Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Planning & Community Preservation Department
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Title: General Plan Amendment No. 2025-02 and Change of Zone No. 2025-03
Project Description: General Plan Amendment No. 2025 -02 is a request by the City of Visalia to change the land use designation on a 21-acre parcel from Parks/Recreation to Commercial Mixed Use.
Change of Zone No. 2025-03 is a request by the City of Visalia to change the zoning designation on a 21-acre parcel from QP (Quasi-Public) to C-MU (Commercial Mixed Use).
Project Location: The site is located on the northwest corner of Akers Street and Riggin Avenue , within the City of Visalia, County of Tulare (APN: 077-100-103).
Project Facts: Refer to Initial Study for project facts, plans and policies, and discussion of environmental effects.
Attachments: Initial Study; Environmental Checklist; Maps (X)
DECLARATION OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT:
This project will not have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons:
(a) The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
(b) The project does not have the potential to achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
(c) The project does not have environmental effects which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. (d) The environmental effects of the project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
This Negative Declaration has been prepared by the City of Visalia Planning Division in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. A copy may be obtained from the City of Visalia Planning Division Staff during normal business hours.
APPROVED
Brandon Smith, AICP
Environmental Coordinator
By: ______________________________
Date Approved: April 21, 2026
Review Period: 21 days
(April 30 - May 20, 2026)
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
INITIAL STUDY
I. GENERAL
A. Description of the Project:
General Plan Amendment No. 2025 -02, described as a request by the City of Visalia to change the land use designation on a n approximately 21-acre parcel from Parks/Recreation to Commercial Mixed Use; together with Change of Zone No. 2025 -03, described as a request by the City of Visalia to change the zoning designation on a n approximately 21-acre parcel from QP (Quasi -Public) to C -MU (Commercial Mixed Use). The site is located on the northwest corner of Akers Street and Riggin Avenue, within the City of Visalia, County of Tulare (APN: 077-100-103).
The proposed Project consists of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and a corresponding Change of Zone (COZ) within the subject property (APN: 077 -100-103), located within the city limits of the City of Visalia. The Project site occupies 20.88 gross acres of undeveloped land, which is seasonally improved for agricultural uses (i.e., row crops).
Currently, the entire 20.88 acres of the Project site has a General Plan land use designation of Parks/Recreation and a Zoning designation of Quasi -Public (QP). The proposed GPA and COZ will establish a new General Plan land use designation and Zoning designation of Commercial Mixed Use (C-MU). No portion of the site will retain a General Plan land use designation of Parks/Recreation or a Zoning designation of Quasi-Public (QP).
Currently, the project only affects the land use and zoning designations . No development is proposed in correlation with the Project.
B. Identification of the Environmental Setting:
The project is located at the northwest corner of Akers Street and Riggin Avenue . The parcel consists of undeveloped land, which is which is seasonally improved for agricultural uses (i.e., row crops) . A man made canal, Modoc Ditch, is in the center of the site and runs in an east-west direction. The site is bounded by West Sedona Avenue to the north, North Akers Street to the east, and West Riggin Avenue to the south.
The surrounding uses, Zoning, and General Plan for the project area are as follows:
General Plan Zoning Existing uses
North: Public Institutional QP (Quasi-Public) Ridgeview Middle School South: Residential Very Low
Density
R-1-20 (Single-
Family Residential,
minimum lot size
20,000 square feet)
Neighborhood Church campus
East: Residential Medium
Density
R-M-2 (Multi-Family
Residential, 3,000 sq.
ft. minimum site area)
Residential apartment complex, under
construction
West: Residential High
Density
R-M-3 (Multi-Family
Residential, 1,200 sq.
ft. minimum site area)
Vanant land seasonally improved for
agricultural uses (i.e., row crops)
Fire and police protection services, street maintenance of public streets, refuse collection, and wastewater treatment will be provided by the City of Visalia upon the development of the project area.
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
C. Plans and Policies: The General Plan Land Use Diagram designates the site as Parks / Recreation.
The site is zoned Quasi-Public (QP). The Project consists of the conversion of the site to a General Plan land use designation and Zoning designation of Commercial Mixed Use (C -MU). No development is proposed at this time for any of the project area to be zoned for Commercial Mixed Use, and there is no inconsistency with plans and policies related to this designation.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified for this project. The City of Visalia Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance contain policies and regulations that are designed to reduce and/or eliminate impacts to a level of non-significance.
III. MITIGATION MEASURES
There are no mitigation measures for this project.
IV. PROJECT COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING ZONES AND PLANS The project is compatible with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance as the project relates to surrounding properties.
V. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
The following documents are hereby incorporated into this Negative Declaration and Initial Study by reference:
• Visalia General Plan Update. Dyett & Bhatia, October 2014. • Visalia City Council Resolution No. 2014-38 (Certifying the Visalia General Plan Update) passed and adopted October 14, 2014.
• Visalia General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2010041078). Dyett & Bhatia, June 2014.
• Visalia General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2010041078). Dyett & Bhatia, March 2014.
• Visalia City Council Resolution No. 2014-37 (Certifying the EIR for the Visalia General Plan Update) passed and adopted October 14, 2014.
• Visalia Municipal Code, including Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance). • California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
• City of Visalia, California, Climate Action Plan, Draft Final. Strategic Energy Innovations, December 2013.
• Visalia City Council Resolution No. 2014-36 (Certifying the Visalia Climate Action Plan) passed and adopted October 14, 2014.
• City of Visalia Storm Water Master Plan. Boyle Engineering Corporation, September 1994. • City of Visalia Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. City of Visalia, 1994. • City of Visalia Zoning Ordinance Update. City of Visalia, March 2017. • Tulare County Important Farmland 2018 Map. California Department of Conservation, 2018. • City of Visalia VMT Thresholds and Implementation Guidelines. LSA, 2021. Together with City of Visalia VMT Screening Application. https://gis1.lsa.net/visaliaVMT/
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
VII. NAME OF PERSON WHO PREPARED INITIAL STUDY
__________________________
Brandon Smith, AICP Brandon Smith, AICP
Principal Planner Environmental Coordinator
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
& EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
NAME OF
PROPONENTS:
City of Visalia NAME OF AGENT: None
Address of
Proponents:
315 East Acequia Avenue,
Visalia, CA 93291
Address of Agent:
Telephone
Numbers:
(559) 713-4359 Telephone Number:
Date of Review April 21, 2026 Lead Agency: City of Visalia
The following checklist is used to determine if the proposed project could potentially have a significant effect on the environment. Explanations and information regarding each question follow the checklist. 1 = No Impact 2 = Less Than Significant Impact
3 = Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated 4 = Potentially Significant Impact
I. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
1 a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
1 c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? 1 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
a) The Project consists of a GPA and COZ that would affect two land use categories and corresponding zoning districts on the subject property. Such policy change will have no impact on scenic vistas, because no development is proposed. In the future, development proposed on the Project site will be required to undergo CEQA review which would address potential impacts on scenic vistas. The City of Visalia General Plan includes policies that promote new developments that are compatible and consistent with the natural and built environment and set forth design guidelines that define the unique character of Visalia. Furthermore, the City of Visalia Zoning Ordinance contains standards for setbacks, landscaping, and height requirements. The Sierra Nevada Mountain range may be considered a scenic vista; however, the view will not be adversely impacted by the project.
b) The project consists of a GPA and COZ that would affect two land use categories and corresponding zoning districts on the subject property. Such policy change will have no impact on scenic resources, because none occur on the site. There are no state scenic highways adjacent to the site.
Name of Proposal General Plan Amendment No. 2025-02 and Change of Zone No. 2025-03 Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
c) The project site is located within an urbanized area and the City has development standards related to landscaping and other amenities that will ensure that the visual character of the area is enhanced and not degraded upon any future development. Thus, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings.
The Project consists of a GPA and COZ that would affect two land use categories and corresponding zoning districts on the subject property. Such policy change will have no impact on visual character or public views, because no development will occur. In addition, the GPA and COZ would eliminate Parks / Recreation lands on the site and would establish Commercial Mixed Use lands on the site . The establishment of Commercial land uses on the site is consistent with the character of other intersections of two arterial streets throughout the City, where it is common to have a commercial land use of at least five acres in size. d) The Project consists of a GPA and COZ which will impact allowed land uses on the site, resulting in an increase in Commercial land, and elimination of Parks / Recreation land. This modification of the General Plan and Zoning maps will have no impact on light and glare, because no development will occur.
The City has development standards that require light to be directed and/or shielded so it does not fall upon adjacent properties.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
2 a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency to non-agricultural use? 1 b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 1 c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
1 d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? 1 e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
a) The project is located on property that is identified as Prime Farmland on maps prepared by the California Department of Conservation, and will involve the conversion of the property to non - agricultural use.
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
The City of Visalia 2030 General Plan has designated the Project site for urban uses under the Urban Growth Development Tier 1. The implementation of this Project will support the General Plan designation for future urban land use and Policy LU -P-20 for urban uses, including commercial development, which may develop within Tier 1 at any time consistent with the City’s Land Use Diagram.
