.150 Signs.

17.12.160 Objective Design Standards.

17.12.13517.12.140 Lot area less than 5,000 square feet.

A. Notwithstanding Section 17.12.050, lots in the R-1-5 zone may have a lot area of between 3,600 and 4,999 square feet if all of the following standards are met:

1. The Planning Commission finds that the development's overall density is consistent with the General Plan Low Density Residential General Plan density range of two (2) to ten (10) dwelling units per gross acre.

2. The maximum number of lots less than 5,000 square feet that may be approved by a tentative subdivision map shall be fifty (50) percent or less of the total lots.

3. Streets shall be constructed to public street standards.

4. Each subdivision with at least 15 lots that are less than 5,000 square feet in size shall make available to buyers at least three (3) different small lot floor plans with at least four (4) available elevation designs for each floor plan to construct on those lots.

5. The development is consistent with all objective design standards as referenced in Section 17.12.160 (Objective Design Standards).

5. The primary frontage of the dwelling unit shall face a public street, primary entryway, circulation walkway, or open space with sidewalks that provide delineated paths of travel.

6. The primary frontage of the dwelling unit shall include the primary entrance and at least one window.
825
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-16
FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2025-01
1 ST READING: 06/02/2025

7. Required covered parking spaces shall be in garages. Carports are prohibited.

8. The width of the garage shall not be greater than fifty (50) percent of the width of the dwelling unit.

9. The garage shall not extend beyond the front building facade (living area.)

10. All dwelling units shall include a covered front porch at least four (4) feet deep and six (6) feet wide or an uncovered front courtyard at least five (5) feet wide and five (5) feet deep that is surrounded on four sides by the dwelling unit or a wall or fence between three (3) and four (4) feet high with a pedestrian gate or entryway.

11. The building official shall not approve a building permit for a new dwelling unit on a lot with a lot area less than 5,000 square feet until the city planner, or designee, has determined that the standards identified in this section are met.

12. The subdivision shall provide a common, usable open space area of a minimum 3,000 square feet or two hundred fifty (250) square feet per lot under 5,000 square feet, whichever is greater. The area shall be landscaped and maintained with funding from either a homeowner's association or a landscape and lighting act district.

B. Notwithstanding this Chapter, lots with less than five thousand (5,000) square feet shall have the following minimum dimensions and building setback areas, unless they were approved with a planned development permit:

1. The minimum lot depth shall be seventy (70) feet.

2. The minimum lot width shall be forty-six (46) feet for interior lots and fiftyone (51) feet for corner lots.

3. The minimum front building setback area shall be twelve (12) feet for livable space and twenty (20) feet for garages.

4. The minimum rear yard building setback area shall be fifteen (15) feet.

5. The minimum interior side yard building setback area shall be five (5) feet.

6. The minimum corner side yard building setback area shall be ten (10) feet.

7. The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet.

8. Lots shall provide for a minimum usable open space area of a minimum three hundred (300) square feet. The open space shall be have a minimum width of fifteen (15) feet wide.

C. Lots less having a lot area of 3,600 square feet, or lots between 3,600 and 4,999 square feet that do not meet all the standards in this section Subsections A and B of 826
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-16
FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2025-01
1 ST READING: 06/02/2025
Section 17.12.140 may be approved through the planned development permit process per Chapter 17.26. (Ord. 2017-01 (part), 2017)

17.12.137 17.12.150 Signs.

Signs shall be placed in conformance with Chapter 17.48. (Ord. 2017-01 (part), 2017)

17.12.160 Objective Design Standards.

Before the issuance of a building permit for each primary dwelling unit, the project proponent shall demonstrate each unit’s compliance with the Objective Design Standards, utilizing any forms approved by the City for determining compliance. 827
Visalia City Council
707 W. Acequia
Visalia, CA 93291
Visalia City Council
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: 25-0108 Version: 1
Type: Public Hearing Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 4/1/2025 In control: Visalia City Council On agenda: 4/21/2025 Final action:

Title: Ordinance Adoption - Public hearing and first reading of Ordinance No. 2024-16 to adopt Zoning Text Amendment No. 2024-03: A request by the City of Visalia to add and amend regulations within the Visalia Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) pertaining to Single-Family Residential Objective Design standards and Planned Residential Development standards applicable to new single-family residential developments. The regulations will apply Citywide to properties within the city limits of the City of Visalia.

