HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - February 15, 2006 I-01 PHAGENDA ITEM I"1
CITY OF LODI
IV COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing to consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation of approval of the requestfor a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Award 65 medium density Growth
Management Allocation units and a Rezonefrom R -MD,
Residential Multi Familyto PD(38), Planned Development
Number 38 for the "Miller Ranch Development Project" a 65 -lot
medium density single-family residential subdivision located
on the north side of Harney Lane between Panzani Way and
Melby Drive (File Nos. ND -05-01, GM05.00, Z-05-04, Jeffrey
Kirst on behalf of Tokay Development, applicant).
MEETING DATE: February 15,2006
PREPARED BY: Lynette Dias and Charity Wagner, LSAAssociates, Inc.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council approve the Planning Commission's
recommendation to approve the request of Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay
Development, for Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND -05-01) as adequate environmental
documentation, Allocation of 65 medium density Growth Management Allocation units (GM05-
003) and a Rezone from R -MD, Residential Multi Family to PD(38), Planned Development
Number 38 (Z-05-04) for the "Miller Ranch Development Project." Staff further recommends
that two additional conditions be added by the Council (as explained under "FUNDING) to pay
for the processing of this project as follows:
17. Subsequent Staff review of above required plans, elevations, fencing, walls, public
lane surfaces, etc., shall require payment of fees at the hourly rate of City Staff
conducting said review.
18. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the full cost of outside planning consultant
fees payable by the City for work performed for review analysis and preparation of
reports for the project.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On January 25,2006, the Planning Commission reviewed
and adopted resolutions recommending that the City
Council conditionally approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Growth Management
Allocations and Zone Change applications for the "Miller Ranch Development Project", located
at 349, 401 and 415 Harney Lane, on the north side of Harney Lane between Panzani Way and
Melby Drive. Project analysis and background information is provided in the attached Planning
Commission staff report.
APPROVED:
Blair Kin , City Manager
The Miller Ranch Development Project would create 65 -lots for the development of 65 single
family homes. The Planning Commission found that the proposed project would not have a
significant impact on the environment; that the land is physically suitable for the proposed
development; that the project would be consistent with the General Plan and complimentary to
surrounding land uses; and that the project would further the City's efforts of developing
appropriate land uses within the City limits.
Staff recommends that the Council confirm the recommendations of the Planning Commission
for approval of the proposed project by adopting the attached resolutions of approval for MND -
05 -01, GM 05-003 and to introduce the Ordinance to approve 2-05-04.
FISCAL IMPACT: Provided the City Council approves the attached resolution there will be
no impactto the City's General Fund.
FUNDING: The Planning Commission recommended conditions as part of this project
call for subsequent staff review of various specific details of the project to
insure quality and compatibility with the surrounding area (e.g. landscape plans, elevations,
fencing, walls, public lane surfaces). There is no clear existing City ordinance which requires
the applicant to pay for staff costs to review and approve these specific details.
When this application was submitted to the City both the Community Development Directorand
City Planner positions were vacant. In order to process this application in a timely manner, the
City hired LSA to provide contract planning services. This resulted in an added cost to the City.
Staff recommends the applicant pay for the contract planning costs of LSA for their work on this
application less fees paid by the applicant.
Two additional conditions (17 and 18 noted above) are recommended by staff to insure that this
new development pays for the costs of processing its planning approvals.
Ruby Pa' , Interim Finance Director
}
�r
15,0 K,
CW/RH/kc
Randy Hatch
Community Development Director
Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report,
Draft Minutes of 1/25 Public Hearing &
Draft Resolutionsfor MND -05-01 & GM -05-003
Draft Ordinance for 2-05-04
CITY OF LODI
PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
MEETING DATE:
January 25, 2006
APPLICATION NOS:
Mitigated Negative Declaration 05-01
Growth Management Allocations 05-003
Zone Change 05-04
REQUEST:
The request of Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay Development for
Growth Management Allocations, a Zone Change and associated
Mitigated Negative Declaration to permit and construct 65
single-family dwelling units on the north side of Harney Lane
between Panzani Way and Melby Drive.
LOCATION:
349, 401 and 415 Harney Lane, Lodi.
APNs 062-290-38, 062-290-37 and 062-290-14
APPLICANT:
Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay Development
PO Box 1259
Lodi, CA 95258
PROPERTY OWNER:
Donald and Nancy Miller
4071 East Harney Lane
Lodi, CA 95240
RECOMMENDATION
1) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adoption the
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND 05-01) and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) attached herein as Attachment 5.
2) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the request of Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay
Development, recommending that the City Council award 65 medium density growth
management allocation units (GM -05-003) subject to the conditions in the attached resolution.
3) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommends approval by the City Council
for the request of Jeffrey Kirst for a Zone Change (Z-05-04: from Residential, Multiple -Family to
Planned Development) and the associated development plan subject to the conditions in the
attached resolution.
SUMMARY
The proposed project would permit the construction of 65 single-family homes on 7.92 acres on
the north side of Harney Lane, just west of The Villas, an 80 -unit single-family subdivision
currently under construction. To implement the proposed project, the applicant has submitted
applications for a zone change and growth management allocation units and subsequent
environmental assessment.
J:\CommnityDe lopment\Planning\Growth Management\2005\Mille Ranch_ StaffReport.doc
PROJECT/AREA DESCRIPTION
General Plan Designation MDR, Medium Density Residential
Zoning Designation. R -MD, Residential, Medium Density, Planned Development
(PD38) requested
Project Size. 7.92 acres
The adjacent zoning designations and land uses are as follows:
North: R-2, Single -Family Residential. A single-family residential neighborhood
borders the project site to the immediate north. Lois E. Borchardt Elementary
School is located further north of the site on Culbertson Drive.
South: AG -40, General Agriculture. The properties to the south (across Harney
Lane) are outside the City limits. San Joaquin County designates these
properties for agricultural land uses and the area is developed with
agricultural land uses and a single-family home.
West: R-2, Single -Family Residential. A single-family residential neighborhood
borders the project site to the west.
East: PD, Planned Development. A new 80 -unit single-family residential
neighborhood, The Villas, is currently under construction to the east of the
project site.
The project site consists of three parcels on the north side of Harney Lane, just west of Melby
Drive and east of Panzani Way. A vicinity map is provided as Attachment 1. The project site is
developed with two single-family homes and active agricultural uses (a cherry orchard and flower
garden). One of the single-family homes is occupied by the current property owner and the other
is currently used as the construction office for the residential project immediately east of the
project site, The Villas. The subject area is characterized by single-family homes that have been
built over the past five years, as well as, agricultural lands that are south of Harney Lane
(properties to the south, across Harney Lane, are unincorporated county properties and are zoned
for agricultural land uses).
BACKGROUND
The Planning Department originally received six separate residential growth management
applications for 2005. One of the applications submitted was rejected by City staff, as the
applicant did not have authorization from the property owner. The remaining 5 applications are
shown below in Table A. In past years, the Community Development Department has processed
all the applications for Residential Growth allocations simultaneously and presented all the
requests in one staff report to the Planning Commission and City Council. Due to the total
number of allocations being requested and the size of the two Priority 3 applications received this
year, the City Council on July 6, 2005, agreed to process the Priority 1 applications separate from
the Priority 3 applications.
J:\CommnityDe lopment\Planning\Growth Management\2005\Mille Ranch_ StaffReportdoc 2
Table A: 2005 Growth Management Applications Received
a Residential units reflected in this table include revisions made by project applicants since the original project submittals.
On June 30, 2005, the Almond Drive and Westgate Apartment applications were deemed
incomplete for lack of application materials and project information needed for staff to review
and process the Growth Management applications. As follow-up to the letters, City Staff met with
the project applicants to discuss the materials needed. The main concerns were that the Almond
Drive project exceeded the density allowed by the General Plan and the Westgate Apartment
project required a significant redesign to accommodate required right-of-way on Tokay Street and
additional design concerns related to livability. Instead of revising their applications and/or
submitting the additional materials, the Almond Drive and Westgate Apartment applicants
withdrew their applications for Growth Management Allocation units.
Therefore, this report analyzes the remaining Priority 1 application, the Miller Ranch
Development plan, as well as, it's associated Mitigated Negative Declaration and Zone Change
application.
ANALYSIS
1) Mitigated Negative Declaration
The City prepared an Initial Study (IS) to determine whether the Miller Ranch Development
project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of the Initial Study, City
staff has concluded that, with the incorporation of Mitigation Measures, the project would not
have potentially significant environmental impacts. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration reflect the independent judgment of the City.
The incorporation of Mitigation Measures would reduce any environmental impacts to a less than
significant level; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared and the
applicant has agreed to the Mitigation Measures (see page 50 of Attachment 5).
The IS/MND was circulated to responsible agencies and made available for public review for a
20 -day period from December 24, 2005 to January 13, 2006. The City received from the San
Joaquin County Air Pollution Control District stating that the District concurs with the findings of
J:\CommnityDe lopment\Planning\Growth Management\2005\Mille Ranch_ StaffReport.doc
Project Name
Priority
Residential Units a
Single-
Medium-
High-
Total
Location
Family
Density
Density
I
Miller Ranch
401 E. Harney Lane
1
0
65
0
65
2
Westgate Apartments
1515 S. Lower
1
0
0
158
158
Sacramento Road
3
Almond Drive Multi-
452 E. Almond Drive
1
0
0
16
16
Family Housing
4
Westside Project
West of Lower Sacramento
3
452
154
167
773
Road between Kettleman and
Harney Lanes
5
Southwest Gateway
West of Lower
3
862
161
340
1,363
Sacramento Road between
WID Canal and Vine
Total
1,314
380
681
2,375
a Residential units reflected in this table include revisions made by project applicants since the original project submittals.
On June 30, 2005, the Almond Drive and Westgate Apartment applications were deemed
incomplete for lack of application materials and project information needed for staff to review
and process the Growth Management applications. As follow-up to the letters, City Staff met with
the project applicants to discuss the materials needed. The main concerns were that the Almond
Drive project exceeded the density allowed by the General Plan and the Westgate Apartment
project required a significant redesign to accommodate required right-of-way on Tokay Street and
additional design concerns related to livability. Instead of revising their applications and/or
submitting the additional materials, the Almond Drive and Westgate Apartment applicants
withdrew their applications for Growth Management Allocation units.
Therefore, this report analyzes the remaining Priority 1 application, the Miller Ranch
Development plan, as well as, it's associated Mitigated Negative Declaration and Zone Change
application.
ANALYSIS
1) Mitigated Negative Declaration
The City prepared an Initial Study (IS) to determine whether the Miller Ranch Development
project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of the Initial Study, City
staff has concluded that, with the incorporation of Mitigation Measures, the project would not
have potentially significant environmental impacts. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration reflect the independent judgment of the City.
The incorporation of Mitigation Measures would reduce any environmental impacts to a less than
significant level; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared and the
applicant has agreed to the Mitigation Measures (see page 50 of Attachment 5).
The IS/MND was circulated to responsible agencies and made available for public review for a
20 -day period from December 24, 2005 to January 13, 2006. The City received from the San
Joaquin County Air Pollution Control District stating that the District concurs with the findings of
J:\CommnityDe lopment\Planning\Growth Management\2005\Mille Ranch_ StaffReport.doc
the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed project will be subject to the District Rules and
conditions of approval are recommended herein to insure said compliance.
2) Growth Management Allocations
The Growth Management Allocation Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on September
18, 1991 to regulate the growth, location, amount and timing of residential development in the
City. The Growth Management system limits the number of residential units to two percent of the
City's population, compounded annually. Once the amount of allocation units is figured, the City
requires that the allocation units be distributed among housing types as follows; 65 percent low
density, 10 percent medium density and 25 percent high density. For example, the following
explains the 448 units available for 2005:
1) Calculate two percent of the City's current population: 62,467 x 2% = 1,249.
2) Divide 1,249 by the average number of persons per household 1,249/2.789 = 447.8
3) Divide the 448 units into the 3 housing types:
65% low density = 291 units
10% medium density = 45 units
25% high density = 112 units
Applications for 2005 Growth Management Allocations
As indicated above in the background discussion, two other applications for 2005 growth
management allocation units are in the review process. These development applications are for
projects located in Priority Area 3 and include annexation into the City, as well as, preparation of
an Environmental Impact Report. Though the City has historically held one hearing for all of the
allocation applications submitted for the calendar year, for purposes of timing, Staff is presenting
the Priority Area 1 allocations independent of the Priority Area 3. This is the first year the City
has ever received a request for allocations in Priority Area 3.
The applicant has submitted an application for 65 medium density growth management allocation
units. There are only 45 medium density allocation units allocated for 2005; however, the City
has not issued all of its medium density growth management units in prior years as shown in
Table B below, which leaves a "bank of units" from previous years. The applicant intends to
construct the proposed single-family homes by the end of 2006 and requests approval of 45
medium density allocation units scheduled for 2005 and 20 medium density units available from
previous years. The Commission may wish to note that though the applicant proposes to build
single-family homes, the application requests medium density growth management units because
the project density falls in the medium density category. Table B shows a history of growth
management allocation units.