The Visalia General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has already considered the environmental impacts of the conversion of properties within the Planning Area into non -agriculture uses. Overall, the General Plan results in the conversion of over 14,000 acres of Important Farmland to urban uses, which is considered significant and unavoidable. Aside from preventing development altogether the conversion of Important Farmland to urban uses cannot be directly mitigated, with agricultural conservation easements or by other means. However, the General Plan contains multiple polic ies that together work to limit conversion only to the extent needed to accommodate long-term growth. The General Plan policies identified under Impact 3.5 -1 of the EIR serve as the mitigation that assists in reducing the severity of the impact to the extent possible while still achieving the General Plan’s goals of accommodating a certain amount of growth to occur within the Planning Area. These policies include the implementation of a three -tier growth boundary system that assists in protecting open space around the City fringe and maintaining compact development within the City limits.
The project will be consistent with Policy LU -P-34. The conversion of the site from agricultural use to urban development does not require mitigation to offset the loss of prime farmland as stated in Policy LU-P-34. The policy states: “the mitigation program shall specifically allow exemptions for conversion of agricultural lands in Tier I.”
Because there is still a significant impact to loss of agricultural resources after conversion of properties within the General Plan Planning Area to non -agricultural uses, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was previously adopted with the Visalia General Plan Update EIR. b) The project is not located on property that is party to a Williamson Act contract. Existing City of Visalia zoning for the area is QP (Quasi-Public), which allows various urban and non -agricultural uses.
c) The City of Visalia does not have a zoning classification for forest land ; additionally, the site is not considered forest land and is currently vacant. Therefore, the site will not conflict with any forest land.
d) There is no forest land currently located on the site. e) The project site is located directly at the northwest corner of Akers Street and Riggin Avenue and is bounded by properties within City Limits on all sides. The surrounding area is primarily developed with Residential and Quasi-Public uses. The project will not result in the conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or the conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
III. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
2 a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 1 b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? 1 c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 1 d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
a) The project site is in an area that is under the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). The project itself does not disrupt implementation of the San Joaquin Regional Air Quality Management Plan and will therefore not be a significant impact.
The Project proposes a GPA and corresponding COZ within a 21-acre site. The Project proposes eliminating the Parks / Recreation designation on the site and establishing a Commercial Mixed Use designation on the entire site. The Project will not change the amount of urbanized land uses allowed on the site, and will not change the type of uses toward uses that would be inconsistent with the development pattern of the city . As such, the Project is expected to have a less than significant impact regarding conflicting with or obstructing implementation of any applicable air quality plan.
b) Future d evelopment of site under the Visalia General Plan may result in emissions that exceed thresholds established by the SJVAPCD for PM10 and PM2.5. The change in land use and zoning itself will not result in emissions that violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations as it is solely the site’s allowed land use designations.
The Project proposes a change in General Plan and Zoning maps only and will have no direct impact on air quality, as it will not generate any construction or development. When future development is proposed on the Project site, the City will undertake CEQA review and assess potential impacts on air quality, including emissions of criteria pollutants and pollutant concentrations near sensitive receptors.
All future projects will be required to adhere to SJVAPCD rules and regulations and City requirements for construction related activities to ensure compliance with the attainment or maintenance plans. Applicable standard requirements and best management practices include, but are not limited to, implementation of a dust control and management plan.
Evaluation of air quality impacts may be required if certain project types are proposed near sensitive receptor land uses. Project types subject to this requirement include certain types of gasoline dispensing facilities.
In addition, future development of the project will be subject to the SJVAPCD Indirect Source Review (Rule 9510) procedures. The Applicant will be required to obtain permits demonstrating compliance with Rule 9510, or payment of mitigation fees to the SJVAPCD. Per the SJVAPCD, an Air Impact Assessment was completed for the project and the District has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements and as such the project complies with the emission reduction requirements of District Rule 9510 and is not subject to payment of off-site fees.
Tulare County is designated non-attainment for certain federal ozone and state ozone levels. c) Future development of site under the Visalia General Plan may result in emissions that exceed thresholds established by the SJVAPCD for PM10 and PM2.5. The change in land use and zoning itself will not result in emissions that violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations as it is solely the site’s allowed land use designations.
The Project proposes a change in General Plan and Zoning maps only and will have no direct impact on air quality, as it will not generate any construction or development. When future development is proposed on the Project site, the City will undertake CEQA review and assess potential impacts on air quality, including emissions of criteria pollutants and pollutant concentrations near sensitive receptors.
All future projects will be required to adhere to SJVAPCD rules and regulations and City requirements for construction related activities to ensure compliance with the attainment or maintenance plans. Applicable standard requirements and best management practices include, but Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
are not limited to, implementation of a dust control and management plan.
Evaluation of air quality impacts may be required if certain project types are proposed near sensitive receptor land uses. Project types subject to this requirement include certain types of gasoline dispensing facilities.