Sponsors:

Indexes:

Code sections:

Attachments: 1. Ordinance 2024-16 for ZTA 2024-03 ODS - 4-21-2025, 2. Attachment 1_Revised Draft Ordinance with track changes, 3. Attachment 2_Original Draft Ordinance 12-16-2024, 4. Attachment 3_Small Lot Revisions, 5. Attachment 4a_Lennar email, 6. Attachment 4a_Ordinance with Lennar comments, 7.

Attachment 4b_Self-Help email, 8. Attachment 4c_DR Horton email, 9. Attachment 4d_SJVH - email,

10. Attachment 4d_SJVH - markup, 11. Attachment 5_Staff Report ZTA 2024-03 12-16-2024, 12.

Attachment 6_Presentation Slides
Date Ver. Action By Action Result
4/21/2025 1 Visalia City Council
Agenda Item Wording:

Ordinance Adoption - Public hearing and first reading of Ordinance No. 2024-16 to adopt Zoning Text Amendment No. 2024-03: A request by the City of Visalia to add and amend regulations within the Visalia Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) pertaining to Single-Family Residential Objective Design standards and Planned Residential Development standards applicable to new single-family residential developments. The regulations will apply Citywide to properties within the city limits of the City of Visalia.

Deadline for Action: 4/21/2025
Submitting Department: Community Development
Contact Name and Phone Number:

Brandon Smith, Principal Planner, [email protected], (559) 713-4636; Paul Bernal, Planning and Community Preservation Director, [email protected], (559) 713- 4025
Department Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing and introduce the first reading of Revised Ordinance No. 2024-16, to amend portions of Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) pertaining to Single-Family Residential Objective Design standards (ODS) and Planned Residential Development (PRD) standards applicable to new single-family residential developments.

Note on Revised Ordinance: This Ordinance and the corresponding draft Municipal Code contains Visalia City Council Page 1 of 6 Printed on 4/29/2025
powered by Legistar™828
File #: 25-0108, Version: 1
Note on Revised Ordinance: This Ordinance and the corresponding draft Municipal Code contains revisions based on input received from interested parties, following the motion acted upon by the City Council on December 16, 2024, to continue the matter and to conduct further outreach with the residential development community.

The City Council may, in lieu of the recommended motion for the Ordinance as specified above, consider any of the following alternative motions:

1. Direct staff to make changes to the Ordinance as specified by City Council, based upon any comments shared by an interested person; or

2. Adopt the single-family residential Objective Design standards and PRD standards by resolution rather than by ordinance (adoption by resolution allows for these standards to be modified / revised in the future without holding multiple public hearings); or

3. Direct staff to conduct further outreach to stakeholders and interested individuals which could result in modifications to the residential objective design standards as proposed, and direct that any revised objective design standards be reconsidered in a public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council.

Background Discussion:

On December 16, 2024, staff presented to the City Council a draft Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance and a draft Objective Design Standards (ODS) Ordinance (the original ordinance is included as Attachment 2; the staff report is also included as Attachment 5). The text would establish a new section in the Zoning Ordinance located at Chapter 17.12, Article 2, commencing at Section

17.12.140. The amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Text also include elimination of certain regulations for lots less than 5,000 square feet in Section 17.12.135 (refer to Attachment 3) since they are now addressed in the Revised Draft ODS Ordinance.

The ODS Ordinance, as originally presented to the City Council on December 16th, was crafted largely in response to current growth trends where developers have been utilizing smaller lot sizes and new design techniques. The standards address a range of topics that include appearance, landscaping, fences, off-street parking, and common open space areas within planned residential developments.

During the public hearing, staff received public comments from a few homebuilder developers requesting that City Council continue the matter to allow additional time for the development community to review and provide additional comments on the draft ODS Ordinance. The Council adopted the ADU Ordinance and elected to continue the ODS Ordinance to a date uncertain in March/April 2025 to give staff and the development community time to meet and discuss the ordinance.