J:\CommnityDe lopment\Planning\Growth Management\2005\Mille Ranch_ StaffReportdoc 4
Table B: Growth Management Allocation History
Density
Available Allocations
Scheduled from
1989-2004
Granted
from 1989- Remaining Scheduled
2004 from 1989-2004 for 2005
Total Available
to Date
Low (0.1-7)
4,317
2,893
1,424
291
1,715
Medium (7.1-20)
664
366
298
45
343
High (20.1-30)
1,660
0a
1,660
112
1,772
TOTAL
6,641
3,259
3,382
448
3,830
a There have been high density allocations granted over the past 15 years; however they have expired or withdrawn
prior to issuance of building permits.
Priority Location Map and Point System
The Growth Management Ordinance includes a priority location map and a point system to assist
the City with prioritizing issuance of growth management allocations. The priority location map
(see Attachment 3) designates lands available for development and provides development
categories of one, two or three, with Priority Area 1 being the first priority area for development.
The priority areas are based on availability of city services (e.g., water, wastewater, storm drains,
streets, police, fire and parks). The project site is located in Priority Area 1. The point system was
established to rate projects based on various project merits in order to determine if one project
should be approved before another. Staff evaluated the proposed plan against the point system
and determined that the project scored 267 points out of 280 points possible. City Council
Ordinance No. 91-170 establishing the point system and Table D, outlining the points earned by
the proposed project, is attached herein as Attachment 4.
Growth Management Allocation Recommendation
The project site is located in Priority Area 1, scored 267 out of 280 possible points based on the
City's growth management point system and would be a well designed residential neighborhood
that is consistent with surrounding land uses. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the
request for 65 medium density growth management allocation units (45 scheduled for 2005 and
20 available from previous years).
3) Zone Change/Development Plan
This request includes a zone change of the project site from the R -MD (Residential, Medium
Density) zone to a PD (Planned Development) zone with the required development plan. The
proposed PD Zone would be consistent with the existing General Plan designation of MDR
(Medium Density Residential) because the proposed density of 8.3 units per acre is within the
MDR density range of 7.1-20 dwelling units per acre.
Intent and Requirements for a PD Zone
A PD zone is intended to allow deviations from standard zoning requirements in an effort to
create a development pattern specifically designed for a project site that allows a more desirable
and efficient use of land. The proposed project would deviate from zoning code standards of
setbacks and lot coverage to allow for the development of new residential units that would be
consistent the PD zone for The Villas project to the east.
J:\CommnityDe lopment\Planning\Growth Management\2005\Mille Ranch_ StaffReport.doc
In accordance with Municipal Code Section 17.33, a PD zone is intended to accommodate
various types of development, including residential developments; however, if a PD is proposed
for an area less than ten acres, the PD may only be approved if the following criteria apply:
a) The proposed development consists entirely of residential uses;
The proposed project is entirely residential.
b) The proposed development does not exceed twelve and one-half units per acre; and
The proposed project would construct new single-family housing at a density of 8.2 units
per acre.
c) The parcel proposed for development has certain unique characteristics that make it difficult to
develop, or the housing types proposed for the development cannot be erected within the
restrictions of other sections of the code.
The proposed project is located immediately west of The Villas Planned Development
and is designed to match its land pattern and housing types. The General Plan requires the
site to be developed with a minimum of 56 units (7.1 DU/acre) and the proposed planned
development would achieve this density by allowing flexibility of the zoning regulations.
Discussion of Proposed PD Zone
As discussed above, a PD zone allows flexibility from the standard zoning regulations. The
project site is currently zoned R -MD and development in this zone is subject to the standard
multiple family zoning code. The proposed project intends to match The Villas residential project
to the east and therefore requests that similar development standards of minimum lot size, front
setback, side setback, street side setback and street standards be modified to suit this project.
Standards that are not modified as part of the PD zone are the same as the standard zoning
requirements for the R -MD zone. Table A demonstrates the development standards proposed for
this project.
Table C: Development Standards
Standard
R -NM Zone
Proposed Project
Minimum lot size
4,000 s .ft.
2,625 s .ft.
Minimum lot width
40 feet
50 feet
Building Height
2 stories not to exceed 35 feet
2 stories not to exceed 35 feet
Front Setback
20 feet
7 feet and 6 inches to 12 feet
Side Setback
5 feet
4 feet
Street side setback
10 feet
4 feet
Rear Setback
10 feet
8 feet
Parkin Spaces
2 covered spaces per unit
2 covered spaces per unit
Lot Coverage
50%
50%
Street standards
Full size cul-de-sac
24 -foot public lane
Source: Lodi Municipal Code.
Discussion of Proposed Development Plan
Prior to the approval of any PD zone, a Development Plan must be reviewed and recommended
for approval by the Planning Commission. Once approved, the project site must be developed in
accordance with the development plan. The applicant has submitted a development plan depicting
the proposed layout and design for the 65 unit project (see Attachment 2).
J:\CommnityDe lopment\Planning\Growth Management\2005\Mille Ranch_ StaffReport.doc
The development plan shows 65 single-family lots ranging in size from 2,625 square feet to 5,203
square feet. None of the proposed units are "affordable housing units" all of the units would be
sold as individual single-family lots at market rate value.
Main access to the project site would be provided by a controlled intersection at Harney Lane and
Panzani Way. Access to the individual units would be provided by one east/west street (that
would connect to Driftwood Drive and Porta Rossa Way), two cul-de-sac streets and several
public lanes. Additionally, a utility corridor and pedestrian access way link the two northern most
public lanes to provide pedestrian access throughout the site. Street parking would be permitted
on the east/west street and cul-de-sac streets, for a total of approximately 39 spaces, and each unit
is designed with a driveway and 2 -car garage.
The 65 units proposed would be built with four
separate floor plans ranging in size from 1,708
square feet to 1,992 square feet. All units
would be two-story homes and would contain
three to four bedrooms, two and one half
bathrooms, living room, dining room and a two
car garage. Similar to The Villas project
(pictured herein), the units would have Spanish
and Mediterranean architectural design features
including tile roofs, arch ways, window
shutters, brick and stone veneer, exposed
rafters and neutral building colors. Final
elevations and landscape plans would be
subject to review and approval by the
Community Development Director prior to the
approval of building permits (see Condition
No. 28 of Attachment 8).
Zone Change Recommendation
The proposed PD zone would allow for the
development of 65 new residential units with
modified development standards, as per the
associated development plan, that allow for a
unique and well designed neighborhood that
would be consistent with surrounding
development. For these reasons, staff Sample Elevation, The Villas Plan I Source: KB Homes
recommends approval of the proposed zone
change to Planned Development with the implementation of the Miller Ranch development plan.
Sample Elevation, The Villas Plan 4 Source: KB Homes
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT
Based on the Initial Study prepared on December 23, 2005, it was determined that a Mitigated
Negative Declaration needed to be prepared for this project. Said Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration was distributed to local agencies on December 24, 2005, and a copy was available for
public review for a 20 -day comment period in accordance with CEQA and local notice
requirements. With the incorporation of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, this
project would not have potentially significant environmental impacts. Based on these findings,
Staff recommends that the Commission forward a recommendation to adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (ND -05-01) to the City Council.
1:\Community Development\Planning\Growth Management\2005\Millerltanch_Staff Reportdoc 7
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
A legal notice for the Zone Change and Growth Management Allocation Applications was
published on January 14,2006 in the Lodi News Sentinel. Thirty-four public hearing notices were
sent to all property owners of record within a 300 -foot radius of the subject property.
Additionally, a Notice of Intention (NOI) to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was
published in the Lodi News Sentinel and was posted at City Hall on December 24,2005.
CONCLUSION
The City Council has final action on the requests for Zone Change, Growth Management
Allocations and the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration; however, these requests must first
be reviewed by the Planning Commission with a recommendation forwarded to the City Council.
Therefore, staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the
public hearing and, based upon its review and consideration of the Draft IS/MND and the
evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and
oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission take the
following actions: recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND05-01);
recommend approval of the Growth Management Allocation application (GM -05-003) to permit
65 growth management allocation units (45 scheduled for 2004 and 20 from previous years); and
recommend approval of the Zone Change application (Z-05-04) to establish a Planned
Development Zone with the implementation of the development plan subject to the conditions
and mitigation measures found in the attached draft resolutions (Attachments 6,7 and 8).
ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS
• Recommend Approval of the Request with Alternate Conditions
• Recommend Denial of the Request
• Continue the Request
Respectfully Submitted.
(,✓Charity Wagner & Lynette Dias
Contract Planners, LSA Associates, Inc.
Concurred by:
q
Randy Hatch
Community Development Director
Attachments 1. Vicinity Map
2. Site Plan
3. Priority Location Map
4 Table D, Growth Management Point Calculation
5. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
6. Draft Resolution for Mitigated Negative Declaration 06-02
7. Draft Resolution for Growth Management Allocations 06-03
8. Draft Resolution for Zone Change and Development Plan 06-04
RHipp/dm/kc
1,tCan,—ily De elapmcni Pl.nning Growth Ma gem \2005'Jtille Ra h StaRRep—d.
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2
b
a �
ATTACHMENT 3
OF L
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL PRIORITY
DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT AREAS
�L1,0 R�~
ATTACHMENT 4
Table D: Growth Management Point Calculation
Category and Merit Project Score
A. Agricultural Land Conflicts
Is the project adjacent to agricultural land on one, two, three Agricultural land exists on one side, south of the 7
or all sides? project, across Hamey Lane.
B. On -Site Agricultural Land Mitigation
Has an adequate on-site buffer has been provided as a part The project includes road widening of Harney 7
of site layout for all adjacent agricultural land? Lane, which would buffer the residents from the
a 'cultural lands to the south.
C. General Location
Is the project located within Priority Area one, two or three? I The project site is located in priority area one. 200
P Rala*innehin 4n 1Pnhlir Car irac
1. General Location
Project abuts existing development on three
7
Points are awarded based on the percentage of affordable
housing units.
sides.
0
2. Wastewater
Project will extend a Master Plan line within its
8
Is the project located within 1/4 mile to 2 miles from an
existing or planned school?
boundaries.
10
3. Water
Project will extend Master Plan lines within its
8
Is the project within 3 or 4 minutes of emergency vehicle
driving time from the nearest fire station?
boundaries
5
4. Drainage
Project area is served by an existing basin and
10
Master Plan line or mains designed to serve the
project.
F. Traffic
Does the project improve circulation by providing additional
The project would connect Driftwood Drive to
5
access to adjacent development (including non -vehicular
Porta Rossa Way.
access)?
G. Housing
Points are awarded based on the percentage of affordable
housing units.
There are no low or moderate housing units
propose
0
I. Schools
Is the project located within 1/4 mile to 2 miles from an
existing or planned school?
Project is within 1/4 mile of Lois E. Borchardt
Elementary School
10
J. Fire Protection
Is the project within 3 or 4 minutes of emergency vehicle
driving time from the nearest fire station?
The project site is within 4 minutes emergency
driving time from Fire Station 3 at 2104 S. Ham
Lane.
5
Total
267
Note: Promotion of Open Space (Section E) and Affordable Housing (Section H) do not apply to single-family residential
development projects.
Source: Lodi City Council Resolution No. 91-170.
RESOLUITON NO. 91-170
A RESOLUTION OF THE LORI CITY COUNCL
ESTABLISHING CRITERIA AND A POINT SYSIB4
FOR PROCESSING TENTATIVE MAPS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
VdiTTASs the Lodi City Council, by Ordinance No. 1521, adopted
September 18, 1991 has provided for the establishment of certain
development criteria and a point system for processing of tentative
maps, parcel maps, and other approvals under the Subdivision Map Act,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Lodi City Council that the
following criteria/point system i s established:
Evaluation Criteria. (The criteria listed below have been developed
to be consistent with current City policies and State laws.)
A. Agricultural Land Conflicts Score
1. Project does not require conversion of vacant
agricultural land 10
2. Project is adjacent to agricultural land on
one side 7
3. Project is adjacent to agricultural land on
two sides 5
4. Project is adjacent to agricultural land on
three sides 3
5. Project is surrounded by agricultural land 0
B. On-site Agricultural Land Mitigation
1. Project needs no agricultural land mitigation 10
2. Adequate on-site buffer has been provided as a
part of site layout for all adjacent agricultural
land 7
3. On-site buffer provided as a part of site layout
for only part of the project 5
4. No buffer between project and adjacent
agricultural land 0
C. General Location - A map showing such priority shall be
adopted or updated from time to time by the Council, and
shall be available for inspection in the office of the
City Clerk.