In addition, future development of the project will be subject to the SJVAPCD Indirect Source Review (Rule 9510) procedures. The Applicant will be required to obtain permits demonstrating compliance with Rule 9510, or payment of mitigation fees to the SJVAPCD. Per the SJVAPCD, an Air Impact Assessment was completed for the project and the District has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements and as such the project complies with the emission reduction requirements of District Rule 9510 and is not subject to payment of off-site fees.
Tulare County is designated non-attainment for certain federal ozone and state ozone levels. d) The proposed GPA and COZ has no potential to generate odors, as no development will occur. The proposed GPA and COZ would facilitate commercial development, which typically do not emit odors that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. CEQA review of future development onsite will include analysis of the types of commercial uses proposed, to assure that no significant odors are emitted, or propose mitigation measures should the use generate such odors.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
1 a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1 b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1 c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
1 d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
1 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
1 f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
a) The proposed GPA and COZ will have no impact on any sensitive species, because no development is proposed. Future project proposals will be required by the City to undergo review under CEQA, including the analysis of impacts to any on-site resources if applicable. City-wide biological resources were evaluated in the Visalia General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for conversion to urban use.
b) The project is not located within an identified sensitive riparian habitat or other natural community.
The project site is more than one mile from any natural river (i.e. St. Johns River) or creek (i.e. Mill Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
Creek).
In addition, City -wide biological resources were evaluated in the Visalia General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR concluded that certain sensitive natural communities may be directly or indirectly affected by future development within the General Plan Planning Area, particularly valley oak woodlands and valley oak riparian woodlands. Such effects would be considered significant. However, the General Plan contains multiple policies, identified under Impact 3.8 -2 of the EIR, that together work to reduce the potential for impacts on woodlands located within in the Planning Area. With implementation of these policies and being that the project is not located within or adjacent to an identified sensitive riparian habitat or other natural communities, including woodlands, impacts on woodlands will be less than significant. c) The project contains a section of the Modoc Ditch which is identified as a riverine feature in the National Wetland Inventory (NWI). At the site visit, it was observed that the irrigation canal has a bare-ground bottom substrate and would not provide suitable habitat for any special -status aquatic species.
The project is not located within or adjacent to federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. City -wide biological resources were evaluated in the Visalia General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR concluded that certain protected wetlands and other waters may be directly or indirectly affected by future development within the General Plan Planning Area. Such effects would be considered significant. However, the General Plan contains multiple policies, identified under Impact 3.8 -3 of the EIR, that together work to reduce the potential for impacts on wetlands and other waters located within the Planning Area.
With implementation of these policies, impacts on wetlands will be less than significant. d) The Project proposes only a map change and will not impact any wildlife movement or corridors.
The project would not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
Citywide biological resources were evaluated in the Visalia General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR concluded that the movement of wildlife species may be directly or indirectly affected by future development within the General Plan Planning Area. Such effects would be considered significant. However, the General Plan contains multiple policies, identified under Impact 3.8-4 of the EIR, that together work to reduce the potential for impacts on wildlife movement corridors located within the Planning Area. With implementation of these policies, impacts on wildlife movement corridors will be less than significant. e) The project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. The City has a municipal ordinance in place to protect valley oak trees. No valley oak trees are located on site.
f) There are no local, regional or state habitat conservation plans for the area.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
1 a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 15064.5?
1 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 15064.5?
1 c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
a) The proposed GPA and COZ have no potential to impact historic resources, because the Project consists only of a map change, and no development will occur. However, future development proposed on the site, which will be subject to review under CEQA, could impact resources. b) The proposed GPA and COZ have no potential to impact archaeological resources, because the Project consists only of a map change, and no development will occur. However, future development proposed on the site, which will be subject to review under CEQA, could impact resources.
c) The Project proposes a map change only and will have no impact on disturbing human remains.
Future development onsite will be subject to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which states that if human remains are encountered during site disturbance, all activity shall stop until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately and notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) if the remains are determined to be prehistoric.
NAHC will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD), who may inspect the site of the discovery with the landowner’s permission within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC. Compliance with the requirements of state and local laws will ensure any potential impact to inadvertent discoveries of human remains due to future site development are reduced to less than significant levels.
VI. ENERGY
Would the project:
2 a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? 1 b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
a) The Project proposes a general plan amendment (GPA) and a change of zone (COZ) on the 21- acre subject property and will not involve any development or energy consumption related to construction or operation. When future development is proposed onsite, its design and construction will be subject to the state Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Energy Code, Title 24, Part 6), which serves to ensure the economical and wise use of energy resources during construction and operational phases.
b) The project will not conflict with or obstruct any state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The proposed project will comply with all state and local policies related to energy efficiency.
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
1 i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map , issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
1 ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
1 iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 1 iv) Landslides?