Following the public hearing, City staff requested a revised scope of work and budget from Mintier Harnish, who prepared the original ODS/ADU Ordinances. These items were approved by the Change Order Committee and worked commenced. The revised scope of work called for facilitating two stakeholder roundtable discussions with local housing developers, with each meeting lasting approximately one hour each.

Stakeholder meetings were held virtually on January 30th and February 5th, with each meeting having 12-15 people in attendance. Following the meetings, letters and comments in e-mail format were also received by four persons. The response at these meetings well exceeded the participation during the original stakeholder outreach done in 2023/2024. As a result of the comments received, a Revised Public Review Draft Ordinance (“Revised Draft Ordinance”) was prepared and circulated to the stakeholders / interested persons for public comment for 15 days beginning March 14, 2024. The Visalia City Council Page 2 of 6 Printed on 4/29/2025
powered by Legistar™829
File #: 25-0108, Version: 1
stakeholders / interested persons for public comment for 15 days beginning March 14, 2024. The Revised Draft Ordinance is contained within the attached Revised Ordinance No. 2024-16, and a track changes version showing all changes between the December 2024 Ordinance and the Revised Ordinance is included as Attachment 1.

Proposed Amendments:

The Revised Draft Ordinance largely retains the same format and structure but removes certain requirements and offers a greater number of options for a builder to achieve compliance. This was done out of a desire, as expressed by stakeholders and builders, for the Ordinance to offer more variety and flexibility towards achieving compliance.

One section where options are presented for achieving compliance is Section 17.12.160 - Structure Design Standards, which addresses requirements for dwellings to provide massing elements (projections, recessions, etc.) and horizontal / vertical articulation. The Revised Draft Ordinance replaces this with a “menu of options”, requiring that units include at least three design elements from a list of 13 items (which includes protruding windows, changes in heights, gables/dormers, decorative trellises, changes in roof pitch, etc.). Whereas there have been repeated concerns expressed by stakeholders over the increased cost associated with additional requirements, the offering of different options provides alternatives for the builders to come into compliance and allows builders to analyze the cost impact of each option.

Another section where options have been presented pertains to the “Front Entryways” Section

17.12.150.B.3 of the draft ordinance. Rather than requiring a covered porch with every unit, the Revised Draft Ordinance allows builders to choose between a front porch, recessed entry, deep overhang, or front landing.

In summary, the following standards have either been removed or listed as an option from the Revised Draft Standards (see Attachment 1) based upon input from stakeholders. The code sections refer to where the standard was found in the prior draft ordinance (see Attachment 2).

Removed:
· Section 17.12.150.A.1 - Unit staggering. Developers commented that staggering is something that they already do. Requiring staggering could further result in shortened spaces for vehicle parking in driveways.
· Section 17.12.160.D - Prohibition of balconies within 20 feet of an adjacent property line unless screened from view
Moved under options section:
· Section 17.12.150.A.2.c. Garages to be setback farther from or equal to the primary elevation. · Section 17.12.150.B.3.a and b - Placement of the main entry and at least one window visible on the primary elevation.
· Section 17.12.150.B.3.d - Pedestrian walkway connecting the front entry to the primary sidewalk/public right-of-way.
· Section 17.12.160.A and B - Massing and Articulation requirements, replaced with a menu of options.

The following items have also been revised in the Revised Draft Standards, with code sections referenced.
· Section 17.12.150.A.1.d - The amount of garage width as part of the overall primary elevation Visalia City Council Page 3 of 6 Printed on 4/29/2025
powered by Legistar™830
File #: 25-0108, Version: 1
· Section 17.12.150.A.1.d - The amount of garage width as part of the overall primary elevation width has increased from 60% to 75% and exempts small lots (under 40 feet wide) from meeting the standard.
· Section 17.12.160.C.2 - The requirement for two or more colors on a building exterior has been separated into different sections for standalone units and subdivisions. · Section 17.12.170 - A new section was added for Utility and Service Areas to ensure that utilities and mechanical equipment are screened from view and/or designed in a manner that minimizes their view from a street.
· Section 17.12.200.A - Removing the requirement for exterior lighting to be directed downward.