1. Project located within Priority Area 1 200
2. Project located within Priority Area 2 100
3. Project located within Priority Area 3 0
-2-
D. Relationship to Public Services
1. General Location
a. Project abuts existing development on four sides 10
b. Project abuts existing development on three sides 7
c. Project abuts existing development on two sides 5
d. Project abuts existing development on one side 3
e. Project is surrounded by undeveloped land 0
2. Wastewater
a. Project i s located adjacent to existing Master
Plan sanitary sewers or mains designed to serve
the project 10
b. Project will extend a Master Plan line within
its boundaries 8
c. Project will extend a Master Plan line outside
of its boundaries but within existing right -of
way (0 if right-of-way is necessary) 4
-3-
d. Project requires construction of a my lift
station for which funds are available in the
Sewer Impact Fee Fund 0
e. Project requires construction of a new lift
station for which funds are not available
in the Sewer Impact Fee Fund
3. Water
a. Project is located adjacent to existing Master
Plan water mains or mains designed to serve
the project 10
b. Project will extend Master Plan lines within its
boundaries a
c. Project will extend Master Plan lines outside its
boundaries, but within existing right-of-way
(0 if outside right-of-way) 4
d. Project requires construction of a my water
well for which funds are available in the Water
Impact Fee Fund 0
-4-
e. Project requires construction of my water well
for which funds are not available in the Water
Impact Fee Fund
f. Project improves the existing system (i.e.,
eliminates dead -ends, loops master plan lines,
provides a well site) +1 to 3
4. Drainage
a. Project is served by an existing drainage basin
and Master Plan line or mains designed to serve
the project 10
b. Project will extend a Master Plan line or expand
an existing basin within its boundaries a
c. Project will extend a Master Plan line or expand
an existing basin outside of its boundaries but
within existing rights-of-way (0 points if
right-of-way i s necessary 4
d. Project requires construction of a new basin for
which funds are available in the Master
Drainage Impact Fee Fund 0
-5-
E
e. Project requires construction of a new basin
for which funds are not available in the
Master Drainage Impact Fee Fund
Promotion of Open Space
Points shall be awarded on the basis of the percentage of
coverage of the total loss of project area by roof area
and paved areas on-site (exclusive of streets).
20% or
less
10 points
30% or
less
a points
40%or
less
6 points
50%
4 points
60%
2 points
70% or
greater
0 points
Project owner shall submit an analysis of the percentage of
impervious surface of the site. This section shall not apply to
single-family residential.
F. Traffic
1. Project widens or improves an existing facility
2. Project will extend Master Plan streets within
i t s boundaries
10
10
U
3. Project will extend Master Plan streets outside
its boundaries, but within existing right-of-way
(0 if outside right-of-way)
4. Project requires roadway improvements for which
funds are available in the Street Impact Fee
Program
5. Project requires roadway improvements for which
funds are not available in the Street Impact Fee
Program
6. Project improves circulation by providing additional
access to adjacent development (including
non -vehicular access)
G. Housing
1. Low and Moderate Income Housing. A point credit
will be awarded with the following schedule:
-7-
4
0
+1 to 5
25% or more of units low and moderate 10
20%-24%
15%-19%
10%-14%
0
6
4
5%-9% 2
Less than 5% 1 ow and moderate or
low and moderate housing proposed 0
* Indicates project cannot proceed without provision
for construction of the appropriate facility.
H. Site Plan and Project Design --Bonus Points (These
criteria shall only apply to multi -family projects),
1. Landscaping. (Planning Commission shall evaluate
and provide between 10 and 0 points)
(These criteria shall only apply to multi -family
projects).
2. Architectural Design. (SPARC Committee shall
evaluate and provide between 10 and 0 points)
(These criteria shall only apply to multi -family
projects.)
-8-
I. Schools
1. Project is within 1/4 mile of an existing
(or proposed) elementary school 10
2. Project is within 1/2 mile of an existing
(or proposed) elementary school 5
3. Project is more than 1/2 mile from an existing or
proposed elementary school 0
4. Project is within 1/2 mile of an existing (or
proposed) middle school. 10
5. Project is within 1 mile of an existing or
proposed middle school 5
6. Project i s more than 1 mile from an existing or
proposed middle school 0
7. Project is within 1 mile of an existing or proposed
high school 10
8. Project is within 2 miles of an existing or proposed
high school 5
J. Fire Protection. (Proximity to fire protection services)
- Within 3 minute emergency vehicle driving time from
the nearest fire station 10
- Within 4 minute emergency vehicle driving time from
the nearest fire station 5
- Beyond 4 minute emergency vehicle driving time from
the nearest fire station
Dated: September 4, 1991
K
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 91-170 was passed and
adopted by the Lodi City Council in a regular meeting held September 4,
1991 by the following vote:
Ayes : Council Members - Pennino, Pinkerton, Si egl ock, Snider
and 14nchman (Mayor)
Noes : Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
Alice M. Reimche
City Clerk
91-170
RES91170/TXTA.02J
ATTACHMENT 5
Miller Ranch Development Project
DRAFT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 05-01
Growth Management Allocations and Planned
Development Zone Change
(GM -05-003 and Z-05-02)
(New Zone file # Z-05-04)
APPLICANT: Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay Development
PREPARED FOR:
City of Lodi
Community Development Department
P.O. BOX 3006
LODI, CA 95241
PREPARED BY:
LSA Associates, Inc
2215 Fifth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
(510)540-7331
www.Isa-assoc.com
December 2005
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................................
I
B. ENVIRONMENTAL FA CTORS POTENTIALL Y AFFECTED .............................................................
8
C. LEAD A GENCY DETERMINA TION ....................................................................................................
9
D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST.......................................................................................
10
E. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS...........................................................................
17
F. SOURCES...........................................................................................................................................45
G. MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE INCL UDED IN THE PROJECT AND AGREED TO BY THE
PROJECT SPONSOR AND ALL SUBSEQUENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND PERMITTEES.......
47
H. AGREEMENT BYPROJECT SPONSOR...........................................................................................
50
1
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Environmental Checklist Form
Prepared Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. Project title: Miller Ranch Development Project
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Lodi, Community Development Department
Box 3006, Lodi, CA 95241
3. Contact person and phone number:
Randy Hatch
Community Development Director
(209)333-6711
4. Project location:
349, 401 and 415 East Harney Lane
City of Lodi, San Joaquin County
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay Development
PO Box 1259
Lodi, CA 95258
6. General Plan Land Use designation: MDR, Medium Density Residential.
7. Zoning designation: R -MD, Residential Medium Density.
8. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None.
9. Description of project: The following provides a description of the Miller Ranch
Development Project.
Existing Conditions
The project area is comprised of three parcels on the north side of Harney Lane, west of
Panzani Way and east of Melby Lane. The project sites are located in the City of Lodi
and are identified as 349 Harney Lane (APN 062-290-38), 401 East Harney Lane (APN
062-290-37) and 415 East Harney Lane (APN 062-290-14). A project vicinity map is
provided as Figure 1 and photos of the project site are provided in Figure 2.
L S A FIGURE I
SOURCE: CSAR, 2005; LSA ASSOCIATES. INC., 2005
1:1LOD530 miller nmch;fguresTig_I.w (11/22105)
Miller Ranch Development Plan
Project Location
and Regional Vicinity
0
1000
2000
FEET
SOURCE: CSAR, 2005; LSA ASSOCIATES. INC., 2005
1:1LOD530 miller nmch;fguresTig_I.w (11/22105)
Miller Ranch Development Plan
Project Location
and Regional Vicinity
Single-family home at 349 East Harney Lame
Agricultural land at 401 East Harney Lane
Single-family home at 415 East Harney Lane
LSA
Miller Ranch Development Plan
Photos of the Project Site
SOURCE: LSA ASSOCIATES. INC., 2005.
I.,\LOD530 miller ranch'Agures%Fig_2,ai (11-11-05)
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
349 East Harney Lane
This parcel is approximately 0.68 acres and is developed with a single-family residence
and a detached workshop/storage building. The home is single -story and faces Harney
Lane. The home is currently inhabited by the property owners that farm the property at
401 East Harney Lane (also part of this project). The detached workshop/storage building
is located behind the home and is not entirely visible to Harney Lane. The workshop is
used for the farming operations including storage of farming equipment.
Vehicular access to the site is provided by two driveways off of Harney Lane: one
driveway leads to the garage and the other leads to the rear of the home and workshop.
There is no sidewalk on Harney Lane. The home is setback approximately 25 feet from
Harney Lane and the entire front yard is landscaped with the exception of a driveway and
walkway. There is a septic tank on site to service the residence and there are mature trees
and shrubs along the north and east property lines.
401 East Harney Lane
This parcel is approximately 6.57 acres and there are no permanent structures on-site.
The site is used for commercial agriculture, growing cherries and flowers. The cherry
trees are located in rows along the western side of the property, while the flowers occupy
the central and eastern portions of the site. There are also miscellaneous temporary
structures on-site, including a portable restroom, and storage of miscellaneous farming
materials, including wood pallets, in the northeast and northwest portions of the site.
Access to the site is provided by a dirt access road off of Harney Lane and there are no
designated parking spaces on site.
415 East Harney Lane
This parcel is approximately 0.67 acres and is developed with a single-family home and
a workshop (the home is currently utilized as a construction office for the residential
development occurring immediately east of the project site). Both structures are located
along the east property line. The home is single -story and is setback approximately 30
feet from Harney Lane. The workshop is located behind the home and is utilized as
storage area. Access to the site is provided by two driveways on Harney Lane.
Proposed Project
The proposed project includes the demolition of all existing structures on the project site
and the construction of 65 single-family units. A conceptual site plan of the proposed
project is shown in Figure 3. The General Plan designates the project site for Medium
Density Residential land uses (MDR) at a density of 7.1 to 20 dwelling units per gross
acre. At 8.2 dwelling units per gross acres, the proposed project would be consistent with
the General Plan.
To implement the proposed project, the project applicant has submitted applications for a
Zone Change (from Residential, Multiple -Family to a Planned Development Zone) and
Growth Management Allocations. The project applicant proposes the construction of 65
single-family detached homes on the project site. The units would be built and sold as
individual homes on separate lots.
I 7m
IF
��f
1�Iad'-T7�r
10
!
� �
� �
•�
ti�rw�r�w��rni
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
This project does not include any affordable housing units. All of units would be sold at
market -rate value.
The applicant has indicated that product types would match the planned development
project currently under construction to the east of the project site, The Villas. The Villas
include three floor plans varying in size from 1,700 square feet to 1,800 square feet. All
units are two-story structures, include a two -car garage, have 3 to 4 bedrooms, and 2'/z
bathrooms.
Access to the site would be provided by an existing intersection at Panzani Way and
Harney Lane and the extension of Driftwood Drive (a residential street to the west).
Internal circulation would be provided by one main east/west roadway in the project that
would connect with two existing roads, Ponta Rosa to the east and Driftwood Drive to
the west. There are also two cul-de-sac streets that would provide north/south access
within the site. Most of units would be accessed from 24 -foot public lanes.
The project includes a 20 -foot dedication for right-of-way improvements on Harney
Lane. Improvements include expansion of road way and a bicycle and pedestrian path.
All of the homes would include a two -car garage. Guest parking would be provided in
individual driveways, on the main roadway and two cul-de-sacs. No parking would be
allowed in the 24 -foot wide public lanes. Approximately 35 on -street parking spaces
would be provided.
The proposed project would include private yard for each of the units and a minimum
landscaped setback of 12 feet in the front yard (front yard setback is reduced to 7.5 feet
for homes on public lanes). Rear yards proposed with this project range from 560 to
2,240 square feet. There is no common landscape or play area proposed.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Single-family residential units are located immediately north, east and west of the project
site (homes to the east are currently under construction). One single-family home and
agriculture lands are located to the south, across Harney Lane. Property to the north and
west is zoned R-2 (Residential, Single -Family) and the property to the east is zoned PD
(Planned Development). The property south of Harney Lane is located in the County. San
Joaquin County designates these parcels as AG -40 (General Agriculture, 40 acre
minimum lot size). A project vicinity map is provided in Figure 1.
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
9
Land Use and Planning
6
Population and Housing
6
Geology and Soils
6
Hydrology and Water
Quality
6
Air Quality
6
Agricultural Resources
9 Transportation/Circulation
6 Biological Resources
6 Mineral Resources
6 Hazards
6 Noise
6 Public Services
8 Utilities and Service
Systems
6 Aesthetics
6 Cultural Resources
6 Recreation
e Mandatory Findings of
Significance
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
C. LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions ion the project have been
made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, 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 although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative DECLARATION, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further
is required.
Signature:
Date:
Printed Name: Randy Hatch, Community Development Director For: City of Lodi
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
Potentially
Potentially Less than
Significant
Significant Significant No
Impact
Unless Impact Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
❑
❑ 0 ❑
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of any
❑
❑ 0 ❑
agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to
the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat or conservation plan?
❑
❑ 0 ❑
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections?
❑
❑ 0 ❑
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by
❑
❑ 0 ❑
proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads and other infrastructure)?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction
❑
❑ 0 ❑
of replacement housing elsewhere?
III. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
❑
❑ 0 ❑
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑ ® ❑
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
❑
❑ 0 ❑
iv) Landslides?
❑
❑ 0 ❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of top soil?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
❑
❑ 0 ❑
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on -or
off landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
❑
❑ 0 ❑
Building Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
❑
❑ ❑ 0
alternate waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water.
10
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the project.
Potentially Potentially Less than
Significant Significant Significant No
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
Impact Unless Impact Impact
❑
Mitigation
plan?
Incorporated
IV. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water standards or waste discharge requirements?
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,
the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
❑
which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
❑ ❑
permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on or off-site?
❑
c) Create or contribute to run-off water which would exceed the capacity
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide
❑
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
0 ❑
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
federal Flood Hazards Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
impede or redirect flood flows?
Q Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or a dam?
j) Inundation by sieche, tsunami, or mudflow?
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the project.
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
❑
❑
0 ❑
plan?
b) Violate air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing
❑
0
❑ ❑
or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
❑
0
❑ ❑
pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an
applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
❑
0
❑ ❑
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
❑
❑
0 ❑
11
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Potentially Potentially Less than
Significant Significant Significant No
Impact Unless Impact Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in
substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
established by the county congestion management agency or
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety
risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special species status in local or regional plans, policies or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish and Game of U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
sensitive natural community identifies in local or regional plans,
policies regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local,
regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
12
City of Lodi Community Development Department
❑
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
Initial Study Checklist
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
Significant
Significant
Significant
No
materials, substances, or waste within''/. mile of an existing or
Impact
Unless
Impact
Impact
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
Mitigation
result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
0 ❑
environment?
Incorporated
❑ ❑ ❑
plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public
VIII. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
❑ ❑
residing or working in the project area?
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
❑
❑
❑
0
would be of value to the region and the residents of the State?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral
❑
❑
❑
0
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
IX. HAZARDS. Would the project:
❑
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
materials, substances, or waste within''/. mile of an existing or
0 ❑
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
❑
result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
0 ❑
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a
❑ ❑ ❑
plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public
❑
use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
❑ ❑
residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
X. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
❑
0
❑ ❑
standard established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne
❑
❑
0 ❑
vibration or ground bourne noise levels.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
❑
❑
0 ❑
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in
❑
0
❑ ❑
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
13
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
Significant
Significant
Significant
No
Impact
Unless
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such
❑
❑
❑
0
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.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project
❑
❑
❑
0
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES.
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered 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:
i) Fire protection?
❑
0
❑
❑
ii) Police protection?
❑
0
❑
❑
iii) Schools?
❑
0
❑
❑
iv) Parks?
❑
0
❑
❑
v) Other public facilities?
❑
❑
0
❑
XH. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
❑
❑
❑
0
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
❑
❑
❑
0
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which would cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
❑
❑
0
❑
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
would cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
❑
❑
0
❑
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which
❑
❑
0
❑
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?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
❑
❑
0
❑
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, State and local statutes and regulations related to
❑
❑
0
❑
solid waste?
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the project.
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❑
❑
❑
0
14
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Create a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
resource as defined in CEQA Section 15064.5?
Significant
Significant
Significant
No
0
Impact
Unless
Impact
Impact
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site
Mitigation
®
❑ ❑
or unique geological feature?
Incorporated
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
b) Substantially damage a scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
❑
❑
❑
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic
XV. RECREATION. Would the project:
highway.
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
❑
❑
® ❑
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or qualify of the site
❑
®
❑
❑
and its surroundings?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion
❑
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
❑
®
❑
❑
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
on the environment?
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Create a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
❑
❑
❑ 0
resource as defined in CEQA Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
❑
0
❑ ❑
archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Section 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site
❑
®
❑ ❑
or unique geological feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
❑
®
❑ ❑
cemeteries?
XV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
❑
❑
® ❑
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion
❑
❑
® ❑
of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
XVI. 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. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide ❑ ❑ ❑ El
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act ❑ ❑ ❑
contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural use?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
15
City of Lodi Community Development Department
a) Does the project 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 pre -history?
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).
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Significant
Impact
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
0
0
Initial Study Checklist
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
0 0
O 0 0 O
16
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
E. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
An evaluation of each environmental impact topic is provided below.
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Summary of Land Use and Planning Impacts and Miti¢ation Measures
The Lodi General Plan includes goals and policies for development and urbanization within the City limits
and the City's Sphere of Influence. The Sphere of Influence (also referred to as the planning area) includes
unincorporated areas adjacent to the City, to which the City intends to expand and urbanize. The General Plan
designates properties within the SOI for future land uses, once incorporated in the City.'
The General Plan establishes a land use pattern for development of the City and the City's Sphere of
Influence. Though a portion of the project site is currently agricultural land (cherry orchard and flower
gardens) the General Plan indicates that the project site and surrounding area (including property south of the
Harney Lane, which is within the Sphere of Influence) are planned for urbanization and development. More
specifically, the General Plan land use element designates the subject site and surrounding areas for
residential development.
The General Plan Land Use Map designates the project area as MDR (Medium Density Residential Land
Uses, 7.1-20 dwelling units per gross acre). Properties to the north, east and west are also designated for
Medium Density land uses, and have been developed as such. The Medium Density Residential land use
designation is intended for development of single-family and multiple -family units. Product types within the
MDR designation include both attached and detached units.
Properties to the south, across Harney Lane, are located in the County; however these properties are within
the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI). The General Plan designates the properties across Harney Lane as PR
(Planned Residential, seven dwelling units per gross acre).
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a physical feature
that would impair mobility within an existing community, or between a community and outlying areas. The
proposed project would include residential uses that would be surrounded by other existing residential uses.
The proposed project would not physically divide an established community.
b) Would the proposal conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of any agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal
program or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding environmental effects?
The purpose of this Initial Study is to evaluate the proposed project in compliance with CEQA and the City's
applicable environmental plans and policies. The City evaluates development projects against plans and
policies of the City's General Plan, Municipal Code and San Joaquin County's Multi -Specie Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan.2
1 Lodi, City of, 1991. General Plan. June.
2 San Joaquin County, 2001. San Joaquin's Multi -Species and Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.
17
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
The proposed project would develop a total 65 single-family detached dwelling units at an overall density of
8.2 dwelling units per gross acre (65 units/7.92 acres). The current General land use designation of Medium
Density Residential permits development of attached or detached units between 7.1-20.0 dwelling units per
gross acre. The proposed project complies with the product type and density range established by the General
Plan.
The current zoning is RMD (Residential, Medium Density), but this project includes a zone change to PD
(Planned Development). The intent of the PD zones is to allow for flexibility of traditional zoning code
standards in effort to achieve a high quality, livable project without compromising the functionality or safety
of the development. The proposed PD zone would modify the development standards of the Zoning Code to
be consistent with an existing PD zone immediately east of the project site (PD 36, The Villas). Once
amended, the proposed project would comply with the City's PD zone requirements.
The project is subject to the City's Right -to -Farm Ordinance because its proximity to agricultural lands.
c) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat or conservation plan?
The San Joaquin Council of Governments established the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan in 2000.3 The purpose of the plan is to provide a strategy for balancing
development while preventing pre -mature development of agricultural lands and protecting endangered
species in San Joaquin County. City of Lodi Municipal Code (Section 15.68 San Joaquin County Multi -
Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP) Development Fees) was adopted in 2001, in
order to implement the goals and objectives of the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation
and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), and to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development on undeveloped
lands within the city of Lodi and in San Joaquin County. The City has established a fee ordinance for
purposes of collecting fees to finance the SJMSCP. Development of the project site is subject to the payment
of fees in accordance with the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.
Mitigation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant land use impacts; no mitigation measures are
required.
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Summary of Population and Housing Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The City of Lodi's current population is 60,521. The City's General Plan (Section 2, Land Use Standards, page
2-2)4 assumes 2.25 persons per household for medium density product development. Using this average
household number, it is estimated that the proposed development would result in 146 residents. The City's
Growth Management Ordinance anticipates growth at 2 percent of the population per year. Approval of Growth
Management Allocations is required prior to issuance of building permits.
a) Would the proposal cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections?
The proposed project would result in the construction of 65 units. The estimated population that would be
generated would be approximately 146 residents (65 units x 2.25 persons per unit). The General Plan assumes
Plan.
3 San Joaquin Council of Governments, 2000. San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space
° Lodi, City of, 1991. General Plan. June.
18
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
a density of 12 dwelling units per acre when establishing growth patterns for the medium density land use
designation (Table A-3, page A-5).5 This project is 8.2 dwelling units per acre and would not exceed
population projections.
The project applicant has filed for 65 medium density growth allocation units (this project would consist of
single-family detached homes, but the units are referred to as medium density units because they fall into the
medium density land use designation density of 7.1-20 dwelling units per gross acre). There are 45 medium
density allocations available for 2005 and 298 medium density allocations available from previous years (the
City has not grown at 2 percent per year, so there are allocations/units from previous year that have not been
granted).' The applicant is requesting approval of the 45 units for 2005 and for 20 units from previous years.
b) Would the proposal induce substantial growth in area either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads and other infrastructure)?
The proposed project would generate a population of approximately 146 residents by constructing 65 new
single-family residential units in compliance with the City's General Plan land use designation. New roads
and utilities would be added to service the units within the project. The project also includes dedication of 20
feet for widening of Harney Lane, as required by the City's Public Works Department. The project does not
include extensions of major roads or infrastructure beyond what is anticipated in the General Plan.
c) Would the proposal displace substantial numbers ofpeople, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
The project site is currently developed with two single-family homes, one of which is currently used as an
office for the residential construction activities immediately east of the project site. The home that is utilized
as a residence is occupied by the property owners, who have indicated that they intend to move to another
home in the City of Lodi. The two existing units are not affordable because they are located on large parcels.
The proposed project would remove the two existing homes and replace with 65 new housing units for a net
increase of the 63 units.
Mitigation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant population and housing impacts; no mitigation
measures are required.
III. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Summary of Geologic Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The project site is located in the southern portion of the Sacramento Valley. Large coalescing alluvial fans
have developed along each side of the valley. The larger and more gently sloping fans occur on the east side
and consist of deposits derived from rock sources in the Sierra Nevada. The valley deposits are derived from
the Coast Ranges to the west and the Sierra Nevada to the east. Basement rocks composed of meta -sediments,
volcanic, and granites underlie these deposits. The valley geomorphology includes dissected uplands, low
alluvial plains and fans, river flood plains and channels, and overflow lands and lake bottoms.
5 Lodi, City of, 1991. General Plan. June.
6 Lodi, City of, 1991. Municipal Code Chapter 15.38: Growth Management Plan for Residential Development.
19
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
The project site is relatively flat and ground water is located approximately 50 feet below ground level.'
a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault; or ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Ground shaking is a general term referring to all aspects of motion of the earth's surface resulting from an
earthquake, and is normally the major cause of damage in seismic events. The extent of ground shaking is
controlled by the magnitude and intensity of the earthquake, distance from the rupture, and local geologic
conditions. Magnitude is a measure of the energy released by an earthquake; it is assessed by seismographs
that measure the amplitude of seismic waves. No faults are known to cross the City; however, ground shaking
may result from an earthquake outside the City and may cause damage to structures. The nearest seismic areas
are the Midland Fault, approximately 20 miles west of the City. Based on the inactivity status of this fault, the
project site is not identified as being in a special study zone, as would be defined by the Alquist-Priolo Act.'
The City requires that all new structures comply with California Building Code, Seismic Requirements.
Because the project site is not located in a special study zone, the Building Code requirements would provide
adequate provisions for development on the site.
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Liquefaction is the temporary transformation of loose, saturated granular sediments from a solid state to a
liquefied state as a result of seismic ground shaking. In the process, the soil undergoes a temporary loss of
strength, which commonly causes ground displacement or ground failure to occur. Since saturated soils are a
necessary condition for liquefaction, soil layers in areas where the groundwater table is near the surface have
higher liquefaction potential than those in which the water table is located at greater depths. Based on the
dense soils and that groundwater is at a depth of 50 feet, the risk of liquefaction is low.'
iv) Landslides?
The site and immediately adjacent areas are relatively flat. The potential for landslides is considered very low
on the site and vicinity and the risk of injury or death associated with land sliding is less than significant.
b) Result in substantial erosion or loss of top soil?
The proposed project will include grading and excavation to construct roadways and infrastructure; however,
the site will remain relatively flat with little change to the existing topography. To mitigate possible erosion
during construction, erosion control measures are included in Mitigation Measure GEO-1.
c) Would the project be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable
as a result of the project, and potentially result in or offsite site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
Differential settlement or subsidence could occur if buildings or other improvements were built on low -
strength foundation materials (including imported fill). Pilings are often used to anchor structures to firmer
' Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November.
8 Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991. April.
9 Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates. November.