1 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil? 1 c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
1 d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
1 e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 1 f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
a) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ and does not propose any development. The Project will have no impact on geology and soils. The State Geologist has not issued an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Map for Tulare County. The project area is not located on or near any known earthquake fault lines or areas prone to seismic activity or landslides. Therefore, the project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts involving earthquakes. b) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21-acre subject property and does not propose any development. Any future d evelopment of this site will require movement of topsoil. Existing City Engineering Division standards require that a grading and drainage plan be submitted for review to the City to ensure that on- and off-site improvements will be designed to meet City standards. c) The project area is relatively flat and the underlying soil is not known to be unstable and have a low capacity for landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Soils in the Visalia area have few limitations regarding development. Due to low clay content and limited topographic relief, soils in the Visalia area have low expansion characteristics. d) Due to low clay content, soils in the Visalia area have an expansion index of 0 -20, which is defined as very low potential expansion.
e) Future development will not include any development that would utilize the need for septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems since City standards require that sanitary sewer lines be installed and utilized for the disposal of wastewater at this site. f) There are no unique geological features, and no known paleontological resources located within the project area. If some potentially unique paleontological or unique geological resources are unearthed during future development, all work should cease until a qualified professional paleontologist can evaluate the finding and make necessary mitigation recommendations.
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
1 a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
1 b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
a) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21 -acre subject property and will not generate any development or greenhouse gas emissions. The proposed GPA and COZ will not conflict with any state and local plan, policy and regulation aimed at reducing GHG emissions.
The City has prepared and adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP), which includes baseline GHG emissions inventories, reduction measures, and reduction targets consistent with local and State goals. The CAP was prepared concurrently with the proposed General Plan and its impacts are also evaluated in the Visalia General Plan Update EIR. The Visalia General Plan and CAP both include policies that aim to reduce the level of GHG emissions emitted in association with buildout conditions under the General Plan.
b) The State of California has enacted the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), which included provisions for reducing the GHG emission levels to 1990 “baseline” levels by 2020 and to a level 80% below 1990 baseline levels by 2050 . In addition, the State has enacted SB 32 which included provisions for reducing the GHG emission levels to a level 40% below 1990 baseline levels by 2030.
The proposed project will not impede the State’s ability to meet the GHG emission reduction targets under AB 32. Current and probable future state and local GHG reduction measures will continue to reduce the project’s contribution to climate change. As a result, the project will not contribute significantly, either individually or cumulatively, to GHG emissions.
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
1 a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
1 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
1 c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 1 d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
1 e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? 1 f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
1 g) Expose people or structures , either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
a) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the subject property and will have no impact on hazards or hazardous materials. The GPA and COZ would only change the acreage of park and commercial designations on-site. No hazardous materials are anticipated with the project as currently proposed. b) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the subject property and will have no impact on hazards or hazardous materials. The GPA and COZ would only change the acreage of park and commercial designations on-site. No hazardous materials are anticipated with the project as currently proposed. c) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the subject property and will have no impact on hazards or hazardous materials. The GPA and COZ would only change the acreage of park and commercial designations on-site. No hazardous materials are anticipated with the project as currently proposed.
The closest school to the Project site is Ridgeview Middle School, located directly north of the site. d) The project area does not include any sites listed as hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65692.5.
e) The Tulare County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan shows the project area is located outside the Airport Influence Area and the Airport Safety Zones. Therefore, the project will not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. f) The project will not interfere with the implementation of any adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan.
g) There are no wildlands within or near the project area.
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
1 a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
1 b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? 1 c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
1 i) result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; 1 ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
1 iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; 1 iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
1 d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? 1 e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
a) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21-acre subject property and does not propose any development. The Project will have no impact on surface or ground water quality, nor violate any water quality standards or wastewater discharge requirements. The proposed map change onsite will have no impact on groundwater supplies or recharge and will not impede sustainable Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
groundwater management, nor conflict with a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
The project will not violate any water quality standards of waste discharge requirements. Future development of the project site would be required to meet the City’s improvement standards for directing storm water runoff to the existing City storm water drainage system, consistent with the City’s adopted City Storm Drain Master Plan.
b) The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies in the project vicinity. Future development of the project site will be served by a water lateral for domestic, irrigation, and fire protection use.
The project area overlies the southern portion of the San Joaquin unit of the Central Valley groundwater aquifer. Future d evelopment within the project area will result in an increase of impervious surfaces, which might affect the amount of precipitation that is recharged to the aquifer.
As the City of Visalia is already largely developed and covered by impervious surfaces, the increase of impervious surfaces through this project will be small by comparison. Any future project therefore might affect the amount of precipitation that is recharged to the aquifer. The City of Visalia’s water conversation measures and explorations for surface water use over groundwater extraction will assist in offsetting the loss in groundwater recharge. c) The project will not result in substantial erosion on - or off-site. Future development of the site will not alter the course of any rivers or streams as neither are located near the site.