The following sections remain unchanged, as there were no specific comments from stakeholders regarding these sections.
· Section 17.12.140 - pertaining to Purpose and Applicability. · Section 17.12.150.A.2 - pertaining to the declaration of a primary elevation. · Section 17.12.150.B.1 and 2 - pertaining to setbacks and height. · Section 17.12.170 - pertaining to landscaping, excepting the removal of a street tree requirement since it is already a City standard elsewhere. · Section 17.12.180 - pertaining to fences, walls, and hedges. · Sections 17.12.200 thru 220 which primarily pertain to planned unit developments (PUDs), dealing with off-street parking facilities, usable common open space areas, and sidewalks. · Section 17.12.230 - pertaining to the Exception powers of the Planning Commission.

Correspondence:

The Revised Public Review Draft Ordinance was shared with stakeholders / interested persons for public comment for 15 days, from March 14th to March 31st. City staff received two letters of correspondence (see A. and B. below) from stakeholders during this period containing comments and requesting certain revisions to be considered toward the Ordinance. In addition, one letter of correspondence (see C. below) was received after the public comment period. All are included as Attachment 4.

A. One correspondence was received from Lennar Homes, who had previously provided comments to the Council on the matter. Lennar Homes had four comments on the Revised Draft Ordinance summarized as follows:

Comment: Staff response:
1) Eliminate projection
requirements for lots less than
40’ wide.

Not supported. Projection requirements are one option from a menu of options for providing at least three design elements.

Staff contends that small lot developments are equally fit for utilizing projections and therefore should not be exempted from a projection standard.
2) Require window fenestration
for front facades only rather than
on all sides.

Not supported. Staff considers this requirement as imperative towards upholding a high aesthetic quality of elevations on all sides and adding visual interest, especially as seen from both major and local roadways.
3) Reduce the minimum size of
window shutters, if used, to
below 100% of the size of the
window.

No change necessary. Shutters are not a requirement in the ordinance, though a standard is provided in case they are used. The standard is intended to convey that shutters could feasibly cover the entire window area and not be dismissed as an accessory/decoration mismatched to the window.
4) Question whether decorativeNo change necessaryDecorative carriage lights would Visalia City Council Page 4 of 6 Printed on 4/29/2025
powered by Legistar™831
File #: 25-0108, Version: 1
from a projection standard.
2) Require window fenestration
for front facades only rather than
on all sides.

No change necessary. Decorative carriage lights would
qualify as meeting the standard.

B. Another correspondence was received from Self-Help Enterprises (“SHE”), who had not provided any previous comment to Council or staff during the entire outreach process. The correspondence contends that the standards are incompatible with SHE’s current plans, thereby imposing increased costs towards a non-profit housing developer. The correspondence goes into detail describing the impacts borne by each section within the ordinance and seeks consideration of “affordable housing developers using pre-approved master plans from Sections 17.12.160.A thru C” or including a waiver process.

Staff maintains that the design standards should be imposed uniformly across all types of singlefamily residential development in order to maintain an aesthetic quality shared among all residents. In fact, the Draft Ordinance includes Section 17.12.240 that grants the Planning Commission the authority to grant one or more exceptions to any regulations prescribed in the standards subject to approval at a public hearing. Such process may be utilized if the applicant deems that any certain standard(s) would compromise the developer’s ability for a builder to maintain a set affordability standard, particularly when subject to public funding. It should be noted that, at present, deed restricted affordable housing accounts for less than 1% of all new single-family detached units which are issued building permits in Visalia.

C. Another correspondence was received from D.R. Horton, who had previously provided comments to the Council on the matter. The letter in summary states that while the builder is generally not in favor of alterations resulting in price increases to the buyer, the builder’s existing plans could be utilized without significant changes. The correspondence offers support of the draft standards and no opposition.

D. Another correspondence was received from San Joaquin Valley Homes, who had previously provided written comments on the original Draft Ordinance. This item was received after the close of the comment period for the Revised Public Review Draft. The email includes a mark-up with some questions and minor suggestions regarding the Revised Public Review Draft Ordinance.