20
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
deposits below the surface in these situations. Although differential settlement generally occurs slowly
enough that its effects are not dangerous to inhabitants, it can cause significant building damage over time.
Areas of the project sites that contain loose or uncontrolled (non -engineered) fill may be susceptible to
settlement. Although ground soils within the project area consist of strong, non -expansive soils, a
Geotechnical Investigation will be conducted to provide grading and site preparations to prevent any such
settlement of proposed buildings (see Mitigation Measure GEO-1).
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risk to life or property?
Ground soils within the project area consist of Tokay fine sandy loam and Tokay fine sandy loam hardpan
substratum. Both of these soil types have good bearing strength, are not expansive, and pose little constraint
to development. 10
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ofseptic tanks or alternate waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
The proposed project would be connected to Lodi's sanitary sewer system and would not entail the use of
septic tanks or alternative water disposal systems.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Geotechnical Investigation shall be
prepared for the project site. The project applicant shall incorporate any grading and site preparations as
recommended in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation.
IV. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Summary of Water Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Lodi and its surrounding areas are underlain by alluvial soils deposited by runoff from surrounding mountain
ranges. The alluvium is underlain with sedimentary layers that contain a major aquifer system that extends
throughout the Central Valley. The alluvium is saturated below a relatively shallow depth, making the
sedimentary layers underneath the area part of the major aquifer system that extends throughout the Central
Valley. The Mokelumne River flows along the northern boundary of the City of Lodi. The river serves to
recharge groundwater aquifers, and further to the west, provides drinking water and irrigation water to
agricultural lands and communities. City of Lodi obtains all of its fresh water supply from 24 existing water
wells that pump groundwater from the Longer San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin."
The City's General Plan EIR (Chapter 12, Hydrology and Water Quality, pages 12-3 and 12-4)12 includes
analysis and discussion of the City's water supply. In summary, the EIR found that the build out of the
General Plan would have significant adverse impacts on water supply because the cumulative demand for
water would increase by 67 percent. At the time the EIR was prepared, the City was already overdrafting from
its main water source, ground water. The General Plan EIR includes mitigation measures to reduce impacts to
water supply.
10 Lodi, General Plan Final FIR, 1991. April.
11 Brown and Caldwell, 2001. Urban Water Management Plan, City of Lodi, June.
12 Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991. April.
21
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
The project site is not located within a designated flood zone, nor are there any water bodies on the project
site.
a) Would the project violate any water standards or waste discharge requirements?
The proposed project (65 units) would discharge into surface waters at a higher volume than the current uses
on the site (two units). The project applicant will be required to prepare a Storm Water Prevention Plan
(SWPP) will be prepared for review and approval by the Public Works Department, prior to the approval of
grading permits for the proposed project (see mitigation measures below). The SWPP would be reviewed and
approved by the City to ensure that water discharge requirements are met during construction and throughout
the life of the project. The proposed project would not violate any water standards or waste discharge
requirements.
b) Substantially deplete ground water supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate ofpre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses
or planned uses for which permits have been granted?
The project site is currently developed, and includes buildings, pavement, gravel, and dirt surfaces. While
there would be more impervious surfaces associated with the proposed project, landscaped areas would be
incorporated into the proposed project to allow for groundwater recharge. Because landscape areas would be
incorporated in the project, the project would not result in a substantial reduction in the amount of ground
water; however, it will contribute to a cumulative loss of available water supply. The General Plan EIR
determined that significant cumulative impacts would result from the build out of the General Plan. Because
the proposed project would not independently have a significant affect on the available water supply, the
water supply impacts are found to be less -than -significant. (see more detailed discussion under the utilities
subsection on page 38) .
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 substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
The proposed project (65 units) would discharge into surface waters at a higher volume than the current uses
on the site (two units). Run-off discharge is discussed below under IV. e. A Storm Water Prevention Plan
(SWPP) will be required as detailed in mitigation measure HYD -4 below. The SWPP will provide
mechanisms to reduce storm water run-off during construction and throughout the life of the project. The
proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area.
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on or off site?
See discussion IV..c above.
e) Would the project create or contribute to run-off water which would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems orprovide additional substantial additional sources ofpolluted run-
off?
Construction will increase impervious surface, which will increase the volume of runoff water from the
project site. The City of Lodi municipal storm drainage system consists of an integrated system of trunk lines,
detention basins, and pump stations. Surface infrastructure such as gutters, alley, and storm ditches provide
22
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
for collection of storm water into the system. The runoff (precipitation and irrigation) would discharge to the
local storm drainage system. During periods of low runoff (not a major storm) the water will flow to a
regional -serving pump station (Beckman Park). The water is directly pumped into the Woodbridge Irrigation
District Canal adjacent to the park. During periods of intense rainfall, the runoff will spill into the detention
basin located at Salas Park (on Stockton Street northwest of the project site) where it will be held until the
storm passes. The Beckman Park pumps will then drain the basin." The City will utilize the SWPPP to ensure
that the project does not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff (see mitigation measure
HYD -4).
Utility plans are reviewed as part of the Public Works Department's review process, to confirm the capacity
of the existing drainage facilities around the project site are adequate to service the needs of the proposed
project.
J) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
See response above related to impacts to surface water quality. The project includes 65 new residential units,
which will generate typical domestic water quality impacts to ground water. Domestic impacts related to
ground water quality would include seepage of automotive emissions and leaked fluids and household and
garden chemicals into the groundwater, which is about 50 feet below the surface. These impacts are typical of
residential development and would not result in substantial impacts to water quality.
g) Would the project place housing within a 100 year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazards Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
The project site is not located in a flood hazard zone. FEMA designates the project site as Flood Zone X
(outside 100 year flood plane).
h) Would the project place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows?
See discussion IV.g above.
i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or a dam?
The proposed project consists of 65 residential units in a residential neighborhood. The project site is not
located near a body of water, a levee or a dam. No such risks of loss, injury or death would result from this
project.
fl Would the project expose people or structures to inundation by sieche, tsunami or mudflow?
The project site is not located near an ocean, lakefront or other large body of water; tsunamis or seiches are
not probable.
Mitigation Measures
13 Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November.
23
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Mitigation Measure HYD -1: As a condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the
project, the Public Works department shall review the Master Utility Plan for the site for compliance with the
City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -2: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans, the project engineer
shall provide a hydraulic analysis to the Public Works Department for review and approval so that
implementation of the proposed drainage plans will comply with the City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -3: The project shall include landscape areas, as shown titled "Revised 2005
Development Plan" prepared by Baumbach & Piazza, Inc., dated May, 2005, to allow for groundwater
recharge.
Mitigation Measure HYD -4: As a part of the compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) and associated fees would need to be submitted to
the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) providing notification and intent to
comply with the General Permit to Discharge Stone Water Associated with Construction Activity for this
project (copies of the NOI and fee payment shall be provided to the City). Prior to construction and site
grading, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for construction activities and
remediation on-site. The project applicant shall prepare a Stone Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the construction and life of the project.
The SWPPP would act as the overall program document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential
water quality impacts associated with the implementation and operation of the proposed project. The project
proponent shall prepare a SWPPP designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the
construction period of the project. The SWPPP must be maintained on-site and made available to City
inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs designed
to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include practices to minimize the contact
of construction materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhe-
sives) with stormwater. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas that keep these
materials out of the rain.
An important component of the stormwater quality protection effort is the acknowledgement of the site
supervisors and workers. To educate on-site personnel and maintain awareness of the importance of
stormwater quality protection, site supervisors shall conduct regular tailgate meetings to discuss pollution
prevention. The frequency of the meetings and required personnel attendance list shall be specified in the
SWPPP.
The SWPPP shall specify a monitoring program to be implemented by the construction site supervisor, which
must include both dry and wet weather inspections. In addition, in accordance with State Water Resources
Control Board Resolution No. 2001-046,14 monitoring would be required during the construction period for
pollutants that may be present in the runoff that are "not visually detectable in runoff.i15 RWQCB and/or City
personnel, who may make unannounced site inspections, are empowered to levy considerable fines if it is
determined that the SWPPP has not been properly prepared and implemented.
BMPs designed to reduce erosion of exposed soil may include, but are not limited to: soil stabilization
controls, watering for dust control, perimeter silt fences, placement of hay bales, and sediment basins. The
"State Water Resources Control Board, 2001. Modification of Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) National Pollutant Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated
with Construction Activity.
15 Construction materials and compounds that are not stored in water -tight containers under a water -tight roof or inside a
building are examples of materials for which the discharger may have to implement sampling and analysis procedures.
24
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
potential for erosion is generally increased if grading is performed during the rainy season as disturbed soil
can be exposed to rainfall and storm runoff. If grading must be conducted during the rainy season, the primary
BMPs selected shall focus on erosion control; that is, keeping sediment on the site. End -of -pipe sediment
control measures (e.g., basins and traps) shall be used only as secondary measures. If hydroseeding is selected
as the primary soil stabilization method, then these areas shall be seeded by September 1 and irrigated as nec-
essary to ensure that adequate root development has occurred prior to October 1. Entry and egress from the
construction site shall be carefully controlled to minimize off-site tracking of sediment. Vehicle and
equipment wash -down facilities shall be designed to be accessible and functional during both dry and wet
conditions.
The City Public Services Department shall review the SWPPP and drainage plan prior to approval of the
grading plan. City staff may require more stringent stormwater treatment measures, at their discretion.
Implementation of this mitigation would reduce the level of significance of this impact to a less -than -
significant level.
V. AIR OUALITY
Summary of Air Ouality Impacts and Miti¢ation Measures
The proposed project is located within the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). In
accordance with the City's General Plan, the City coordinates development review with SJVAPCD standards
in order to minimize impacts to air quality.
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
The proposed project would construct 65 single-family units, as intended by the general plan, and is subject to
SJVAPCD regulations. The project would not conflict or obstruct any air quality plans.
b) Would the project violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation to an existing or projected air quality violation?
The proposed project would develop 65 single-family dwelling units in the Multiple -Family Residential land
use designation. According to SJVAPCD, a single-family project with less than 152 units requires an air
quality analysis at the "Small Project Analysis Level" (SPAL). SJVAPCD has pre -calculated the emissions of
projects that qualify as SPAL and there is no possibility of exceeding air quality emission thresholds.
However, SPAL does not eliminate other factors such as toxic air contaminants, hazardous materials, asbestos
and odors resulting from project construction. The following discussion describes potential air quality
violations that could occur as a result of construction equipment exhaust emissions, fugitive dust, and long-
term vehicular emissions. 16
Project -related construction activities would include demolition, site preparation, earthmoving and general
construction. Site preparation includes activities such as general land clearing. Earthmoving activities include
cut and fill operations, trenching, soil compaction, and grading. General construction includes adding
improvements such as roadways surfaces, structures, and facilities. The emissions generated from
construction activities include dust, combustion emissions, and evaporative emissions from asphalt paving
and architectural coating applications.
2002).
16 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 1998. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. (Revised
25
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Construction activities would also result in emissions from equipment exhaust, construction -related vehicular
activity and construction worker automobile trips. Emission levels for construction would vary depending on
the number and type of equipment, duration of use, operation schedules, and the number of construction
workers. Criteria pollutant emissions of ROG and NOx from these emission sources would incrementally add
to regional atmospheric loading of ozone precursors during project construction. SJVAPCD's CEQA
Guidelines recognize that construction equipment emits ozone precursors, but indicate that such emissions are
included in the emission inventory that is the basis for regional air quality plans.
Demolition may result in airborne entrainment of asbestos, a toxic air contaminant, particularly where
structures built prior to 1980 are being demolished. Some structural components of the buildings to be
demolished may contain hazardous materials such as asbestos used in insulation, fire retardants, or building
materials, and lead-based paint. If asbestos were found to be present in building materials to be removed,
demolition and disposal would be required to be conducted in accordance with procedures specified by
SJVAPCD's regulations. Therefore, the required compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the
potential for public health hazards associated with airborne asbestos fibers or lead dust would be at less -than -
significant levels.
Construction -related fugitive dust emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the level and type of
activity, silt content of the soil, and the weather. In the absence of mitigation, construction activities may
result in significant quantities of dust, and as a result, local visibility and PMIo and PM2.5 (particulate matter)
concentrations may be adversely affected on a temporary and intermittent basis during the construction
period. In addition, the fugitive dust generated by construction would include not only PM 10, but also larger
particles, which would fall out of the atmosphere within several hundred feet of the site and could result in
nuisance -type impacts. The SJVAPCD's recommends implementation of effective and comprehensive dust
control measures rather than detailed quantification of emissions. The District considers any project's
construction -related impacts to be less than significant if the required dust -control measures are implemented.
Without these measures, the impact is generally considered to be significant, particularly if sensitive land uses
are located in the project vicinity. In the case of this project, residential land uses are located immediately
adjacent to the boundaries of the project site. Therefore, without mitigation, the impact of fugitive dust
emissions would be considered significant.
Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PMIo Prohibitions of the SJVAPCD, the following controls are
required to be implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the project. Regulation VIII is
incorporated as Mitigation Measure AIR -2.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR -1 and AIR -2 would reduce construction -related air quality
impacts to a less -than -significant level.
c) Would the project result in 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 (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
See discussion IV..b above.
d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
The proposed project would expose surrounding residential units to pollutants during construction. Mitigation
Measures AIR -1 and AIR -2 would reduce the construction related pollutants to a less -than -significant level.
26
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Air quality impacts related to the proximity of agricultural land uses to the south, across Harney Lane, include
fumes and odors from typical farming activities. The City's Right -to -Farm Ordinance requires that the new
home buyers be notified of farming activities, including odors, upon purchasing the units.
e) Would the proposal create objectionable odors effecting a substantial number ofpeople?
Some objectionable odors may be generated from the operation of diesel -powered construction equipment
and/or asphalt paving during the project construction period. However, these odors would be short term in
nature and would not result in permanent impacts to surrounding land uses, including sensitive receptors in
the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project involves residential uses, and would not involve any
component that would generate significant odors. Additionally, there are no potential odor sources within the
vicinity of the project site. Therefore, no significant impacts related to objectionable odors would result from
the proposed project.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AIR -1: The following construction equipment mitigation measures are to be implemented
at construction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions:
1. Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -fired equipment;
2. Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as recommended by the manufacturer
manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
3. Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduce emissions associated with
idling emissions;
4. Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use to 7:OOam
to 7:OOpm; and
5. Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing
of construction activity during the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways.
Mitigation Measure AIR -2: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions of the SJVAPCD,
the following controls are required to be implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the
project.
1. All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being used on a daily basis for construction
purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant,
covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.
2. All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust
emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
3. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition
activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by
presoaking.
4. During the demolition of existing buildings, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during
demolition.
5. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit
visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be
maintained.
27
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
6. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public
streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where
preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower
devices is expressly forbidden.)
7. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage
piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or
chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
8. Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the
site and at the end of each workday.
9. Site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Prevention measures
include requiring all trucks to drive over a bed of gravel to rid the tires of dirt and mud prior to exiting
the site.
VI. TRANSPORTATIONS/CIRCULATION
Summary of Transportation/Circulation Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The City reviews development projects for consistency with the General Plan Circulation Element" and the
Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan18 Access to the project site is provided via Harney Lane and SR- 99
is the nearest highway. The General Plan designates Harney Lane as a 4 -lane divided arterial (General Plan,
Figure 2-1, page 2-7). The Bicycle Master Plan shows a Class II bike path on Harney Lane. A Class II bike
path is a striped bikeway within the paved area of a road (Bicycle Master Plan, Chapter IV, page 23).
a) Would the proposal cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load
and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity, ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
According the General Plan EIR (page 9-9) the multi -family land use designation trip ratio is 6 trips per
dwelling unit.19 The proposed project would generate approximately 390 vehicle trips per day (65 units x 6
trips). The General Plan land use element assumed development of 12 units per acre for properties designated
as MDR. At 12 units per acre, the General Plan assumed the subject site would be developed with 91 units.
The proposed project is below the density anticipated by the General Plan. Additionally, the General Plan
designates Harney Lane as a four -lane divided arterial. The proposed project includes dedication of 20 feet on
the north side of Harney Lane to accommodate the future right-of-way. The proposed project will not increase
vehicle trips or traffic congestion beyond the level anticipated by the General Plan and the project will be
subject to traffic impact fees, as required by the General Plan EIR (page 9-9).
b) Would theproject exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by
the county congestion management agency or designated roads or highways?
As stated above under VI. a, the proposed development is less dense than anticipated by the general plan and
would only produce approximately 390 vehicle trips per day. The proposed project would not exceed service
standards for Harney Lane or other adjacent roadways.
17 Lodi, General Plan, 1991.
18 Brady and Associates, Inc., 1994. Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. November 16.
19 Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991. April.
28
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Additionally, Caltrans has reviewed the proposed project and determined that the project would not create a
major impact on SR -99; however, it would contribute to impacts when combined with existing and proposed
development in the City of Lodi. To mitigate its share of impacts on SR -99, the proposed project would be
subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis (see Mitigation Measure TRAF-2).
c) Would the project result in a change to air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or
a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
The proposed project is not in the vicinity of a flight path. No impacts to air traffic would occur as a result of
the proposed project.
d) Would the project increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
The main access to the project would be provided by one controlled intersection at Harney Lane and Panzani
Way. Additionally, the project can be accessed from Driftwood (existing street) and Ponta Rosa (street
currently under construction). The project complies with City standards for street size and type and would
reduce the number of driveways on Harney Lane. The project would slightly increase vehicular traffic (390
trips per day), but access to the site would not burden the traffic pattern for farm equipment associated with
the agriculture uses to the south.
e) Would the proposal result in inadequate emergency access?
The project would be accessed by one controlled intersection on Harney Lane. Access to the individual units
within the project site is provided by one east/west street, two cul-de-sac streets and several public lanes. The
main east/west street right-of-way is 50 feet and parking is permitted on both sides of the street. The cul-de-
sac street right of way is also 50 feet, parking is permitted on both sides of the street and the cul-de-sacs are
approximately 180 feet long. The public lanes are 24 feet wide, parking is not permitted on either side and the
public lanes are 90-120 feet long. The Fire Department has reviewed the proposed site plan and determined
that the proposed circulation pattern complies with the City standards. Access to nearby uses would be
provided by the east/west street that would connect Driftwood Drive (on the west) to Ponta Rossa Way (on
the east).
fi Would the proposal result in inadequate parking capacity?
The Zoning Code requires two covered parking spaces per unit. The site plan (see Figure 3) indicates each
unit would have a two -car garage. On -street parking (approximately 35 parking spaces) is also permitted
within the project site. Guest parking would be provided in individual driveways and within the
approximately 35 on -street parking spaces.
g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
The proposed site plan includes extension of an existing pedestrian walkway within a landscape area along
Harney Lane and sidewalks within the project site. The proposed project would also implement the City's
Bicycle Transportation Master Plan20 by dedicating additional right-of-way along Harney Lane to
accommodate a Class II bicycle lane. The proposed project would eliminate driveways along Harney Lane
20 Brady and Associates, Inc., 1994. Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. November 16.
29
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
and provide controlled access at intersections for a safer pedestrian/bike and car interactions. There are no bus
routes that service Harney Lane between Ham Lane and Lower Sacramento Road.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1: To mitigate its share of traffic impacts on City streets, the project
applicant/developer shall be subject to traffic impact fees assessed by the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2: To mitigate its share of impacts on SR -99, the project applicant/developer shall
be subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis as stipulated in the soon -to -be -adopted regional traffic impact fees
established by the San Joaquin County Council of Governments.
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Summary of Biological Resource Imoacts and Mitigation Measures
The San Joaquin Council of Governments established the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan in 2000?' The purpose of the plan is to provide a strategy for balancing
development with protecting endangered species in San Joaquin County. City of Lodi Municipal Code
(Section 15.68 San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP)
Development Fees) was adopted in 2001, in order to implement the goals and objectives of the San Joaquin
County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), and to mitigate the cumulative
impacts of new development on undeveloped lands within the city of Lodi and in San Joaquin County. The
City has established a fee ordinance for purposes of collecting fees to finance the SJMSCP. Development of
the project site is subject to the payment of fees in accordance with the San Joaquin County Multi -Species
Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.
The project site is developed with two single-family homes, with ancillary storage buildings, and agricultural
farm land (cherry tree orchard a commercial flower garden). During a recent site visit, there was no evidence
of endangered species or natural habitat on-site.
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No evidence of endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats was found during a recent site visit. In
compliance with the SJMSCP, a biological study will be prepared to determine if there are any species or
habitats on-site. Participation in the SJMSCP satisfies the state and federal endangered species acts, and
ensures that impacts are mitigated to a less -than -significant level .22 The San Joaquin Council of Governments
(SJCOG) has reviewed the proposed project and recommends Mitigation Measure BIO -1 listed below to
ensure compliance with the SJMSCP.
b) Would the proposal have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
21 San Joaquin Council of Governments, 2000. San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space
Plan.
22 Ibid.
30
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
The project site is developed with two single-family homes and agricultural uses on Harney Lane in the City
of Lodi. No evidence of wetland habitat was found during a recent site visit. Mitigation Measure BIO -1
requires that a biological survey be conducted in compliance with the SJMSCP. Should the survey find
wetland habitat on-site, impacts fees would be assessed in accordance with the SJMSCP.
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
There are no federally protected wetlands on the project site.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish of
wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
The project site would not impact the movement of any native or wildlife species, nor would it impact a
migration corridor because it is not located within a migration corridor. The site is developed with two single-
family homes and an agricultural business. Furthermore, the site is surrounded by residences to the north, east
and west. However, Mitigation Measure BIO -1 requires that a biological survey be conducted in compliance
with the SJMSCP. Should the survey find evidence of wildlife migration patterns on-site, impacts fees would
be assessed in accordance with the SJMSCP.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
There are a few shrubs and several non-native trees on the subject site that were planted several years ago
(excluding cherry and flower farming plants). The City does not a designate local species (e.g., heritage
trees). The City relies on the SJMSCP for regulation and mitigation of biological impacts. As stated in VILa,
the project would be subject to fees in compliance with the SJMSCP.
fi Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
The project site would comply with the provisions of the SJMSCP, which is the only applicable conservation
plan.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure BI0-1: Consistent with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open
Space Plan (SJMSCP), a SJMSCP biological survey must be completed and the appropriate fees shall be paid
prior to receiving building permits.
31
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Summary of Enemy and Mineral Resource Impacts and Miti¢ation Measures
The City implements the California State Building Codes related to energy efficient construction standards.
a) Would the proposal result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future
value to the region and the residents of the State?
Development of the site would not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resource that would
be of future value to the region and the residents of the State. There are no known mineral deposits within the
area. The soil in the area is a sandy loam type. There is no indication that valuable minerals are located within
the general area.
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
The general plan does not designate this project area as a locally -important mineral recovery site. As
discussed under VIII.a, there are no known mineral deposits within the project area.
Miti¢ation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant energy and mineral resource impacts; no mitigation
measures are required.
IX. HAZARDS
Summary of Hazard Related Impacts and Mifleation Measures
The proposed project involves the demolition, site grading, and other construction activities to develop 65
new single-family homes. The project would include short term hazard impacts related to demolition of
existing structures and storage/use of typical construction materials of 65 single-family residential units. The
project would not involve storage of any explosives or hazardous substances, beyond the typical domestic
supplies of household chemicals or gardening supplies.
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
The proposed project would construct 65 single-family homes in a residential neighborhood; however, there
are agricultural uses south of the project site, across Harney Lane in San Joaquin County. Similar land
patterns of agriculture next to single-family homes exist throughout the City. The City's "Right to Farm
Ordinance" requires that disclaimers are provided to new home buyers regarding the adjacency of agricultural
uses.23 The existing agricultural use would not present potential health hazards to people within proposed
residential units.
23 Lodi, City of, 1991, op. cit.
32
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
The proposed project consists of 65 new single-family homes on property designated as Residential Medium
Density in the City's General Plan. The proposed future development would not involve explosives or
hazardous substances, with the exception of possible gardening pesticides, and household chemicals, which
would not qualify as significant hazardous impact.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within '/ mile of an existing or proposed school?
The project site is located within 1/4 mile of Lois E. Borchardt Elementary School; however, as discussed
above under IX. b, the project would not emit hazardous materials.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the
environment?
The project site is not listed as a hazardous material site.`
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a p plan has not been adopted, within
2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public or public use
airport. The closest airport is Kingdon Airpark Airport which is approximately 5.6 miles southwest of the of
the project site.
J) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstip, would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public or public use
airport. The closest airport is Kingdon Airpark Airport which is approximately 5.6 miles southwest of the of
the project site.
g) Would the project impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
The proposed project would develop new residential units in an existing neighborhood. The Fire Department
has reviewed the proposed project and determined that plans meet the City's standards for accessibility for
emergency vehicles. Additionally, building permits are subject to review and approval by the City's Fire
Department.
h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildfires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized area or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
" State of California Department of Toxic Substance Control, 2005. DTSC's Hazardous Waste and Substance Site List
(Cortese List). Website: www.dtsc.ca.gov/database/Calsites/Cortese_List.cfrn?county=39
33
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
The proposed project would construct 65 single-family homes in a residential neighborhood surrounded by
existing urban development and an arterial road. No significant risk of wildfire would result from the
proposed project.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: To ensure that the project does not interfere with emergency evacuation plans,
grading and building plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Fire Department.