Development of the site has the potential to affect drainage patterns in the short term due to erosion and sedimentation during construction activities and in the long term through the expansion of impervious surfaces. The City’s existing standards may require the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with the SWRCB’s General Construction Permit process, which would address erosion control measures.
The project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site. The development of the site will also not impede or redirect flood flows.
Development of the site will create additional impervious surfaces, such as streets. However, existing and planned improvements to storm water drainage facilities as required through the Visalia General Plan policies will reduce any potential impacts to a less than significant level.
The project will not create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
The development will be required to meet the City’s improvement standards for directing storm water runoff to the existing City storm water drainage system; consistent with the City’s adopted City Storm Drain Master Plan.
d) The project area is not located within a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone.
The project area along with the entirety of the City of Visalia lies within the dam inundation area of Terminus Dam, located approximately 35 miles to the east from the project site. In the case of dam failure, people and structures would be exposed to flooding risk and potentially pollutants. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
e) The project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. The Visalia General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has already considered the environmental impacts of the placement of people and structures to an area at risk of dam failure. The General Plan contains multiple policies that address the issue, and the County of Tulare maintains the Tulare County Hazard Mitigation Plan and a Mass Evacuation Plan that will help to reduce the impact.
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
Because there is still a significant impact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was previously adopted with the Visalia General Plan Update EIR.
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
1 a) Physically divide an established community?
2 b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
a) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21-acre subject property and does not propose any development. The Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, surrounded by public roadways on the north, east and south, and similar vacant land on the west. The Carleton Acres Specific Plan applies to private property located directly west of the site. The Specific Plan’s land use and circulation concept illustrates a future local roadway to be developed on the west side of the Project site adjacent to the Specific Plan area. Since this area will operate independently, it will not be physically divided by future development on the Project site. No impact will occur. b) The Visalia General Plan designates land use categories to the property, and includes objectives and policies that guide growth within the Planning Area. Currently the General Plan designates the entire 21-acre Project site for Parks/Recreation. The City’s Zoning Map further zones the property as Quasi-Public (QP). While General Plan Table 9 -1, Consistency Between the Plan and Zoning, states that the Consistent Zoning District to the Parks/Recreation General Plan Land Use Designation is PR, the Zoning Map currently does not utilize a PR designation. Rather, the QP zone is the most consistent zoning district to this land use designation, based upon the QP zone district’s Purpose and intent (Municipal Code Section 17.52.010) and Permitted uses (Municipal Code Section 17.52.030), which support parks and uses providing community service.
The proposed GPA and COZ would result in the establishment of approximately 21 acres of Commercial Mixed Use land use and zoning designation and elimination of approximately 21 acres of Parks/Recreation land use designation and QP zoning designation at this location. The City of Visalia’s General Plan and Zoning ordinance do not contain any policies or regulation that would otherwise regulate the placement or location of the Commercial Mixed Use designation at this location.
General Plan Policy PSCU-P-5 calls for the creation of a new community park to be built in and to serve the northwest quadrant. The policy generally states that the park shall be in the northwest, and the facility map shown as Figure 5 -1 identifies the 21-acre Project site as the potential location of the community park. Policy PSCU -P-5 further states that community parks are intended to include resources beyond those found at neighborhood parks, such as a community center building, reserved picnic facilities, tennis courts, aquatic center, and/or outdoor concert area.
The current size of this parcel is significantly larger than the policy guideline of “5 to 12 acres or more” for community parks. While the proposed GPA and COZ would eliminate the potential of this location to develop as a community park, c urrently there are two other undeveloped Park/Recreation land use designations in the northwest quadrant of at least five acres in size that could facilitate a community park . These sites are 15 acres near the northeast corner of Demaree Street & Pratt Avenue and 10 acres fronting the future Riverway Avenue extension north of Modoc Basin. Both designated sites could facilitate the northwest quadrant’s community park based on their acreage. Therefore, the Project will not result in a conflict with this General Plan policy.
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
1 a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state?
1 b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
a) No mineral areas of regional or statewide importance exist within the Visalia area. b) There are no mineral resource recovery sites delineated in the Visalia area.
XIII. NOISE
Would the project result in:
1 a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
1 b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 1 c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
a) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21-acre subject property and does not propose any development. The Project will have no impact on noise. When future development is proposed onsite, noise impacts will be analyzed during the CEQA review and building permit processes. The City may require the preparation of site -specific noise studies to assess impacts from roadway noise, as appropriate. Should noise levels on the Project site require mitigation, there are a variety of means such as noise attenuation walls and limiting the hours of operation on activities.