Fiscal Impact:

None.

Prior Council Action: On December 16, 2024, City staff introduced separate Ordinances to adopt new regulations pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and ODS / PRD standards. The City Council proceeded with introducing the 1st Reading of the ADU Ordinance (which was subsequently passed with the 2nd Reading on January 21, 2025), and delayed action on the ODS Ordinance to allow additional time for interested parties to meet with staff.

Recommended Motion (and Alternative Motions if expected):

I move to introduce for first reading Ordinance No. 2024-16 for Zone Text Amendment No. 2024-03, to amend portions of Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) pertaining to Single-Family Visalia City Council Page 5 of 6 Printed on 4/29/2025
powered by Legistar™832
File #: 25-0108, Version: 1
Residential Objective Design standards.

Environmental Assessment Status: The Zoning Ordinance amendment for the proposed ODS ordinance is exempt from CEQA per the CEQA Common Sense Exemption Section 15061(b)(3) that applies to projects which clearly do not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The project, in itself, does not allow construction of any building or structure, but sets forth design regulations that shall be followed. The regulations do not change allowable uses or building intensities. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and thus is not subject to CEQA review.

CEQA Review: The Zoning Ordinance amendment for the proposed ODS ordinance is exempt from CEQA per the CEQA Common Sense Exemption Section 15061(b)(3) that applies to projects which clearly do not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The project, in itself, does not allow construction of any building or structure, but sets forth design regulations that shall be followed. The regulations do not change allowable uses or building intensities. It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and thus is not subject to CEQA review.

Attachments:

1. Ordinance No. 2024-16 for Objective Design Standards

2. Attachment 1 - Revised Draft Ordinance with track Changes

3. Attachment 2 - Original Draft Ordinance presented to Council on December 16, 2024

4. Attachment 3 - Revisions to Section 17.12.135, (Standards for) Lot area less than 5,000 square feet

5. Attachment 4 - Correspondence from stakeholder received during public review period a. Lennar Homes
b. Self-Help Enterprises
c. D.R. Horton
d. San Joaquin Valley Homes

6. Attachment 5 - City Council staff report from December 16, 2024

7. Attachment 6 - Presentation Slides
Visalia City Council Page 6 of 6 Printed on 4/29/2025
powered by Legistar™833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
Visalia City Council
Staff Report
Visalia City Council
707 W. Acequia
Visalia, CA 93291
File #: 25-0202 Agenda Date: 6/2/2025 Agenda #: 4.

Agenda Item Wording:

Authorization to Amend Measure N Spending Plan and the Axon Contract - Conduct the first of two Public Hearings to amend the Measure N Spending Plan for an amendment to the current BodyWorn Camera contract with Axon Enterprises in the amount of $431,350.65, and appropriate $138,121 for Fiscal Year 2025/26.

Prepared by:

Police Chief Jason Salazar, 559-713-4210, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>;
Police Captain Dan Ford, 559-713-4151, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; Financial Analyst Liz Ybarra, 559-713-4250, [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Department Recommendation:

Conduct the first of two Public Hearings to amend the Measure N Spending Plan for an amendment to the current Body-Worn Camera (BWC) contract with Axon Enterprise Inc. in the amount of $431,350.65, and appropriate $138,121 for FY 2025/26. The second public hearing scheduled for June 16, 2025.

Summary:

Measure N, the ½ cent sales tax that began April 1, 2017, requires the City to conduct two Public Hearings before amending the 2025/26 spending plan to amend the current BWC contract, with Axon Enterprise Inc. The cost of the amendment is $431,350.65, spread out over the remaining three years of the contract, and requires an appropriation of $138,121 for FY 2025/26. The remainder will be applied in the next two-year budget cycle.

On May 19, 2025, the City Council voted unanimously to allow staff to initiate the Measure N amendment process to amend the current BWC contract and appropriate $138,121 for FY 2025/26 On May 29, 2025, City Staff met with the Measure N Committee and presented the recommended amendment, including a detailed summary of the request, the increased budget, and why the increases were necessary. Upon being presented with the proposed amendment and appropriation, the committee was provided with an opportunity for comments. Upon accepting the motion, the committee recommended approval of this item.