X. NOISE
Summary of Noise Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The City evaluates noise impacts based on the General Plan Noise Element and Chapter 9.24 of the Municipal
Code, Noise Regulation. The General Plan Noise Element (page 6-7) establishes the maximum outdoor noise
level of 55-60db as acceptable for residential units. Chapter 9.24 of the Municipal Code states that noise, of a
commercial or non-commercial nature, shall not exceed the ambient noise level by more the five decibels at a
point measured at the property line of any residential property. The project would have short terms impacts
related to typical construction noise.
a) Would the project expose persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
The project would result in temporary noise impacts related to construction (truck traffic, demolition, etc.)
The City prohibits construction between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week. The site is
surrounded with homes and construction in the evening hours could result in a substantial impact. Mitigation
Measure NOI-1 would limit construction hours to mitigate potential noise impacts to a level of less -than -
significant.
Increased noise would also result from project related traffic; however, as discussed above under Traffic and
Circulation, the project would result in only 390 vehicle trips per day, which would increase the noise level
by less than 1 decibel (dB). The human ear can only detect increases in noise levels of 3.0 dB or greater in
outdoor environments. Therefore, the increase of less than 1 db would not impose significant long term noise
impacts.
Additionally, the residents of the future development could be exposed to potential long-term noise generated
by the vehicular traffic on Harney Lane. The City's General Plan identifies Harney Lane to have a noise level
(Ldn) of 65-70db within 100 feet from the centerline of Harney Lane. For residential projects, 65-70db is
considered "Normally Unacceptable" without mitigation. Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would mitigate the noise
level for future residents to a less -than -significant level.
b) Would the project expose persons to or generation of excessive ground bourne vibration or ground bourne
noise levels?
The proposed project is entirely residential and no excessive ground bourne noise or vibration would result
from the proposed project. See discussion above under X. a for noise impacts related to vehicular traffic.
c) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project.
34
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
The proposed project would construct new residential units in a residential neighborhood. The future residents
would be subject to the City's noise ordinance and no substantial permanent increase would result.
d) Would the project result insubstantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
See discussion above under X. a.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2
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?
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public or public use
airport. The closest airport is Kingdon Airpark Airport which is approximately 5.6 miles southwest of the of
the project site.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: To minimize temporary construction noise impacts on surrounding residences,
construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., seven days a week.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: To minimize long term noise impacts on future residents, a sound attenuation
study shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Said study shall provide measure
to reduce the potential outdoor noise to a level acceptable for residential units (below 60db) as stipulated in
the Noise Element of the General Plan. Measures may include sound attenuation walls, increased insulation
and insulated windows.
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES
Summary of Public Service Imoacts and Mitigation Measures
Police and fire services are provided by the City of Lodi and Lodi Unified School District provides school
services. The addition of 65 homes to the City of Lodi will generate the need for expanded governmental
services including schools, fire, and police services. Impacts to police, fire and school services would be
mitigated through established capital impact fees.
a) Would the project result insubstantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered facilities, the construction of
which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:
i) Fire protection: The Lodi Fire Department provides fire protection services to the project site. Fire
Station 3, at 2104 South Ham Lane, provides fire service to the project site. There are three personnel
on duty at all times. The General Plan includes a policy to maintain a 3 -minute travel time for fire
emergency calls. The current response time is less than 3 minutes and impacts to response times are
not anticipated as a result of the proposed project. ss The proposed project would be subject to the
Citywide Development Impact Mitigation Fee schedule that was adopted to insure that new
25 Hoover, Linda, 2005. Lodi Fire Department. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November.
35
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
development generates sufficient capital revenue to maintain specified levels of service in Lodi,
including fire services.
ii) Police protection: The Lodi Police Department provides police protection for the project site. The
project site is located within the Heritage District, Patrol Beat 4, which has a minimum of one officer
on duty at all times."
The General Plan includes a policy to maintain 1.3 police officers per 1,000 residents. The proposed
project would increase the population by 146 residents for a total of 60,667 residents (60,521 current
population + 146). With 60,667 residents, the City would need to have 78 police officers to maintain
the policy of 1.3 officers per 1,000 residents (60.6x1.3=78). The City of Lodi's Police Department is
budgeted for 78 police officers. The proposed project would be subject to the Citywide Development
Impact Mitigation Fee schedule that was adopted to insure that new development generates sufficient
capital revenue to maintain specified levels of service in Lodi, including police services.
iii) Schools: The Lodi Unified School District (LUSD) provides school service to the project site.
LUSD has 37 school sites and the project would be served by the following schools: Borchardt
Elementary (grades K-6), Lodi Middle School (grades 7-8), and Tokay High School (grades 9-12).
The 2005 enrollment figures for these schools are 331, 1167 and 2,870 respectively.2'
According to the LUSD, single family development generates 0.31 K -6th grade students per unit,
0.08 7th -8th grade students per unit, and 0.15 9th -12th grade students per unit.28 Using this student
generation rate, the proposed project would generate twenty K -6th students, five 7 -8th grade students
and ten 9th -12th grade students. Borchardt Elementary and Lodi Middle School are currently under
capacity and the potential addition of students from this project will not exceed school capacities.
Tokay High School is currently over capacity by seventy students and the proposed project would
potentially add ten high school students. The addition of ten additional students to a school that is
already over capacity would not result in a significant impact on schools .29 The development is
subject to a mitigation fee of $3.79 per square foot for residential uses.
iv) Parks: There are no parks proposed as part of this project. The future residents will utilize existing
parks, the closest of which is Samuel Salas Park, which is within 1,300 feet. The project would be
subject to the Citywide Development Impact Mitigation Fee schedule that was adopted to insure that
new development generates sufficient capital revenue to maintain specified levels of service in Lodi,
including park services.
v) Other public facilities: The Citywide Development Impact Mitigation Fee schedule was adopted to
insure that new development generates sufficient capital revenue to maintain specified levels of
service in Lodi, including public facilities.
Miti¢ation Measures
Mitigation Measure PUB -1: The project applicant/developer shall be subject to development impact fees for
fire and police services established by the City of Lodi.
26 Versteeg, Eric, 2005. Lodi Police Department. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November.
27 Lodi Unified School District, 2005. Lodi Unified School District Boundary Maps. Website:
http://sites.lodiusd.net/schoolcity/ssb/content.cfm.
28 Bram, Vickie, 2005. Lodi Unified School District. Personal communication with LSA Associates. November.
29 Brum, Vickie, 2005. Lodi Unified School District. Personal communication with LSA Associates. November.
36
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Mitigation Measure PUB -2: The project applicant/developer shall be subject to school impact fees established
by Lodi Unified School District.
XIL UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Summary of Utilities and Service Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The project site is not currently connected to utilities. The City of Lodi provides water, wastewater and
electrical service to the site; Central Valley Waste Services provides solid waste disposal. Water, wastewater
and storm drain facilities are available in adjacent residential developments and may be extended to serve the
project site.
a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
The proposed project, and the treatment of wastewater, would adhere to all applicable water quality
regulations and not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board. No major modifications or additions to local or regional water treatment or
distribution facilities would be required as a result of this project.
b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects?
See discussion under AW. a
c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects?
The runoff will discharge to the local storm drainage system. During periods of low runoff (not a major
storm) the water will flow to a regional -serving pump station at Beckman Park. The water is directly pumped
into the Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal adjacent to the park. During periods of intense rainfall, the
runoff will spill into the detention basin located at Salas Park (on Stockton Street northwest of the project site)
where it will be held until the storm passes. The Beckman Park pumps will then drain the basin.
The City is limited by agreement with Woodbridge Irrigation District on the rate of pumping into the WID
canals. City currently operates pump stations at two locations that discharge into the WID canals. When the
runoff from the storm event exceeds the allowed pumping rate, water backs up in the system and spills to a
number of storm detention basins around town. Salas Park is one of those basins."
Runoff water quality is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Nonpoint
Source Program (established through the Clean Water Act); the NPDES program objective is to control and
reduce pollutants to water bodies from nonpoint discharges. The program is administered by the California
Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The project site would be under the jurisdiction of the CVRWQCB.
30 Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November.
37
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
In addition, the proposed project would disturb more than one acre of land" during construction and would
therefore be required to file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the RWQCB to be covered under the State NPDES
General Construction Permit for discharges of storm water associated with construction activity. A developer
must propose control measures that are consistent with the State General Permit. A Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must be developed and implemented for each site covered by the general permit. A
SWPPP should include Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface
water quality during the construction of the project. Mitigation Measure HYD -4 requires an SWPP be
prepared for this project.
d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the projectfrom existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Groundwater from 26 wells is the primary source of water supply for the City of Lodi.32 As discussed above
in under IV. i, the project proposed project would not substantially reduce the amount of ground water
otherwise available for public water supply; the proposed project would develop at a less intense rate than
anticipated in the General Plan. However, the project would contribute to cumulative impacts on availability
water supply. The General Plan EIR determined that there would not be adequate water supply to
accommodate build out of the General Plan; the City is currently implementing measures to increase the
supply (e.g., conservation methods, metering of all new units, and purchasing water rights to the Molkemune
River) and has determined that they can adequately serve the proposed project."
e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
The City of Lodi Public Works Department provides wastewater collection and treatment services to areas
within the City of Lodi. The collection system includes separate domestic and industrial lines. Untreated
sewage is piped to the City's treatment plant using both gravity flow and lifts stations.
As part of the development plan review process, the City of Lodi Public Works Department will review utility
plans and the applicant will be subject to sewer connection fees at the time of development.
f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's
solid waste disposal needs?
Central Valley Waste Services, a subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc., provides solid waste collection
services to the City of Lodi. Central Valley Waste collects solid waste from residential, commercial and
industrial properties in the City of Lodi and transports the waste to a Transfer Station and Materials Recovery
Facility (MRF). The waste is then transferred to large haul vehicles that transport the waste to the North
County Landfill. The proposed 65 single-family units is less than what was anticipated for this property by
3' The State Water Resources Control Board, Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES), General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (General Permit) states that:
The regulations provide that discharges of stormwater to waters of the United States from construction projects that encompass five or
more acres of soil disturbance are effectively prohibited unless the discharge is in compliance with an NPDES Permit. Regulations
(Phase II Rule) that became final on December 8, 1999 expand the existing NPDES program to address stonnwater discharges from
construction sites that disturb land equal to or greater than 1 acre and less than 5 acres (small construction activity). The regulations
require that small construction activity, other than those regulated under an individual or Regional Water Quality Control Board
General Permit, must be permitted no later than March 10, 2003.
32 Brown and Caldwell, 2001. Urban Water Management Plan, City of Lodi, June.
33 Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November
38
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
the City's General Plan. No major modifications or additions solid waste disposal facilities would be required
as a result of this project.
g) Would the project comply with federal, State and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The proposed project would comply with all federal, State and local statues and regulations related to solid
waste.
Miti¢ation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant utility and service system impacts; no mitigation
measures are required.
XIII. AESTHETICS
Summary of Aesthetic Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The existing visual character of the project site includes a two single-family homes, two storage/workshop
buildings, portable structures and outdoor storage materials used in connection with the agricultural business
(green house structures once visible to Harney Lane were recently demolished). The proposed project is
located on Harney Lane. Harney Lane is not designated as a scenic route and there are no scenic views of
natural hillsides or vistas to or from the project site.
a) Would the project have a substantial effect on a scenic vista?
The proposed project would not effect a scenic vista or scenic highway because there are no known or
recognized scenic views or highways in or immediately around the project area. The project area is
surrounded by existing single-family residential subdivisions with Harney Lane to the south. Harney Lane is
not designated as a scenic highway to street route.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
The project site consists of two single-family homes and agricultural land uses. There are no such scenic
resources on site and the project site is not visible from a scenic highway.
c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
The existing visual character of the project site includes two single-family homes and two workshop/storage
buildings. Additionally, the agriculture business includes views of utility cabinets, a portable bathroom and
outdoor storage of materials including several stacks of wood pallets. The single-family home at 349 Harney
Lane has been well maintained and is currently occupied. The single-family home at 415 Harney Lane has
been subject to deferred maintenance and is currently used as a construction office for the residential project
currently under construction to the east of the project site. Figure 2, shows photographs of the existing
condition of the project site.
The proposed project would include the construction of 65 single-family homes. These units would include a
level of detail similar to the existing single-family homes in the neighborhood immediately east of the project
site. The side elevations of units 41-63 would be visible to Harney Lane. Though not specifically shown on
the site plan (see Figure 3) the project would include a masonry wall along Harney Lane. The height of the
39
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
wall may be determined by a sound attenuation study, but never the less, the wall should include detailing or
landscaping to break up the length and massing. By providing architectural interest to side elevations of lots
41-63, as well as all others within the project, and by providing specific details (such as cap stones and
landscaping) to the wall along Harney Lane, the proposed subdivision would result in an improvement to the
existing visual character of the site.
d) Would the project create anew source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
The existing conditions on the project site include exterior lighting. The new development would emit some
light and glare during evening hours, as is typical in residential environments. The proposed project would
include indoor lighting and outdoor lighting for safety purposes. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES -
3 would reduce potential impacts associated with light and glare to a less than significant level.