Future development of the site will result in noise generation typical of urban development, but should remain within the standards established in the City of Visalia’s General Plan or Noise Ordinance. Noise levels would increase temporarily during construction of the site b ut should remain within noise limits and will be restricted to the allowed hours of construction defined by the City of Visalia Noise Ordinance. Temporary increase in ambient noise levels is less than significant.
Furthermore, the Visalia General Plan contains multiple policies, identified under Impact N -P-3 through N-P-5, that work to reduce the potential for noise impacts to any sensitive land uses. With implementation of Noise Impact Policies and existing City Standards, noise impacts to new noise sensitive land uses would be less than significant.
b) The Project will have no impact on noise. Ground-borne vibration or ground -borne noise levels could occur in the future because of construction activities associated with any development. Any construction activities will be temporary and will not expose persons to such vibration or noise levels for an extended period; thus, the impacts will be less than significant. There are no existing uses near the project area that create ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels. c) The project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area nor within the Airport Safety Zones nor near a private airstrip and therefore will not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
1 a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
1 b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
a) The project will not directly induce substantial population growth that is more than what is planned in the General Plan. The proposed GPA and COZ would reduce the area designated for park development and increase the area designated for commercial development onsite. Since there are no residential uses involved, there is no difference in population growth compared to that under the existing land use designations. The Project would not induce unplanned population growth either directly or indirectly. No impact would occur.
b) The Project and any future development will not displace any housing or people as the proposed site is currently vacant.
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
1 a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
1 i) Fire protection?
1 ii) Police protection?
1 iii) Schools?
1 iv) Parks?
1 v) Other public facilities?
a)
i. Current fire protection facilities are located at Visalia Station 56 and can adequately serve the site without a need for alteration. Impact fees will be paid upon future development to mitigate the project’s proportionate impact on these facilities.
ii. Current police protection facilities can adequately serve the site without a need for alteration.
Impact fees will be paid upon future development to mitigate the project’s proportionate impact on these facilities.
iii. The Project will have no impact on public services. Future development proposed on the Project site will be assessed under CEQA, to determine whether it will impact public services. The area surrounding the Project site is partially developed and in an area that already receives public services.
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
iv. The Project will have no impact on public services. Future development proposed on the Project site will be assessed under CEQA, to determine whether it will impact public services. The area surrounding the Project site is partially developed and in an area that already receives public services.
v. Other public facilities can adequately serve the site without a need for alteration.
XVI. RECREATION
1 a) Would the project i ncrease the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
1 b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
a) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21-acre subject property and involves no development. There will be no impact on recreational facilities. Future development may contribute to park impact fees , which would cover the additional costs associated with providing parks and recreational services. These issues will be reviewed under CEQA as future development projects are proposed.
b) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21-acre subject property and involves no development. There will be no impact on recreational facilities.
XVII. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC
Would the project:
1 a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
1 b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? 1 c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 1 d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
a. The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21-acre subject property and involves no development. There will be no impact on transportation. Future development may contribute to transportation impact fees, and would be required to address its traffic impacts in the CEQA review process.
The development which could occur under the Project would generate additional commercial trips, but reduced park/recreation trips. Since the type and density of development is not known at this time, it would be entirely speculative to predict trip generation for the commercial designation on the Project site. A Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) will be required per the City Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines if the development would generate a net increase of 100 or more peak hour vehicle trips. The TIA will include mitigation measures where necessary, including fair share contributions.
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
There are existing bike lanes on Riggin Avenue , immediately east of the Project site. When development occurs, it will be required to extend these bike lanes along the Project frontage, consistent with City requirements.
Visalia Transit provides a bus service to the city. Existing service on route #7 includes a stop at the fronting intersection. As the community develops, including the Project site, additional stops will be provided to support ridership.
b. Under SB 743, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 was amended December 2018, stating that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. A lead agency may use models or other methods to analyze a project’s VMT quantitatively or qualitatively.
The City of Visalia, in determining the significance of transportation impacts for land use projects and for compliance with CEQA , recognizes the adopted City of Visalia Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) Thresholds and Implementation Guidelines (LSA, 2021, herein referred to as “Guidelines”) recommended threshold as the basis for what constitutes a significant or less than significant transportation impact.
The proposed GPA and COZ will have no impact on VMT. The development of park and commercial projects in the future will require a VMT analysis. At the time that a development is proposed, its impact on regional VMT will be analyzed, to ensure that if any significant VMT impacts were to occur, they could be reduced to less than significant levels. It should be noted, however, that the adjacency of residential, commercial, and park land uses, being that the Project site is surrounded by residential uses , tends to reduce VMT because of the synergistic relationship between where people reside and where they work and shop. c. The GPA and COZ will only result in a map change, and no development will occur. Future development will be subject to City standards regarding roadway improvements, parking, and emergency access, either through CEQA or through conditions of approval.