Background Discussion:

The Visalia Police Department is requesting to amend the current contract with Axon Enterprise, Inc., increasing the total cost of the contract by $431,350.65 spread out over the remaining three years of the contract, to increase the current amount of BWC Officer Safety Plans including associated equipment, license and services. The Department began their BWC Program in 2018 and is approaching the midpoint in their second five-year contract.

Staff have recognized the current amount of BWCs was insufficient to align with best practices for Visalia City Council Page 1 of 3 Printed on 5/30/2025
powered by Legistar™849
File #: 25-0202 Agenda Date: 6/2/2025 Agenda #: 4.

Staff have recognized the current amount of BWCs was insufficient to align with best practices for deployment; however, due to staff shortages, the department was able to meet these standards through effective administration. With the department now maintaining at or near full staffing levels, the additional BWCs have become a necessity. Staff are requesting to deploy BWCs to all sworn staff, including command staff in non-administrative positions. Additionally, staff are requesting the add-on service of Axon Auto-Tagging, a software that automatically categorizes BWC evidence, to reduce the amount of administrative time spent by officers and digital evidence technicians processing digital evidence. This request will result in the following license increases deployed over the remainder of this contract:

Year OSP7 Plans Axon VR Axon Performance Auto-Tagging
2023/24 130 155 130 0
2024/25 131 (+1) 155 131 (+1) 0
2025/26 165 (+34) 156 (+1) 165 (+34) 165
2026/27 167 (+2) 158 (+2) 167 (+2) 167
2027/28 167 158 167 167
Based on the requested licenses and additional software, the following chart indicates the increased cost for these services.

Service Net Cost Tax Subtotal
OSP 7 Bundle $361,861.83 $20,154.53 $382,016.36
Axon Performance $14,020.44 - $14,020.44
Auto-Tagging $32,995.38 - $32,995.38
Axon VR $2,136.84 $181.63 $2,318.47
Total Cost $431,350.65
Fiscal Impact:

As indicated in the chart below, staff is requesting an allocation of $431,350.65, spread out over the remaining three years of the contract. Staff are requesting to appropriate $138,121 in FY 2025/26 and apply the remainder in the next two-year budget cycle.

AXON Contract C24002
Amendment #2
Billing Schedule - Equipment, Licenses, and Tax
Description Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total
Equip &
Services
(Original)
$312,850 $338,379 $349,759 $361,595 $373,904 $1,736,487 Amendment #1 - $6,513 $6,773 $7,045 $7,326 $27,657
Amendment #2
(Current
Request)
- - $138,121 $146,651 $146,578 $431,351
Total $312,850 $344,892 $494,654 $515,290 $527,909 $2,195,495 Visalia City Council Page 2 of 3 Printed on 5/30/2025
powered by Legistar™850
File #: 25-0202 Agenda Date: 6/2/2025 Agenda #: 4.

Description Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total
Equip &
Services
(Original)
$312,850 $338,379 $349,759 $361,595 $373,904 $1,736,487 Amendment #1 - $6,513 $6,773 $7,045 $7,326 $27,657
Amendment #2
(Current
Request)
- - $138,121 $146,651 $146,578 $431,351
Total $312,850 $344,892 $494,654 $515,290 $527,909 $2,195,495 Prior Council Action:

May 19, 2025 - Authorized staff to enter into Measure N Amendment process. June 19, 2023 - Council awarded $1,738,749.49 for contract with Axon Enterprise.

Other: N/A
Alternatives: N/A
Recommended Motion (and Alternative Motions if expected):

Conduct the first of two Public Hearings to amend the Measure N Spending Plan for an amendment to the current contract with Axon Enterprises, Inc. in the amount of $431,350.65, and appropriate $138,121 for FY 2025/26
Environmental Assessment Status: N/A
CEQA Review: N/A
Deadline for Action: 6/2/2025
Attachments: 1. Axon Enterprise Quote
Visalia City Council Page 3 of 3 Printed on 5/30/2025
powered by Legistar™851

Page 1 ends

Visalia City CouncilJune 2, 2025

Visalia City Council
June 2, 2025