The Project site is in the established street system of the city and region, and future development is not expected to interfere with the system.
d. Future development on the Project site will be required to meet City design standards for adequate access by emergency vehicles and comply with all applicable fire code and ordinance requirements for geometric design and site access.
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
1 i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or 1 ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code § 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
The City has conducted formal government-to-government consultation with tribes under SB 18. As a result of that consultation effort, the City received one letter from the Table Mountain Rancheria, stating Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
that the project site is beyond their area of interest. No other correspondence was received from any other tribes. It is important to note, as described in Section V., that the proposed Project will not include any ground disturbance, and future development will be subject to future CEQA review, and mitigation as needed for project-specific impacts.
Therefore, no impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required at this time.
The proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe. a) The site is not listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). b) The site has been determined to not be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
1 a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? 1 b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
1 c) Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
1 d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? 1 e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
a) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21 -acre subject property and involves no development. The Project will have no impact on utilities. Future development will consider utilities as part of the CEQA review and land use application process.
The Visalia wastewater treatment plant has a current rated capacity of 22 million gallons per day but currently treats an average daily maximum month flow of 12.5 million gallons per day. With the completed project, the plant has more than sufficient capacity to accommodate impacts associated with the project. The proposed project will therefore not cause significant environmental impacts.
The development onsite will be required to install City storm water drainage lines that handle on - site and street runoff. Usage of these lines is consistent with the City Storm Drain Master Plan.
These improvements will not cause significant environmental impacts. The project also does not require the relocation or construction of new or expanded electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications.
b) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21 -acre subject property and involves no development. The Project will have no impact on utilities. California Water Service Company Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
oversees the Project site as part of their long-range planning, accounting for local population growth and development trends in the Project area.
c) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21 -acre subject property and involves no development. The Project will have no impact on wastewater. The City has determined that there is adequate capacity existing to serve the site’s projected wastewater treatment demands at the City wastewater treatment plant upon future development of the project. However, t he real impacts associated with the City’s wastewater system will be assessed when development is known and can be quantified.
d) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21 -acre subject property and involves no development. The Project will have no impact on solid waste disposal. Future commercial customers on the Project site will be assessed fees for solid waste service. The transfer stations and landfills in the region currently have sufficient capacity to accommodate future development.
Future development on the Project site will be required to analyze demand and capacity for solid waste disposal as part of the CEQA process.
e) The Project proposes a GPA and COZ on the 21 -acre subject property and involves no development. The Project will have no impact on solid waste disposal. The project will be able to meet the applicable regulations for solid waste. Removal of debris from future construction will be subject to the City’s waste disposal requirements.
XX. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
1 a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 1 b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
1 c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? 1 d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
a) The proposed GPA and COZ will have no impact on wildfire hazards, as no development is proposed. The project will not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
b) The project site is located on a flat area of agriculture and urban land which is at little risk of fire. c) The future development of the site will include the development of infrastructure such as roads, sewer lines, power lines and utilities, however all improvements would be subject to City standards and Fire Marshal approval. The proposed project would not exacerbate fire risk. d) The project site is flat and therefore is not susceptible to downslope or downstream flooding or landslides as a result of post-fire instability, or drainage changes.
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1 a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self -sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 2 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
2 c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
a) As described above, the Project proposes a map change only and does not involve any development or construction. There will be no impact on biological and cultural resources. b) This site was evaluated in the Program EIR ( SCH No. 2010041078) for the City of Visalia General Plan Update for the area’s conversion to urban use. The City adopted mitigation measures for conversion to urban development. Where effects were still determined to be significant a statement of overriding considerations was made.
c) This site was evaluated in the Program EIR ( SCH No. 2010041078) for the City of Visalia General Plan Update for conversion to urban use. The City adopted mitigation measures for conversion to urban development. Where effects were still determined to be significant a statement of overriding considerations was made.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference:
Section 65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21083, 21083.05, 21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21095, and 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino,(1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.
Revised 2019
Authority: Public Resources Code sections 21083 and 21083.09 Reference: Public Resources Code sections 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3/ 21084.2 and 21084.3
Environmental Document No. 2026-14
City of Visalia Community Development
DETERMINATION OF REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X _ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on the attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
_ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
_ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
_ I find that as a result of the proposed project no new effects could occur, or new mitigation measures would be required that have not been addressed within the scope of the Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2010041078).
The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the City of Visalia General Plan was certified by Resolution N o. 2014-37 adopted on October 14, 2014 . THE PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WILL BE UTILIZED.
April 21, 2026
Brandon Smith, AICP Date
Environmental Coordinator