Miti¢ation Measures
Mitigation Measure AES -1: Plans submitted for building permits shall show architectural enhancements for
street side elevations of units 41-63. Architectural enhancements shall be similar to that provided on the front
elevations of said units including, but not limited to, decorative iron work, window banding, shutters, and
varying roof -lines. Said plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development
Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -2: Plans submitted for the masonry wall along Harney Lane (whether or not a sound
wall is required) shall include decorative treatments such as cap stones and columns. Additionally, clinging
vines (on 3 -foot centers) and other landscaping shall be planted on the wall. Design of the wall shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -3: Outdoor lighting associated with the proposed development shall be designed and
located to minimize ambient light levels for any given application, consistent with public safety standards.
Lighting shall be placed in areas of pedestrian activity and at residential entrances, and shall be minimized
elsewhere. Ornamental, pedestrian scale lighting fixtures shall be utilized when possible. Lighting fixtures
shall be shielded and directed downward to minimize glare on neighboring properties.
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Summary of Cultural Resource Impacts and Miti¢ation Measures
Based on the General Plan EIR (Chapter 11, Cultural Resources, pages 11-1 and 11-2)34, there are no
archaeological or cultural resources recorded within the City of Lodi. It is also noted that there are two
cultural resources (Native American occupation/burial sites north of City near the Mokelumne River). The
General Plan designates the project site for residential land uses. Should cultural resources be discovered
during project grading/construction, a Mitigation Measure is incorporated to reduce potential impacts to a
less -than -significant level.
a) Would the project create a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in CEQA Section 15064.5?
34 Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991.
40
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
The project site is surrounded by residential development. The proposed residential subdivision would not
affect unique ethnic cultural or historical values as there is no information that such values exist on-site. The
project site does not contain a registered or listed historical landmark."
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource
pursuant to CEQA Section 15064.5
Based on the General Plan EIR and a recent site visit, there is no evidence of archeological or paleontological
resources on site. The proposed project would require site grading to accommodate roads and proper drainage.
During the grading process, the developer shall cease operations and contact the proper authorities if anything
of archeological or paleontological significance is found.
c) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
See discussion under XIV. b
d) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
No human remains are known to exist on the project site. The vicinity of the project site has a low potential
for Native American sites. The project is proposed in a location that has been subject to previous ground
disturbing activities related the construction of the existing homes and agricultural operations. If human
remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance
shall occur until the County Coroner has made determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the fmd immediately. If the
remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner is required to notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the
permission of the owner of the land or his/her representative, the descendant shall inspect the site of the
discovery. The descendant shall complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The
MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated
with Native American burials.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure CULT -1: If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered
during project construction activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be stopped and a qualified
archaeologist shall be contracted to evaluate the discoveries and make recommendations regarding their
potential significance and extent throughout the site. If such deposits cannot be avoided, they shall be
evaluated for their California and National Register eligibility. If the deposits are not eligible, additional
mitigation is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided or adverse project effects shall
be mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeologist's evaluation, a report shall be prepared documenting the
methods and results of the research, and recommendations for additional mitigation. In accordance with the
City's General Plan Urban Design and Cultural Resources Element, the City shall consult the California
Archeological Inventory, Central California Information Center, at Stanislaus State University, for
recommended mitigation measures.
XV. RECREATION
"CERES: State Historical Landmarks for San Joaquin County, 2005. Website:
www.ceres.ca.gov/geo area/counties/San_ Joaquin/landmarks.html.
41
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Summary of Recreation Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The proposed project would include the construction of 65 single-family homes, which would generate
approximately 146 people. There are no public parks or tot lots proposed within the development; however all
of the proposed residences would include private open space within rear yards. The City's General Plan
includes a goal for 8 acres of parks per 1,000 residents and 3.9 acres of parks per 1,000 residents (excluding
detention basins and school parks). 36
a) Would the project increase the use of neighborhood or regional parks or other recreation facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
The proposed project does not contain any public recreation elements. Private open space would be provided
within individual yards. There are three recreational facilities within a mile of the project site, including the
Samuel D. Salas Park, Century Park and English Oaks Park.,' The closest park is Samuel Salas Park, which is
approximately 1,300 feet (0.24 miles) from the project site.
The proposed project would include the construction of 65 single-family homes, which would generate
approximately 146 people. The General Plan contains a policy requiring a parks -to -population ratio of 3.9 -to -
1,000 (excluding school parks and detention basins). The proposed project does not include public open
space; park impact fees would be assessed upon issuance of building permits. The projected increase in
population as a result of this project would not result in increase demand for parks and recreation services
such that substantial deterioration of parks would occur or be accelerated.
b) Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
The project does not include the construction or require the expansion of recreational facilities.
Mitigation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant recreation impacts; no mitigation measures are
required.
XVI. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Summary or Agricultural Resource Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section is based on information from the California Resources Agency California Land Conservation Act
(Williamson Act) Program and the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) of the California
Resources Agency. The most recent FMMP information available for San Joaquin County is from 2004.
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural uses?
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Maps prepared by the Department of Conservation designate the
subject site as urban built-up land, which is not a category of farmland importance.38 However, the project
36 Lodi, City of, 1991, op. cit.
37 Lodi, City of, 2005. Community Development, Mapguide. Website: hM://mapguide.lodi.gov.
42
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
site consists of three parcels, one of which is dedicated to the agricultural uses of a cherry tree orchard and
commercial flower garden. The General Plan designates the entire project site for residential land uses and
development has occurred around the site, such that the project site has become an "in -fill" residential project.
To mitigate the development of this agricultural site, the applicant is subject to mitigation fees established in
the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan. Mitigation Measure LU -1 requires
compliance with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Though there is active agricultural land use on the project site, the site is currently zoned for development of
medium density land uses. The property is not under Williamson Act contract. The proposed project includes
a zone change from Medium Density to Planned Development. The project would be consistent with the
proposed zoning designation.
c) Would theproject involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural uses?
The proposed project is surrounded by residential development, with the exception of properties south of
Harney Lane, which are agricultural lands located in the County. The proposed project would not change the
environment such that the existing agricultural uses would be converted. The farming rights of the property
owners to the south, across Hamey Lane would be protected because the applicant is subject to compliance
with the City's Right -to -Farm Ordinance."
Mitigation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant agricultural impacts; no mitigation measures are
required.
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Summary of Mandatory Findings
a) Does the project 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
pre -history?
The proposed project consists of the construction of 65 new residential units on the 7.92 acres in the
southwest portion of the City of Lodi. The subject site is designated for residential development and is
currently surrounded by residential land uses to the north, east and west. The project site is developed with
two single-family homes and an agricultural use (cherry orchard and commercial flower garden) and there is
no evidence of wildlife on-site. The project would not potentially degrade the quality of the environment or
substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species. The proposed project would not eliminate
important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory.
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 in
39 Lodi, City of, 1991. Municipal Code Chapter 8.18: Notification of Agricultural Operations Effecting Other Property.
43
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
connection with the effects ofpastprojects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects ofprobable
future projects)?
The construction of 65 new single-family homes and related infrastructure improvements will increase the
residential population in the existing neighborhood, as anticipated by the City's General Plan. Cumulatively
considerable impacts associated with increased traffic on Highway 99 and to the overall water supply would
be mitigated to less -than -significant levels with the implementation of the mitigation measures provided
above, in Sections W and VI. The proposed project is located in a residential area and the inclusion of the
mitigation measures mentioned above will reduce potentially significant impacts that would become
cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past, current and reasonably
foreseeable future projects.
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
The proposed project consists of construction of a new residential development and would not have
environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly.
44
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
F. SOURCES
Brady and Associates, Inc., 1994. Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. November, 16.
Brown and Caldwell, 2001. Urban Water Management Plan, City of Lodi, June.
CERES: State Historical Landmarks for San Joaquin County, 2005. Website:
www.ceres.ca.eov/seo area/counties/San_ Joaquin/landmarks.html
Lodi, City of, 1991. General Plan, June.
Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991. April.
Lodi, City of, Municipal Code, revised through 2005.
Lodi, City of, 1991. Municipal Code, Chapter 15.38: Growth Management Plan for Residential Development.
Lodi, City of, 1991. Municipal Code, Chapter 8.18: Notice of Agricultural Operations Affecting Other
Property.
Lodi, City of, 2005. Parks and Recreation Department. Website: www.lodi.goy/parks_rec/index.htm.
November 14.
Lodi, City of, 2005. Community Development, Map Guide. Website: h_q://mapguide.lodi.gov
Lodi Unified School District, 2005. Lodi Unified School District Boundary Maps. Website:
http://sites.lodiusd.net/schoolciiy/ssb/content.cfm
San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG), 2001. San Joaquin County's Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 1998. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality
Impacts. (Revised 2002)
State of California Department of Toxic Substance Control, 2005. DTSC's Hazardous Waste and Substance
Site List (Cortese List). Website: www.dtsc.ca.gov/database/Calsites/Cortese_List.cfin?county=39
Communications
Brum, Vickie, 2005. Lodi Unified School District, Facilities Planning. Personal communication with LSA
Associates, Inc, November.
Dumas, Tom. 2005. Department of Transportation. Written communication to Mark Meissner, City of Lodi
Community Development Department, July 1.
Hoover, Linda, 2005. City of Lodi Fire Department. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc.
November.
Meissner, Mark, 2005. City of Lodi Community Development Department. Personal communication with
LSA Associates, Inc. November.
45
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, Lodi Public Works Department. Personal communication with LSA
Associates, Inc. November.
Versteeg, Eric, 2005. City of Lodi Police Department. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc.
November.
46
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
G. MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT AND AGREED TO BY
THE PROJECT SPONSOR AND ALL SUBSEQUENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND
PERMITTEES
The following mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant impacts of the proposed project
to a "Less -Than -Significant" or "No Impact" level. These mitigation measures shall be made conditions of
approval for the project. For every mitigation measure, the Permittee will be responsible for implementation
actions, schedule, funding and compliance with performance standards, unless otherwise stated in the measure.
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Geotechnical Investigation shall be
prepared for the project site. The project applicant shall incorporate any grading and site preparations as
recommended in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation.
Mitigation Measure HYD -1: As a condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the
project, the Public Works department shall verify that the Master Utility Plan for the site will comply with the
City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -2: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans, the project engineer
shall provide a hydraulic analysis to the Public Works Department for verification that implementation of the
proposed drainage plans would comply with the City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -3: The project shall include landscape areas, as shown titled "Revised 2005
Development Plan" prepared by Baumbach & Piazza, Inc., dated May, 2005, to allow for groundwater
recharge.
Mitigation Measure HYD -4: As a part of the compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) and associated fees would need to be submitted to
the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) providing notification and intent to
comply with the General Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity for this
project (copies of the NOI and fee payment shall be provided to the City). Prior to construction and site
grading, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for construction activities and
remediation on-site. The project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the construction and life of the project.
The SWPPP would act as the overall program document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential
water quality impacts associated with the implementation and operation of the propose project. The project
proponent shall prepare a SWPPP designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the
construction period of the project. The SWPPP must be maintained on-site and made available to City
inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs designed
to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include practices to minimize the contact
of construction materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhe-
sives) with stormwater. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas that keep these
materials out of the rain.
Mitigation Measure AIR -1: The following construction equipment mitigation measures are to be implemented
at construction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions:
1. Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -fired equipment;
2. Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as recommended by the manufacturer
manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
3. Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduce emissions associated with
idling emissions;
47
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use to 7:OOam
to 7:OOpm; and
Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing
of construction activity during the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways.
Mitigation Measure AIR -2: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions of the SJVAPCD,
the following controls are required to be implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the
project.
1. All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being used on a daily basis for construction
purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant,
covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.
2. All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust
emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
3. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition
activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by
presoaking.
4. During the demolition of existing buildings, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during
demolition.
5. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit
visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be
maintained.
6. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public
streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where
preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower
devices is expressly forbidden.)
7. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage
piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or
chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
8. Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the
site and at the end of each workday.
9. Site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Prevention measures
include requiring all trucks to drive over a bed of gravel to rid the tires of dirt and mud prior to exiting
the site.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1: To mitigate its share of traffic impacts on City streets, the project
applicant/developer shall be subject to traffic impact fees assessed by the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2: To mitigate its share of impacts on SR -99, the project applicant/developer shall
be subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis as stipulated in the soon -to -be -adopted regional traffic impact fees
established by the San Joaquin County Council of Governments.
Mitigation Measure BIO -1: Consistent with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open
Space Plan (SJMSCP), a SJMSCP biological survey must be completed and the appropriate fees shall be paid
prior to receiving building permits.
48
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: To ensure that the project does not interfere with emergency evacuation plans,
grading and building plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Fire Department.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: To minimize temporary construction noise impacts on surrounding residences,
construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., seven days a week.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: To minimize long term noise impacts on future residents, a sound attenuation
study shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Said study shall provide measure
to reduce the potential outdoor noise to a level acceptable for residential units (below 60db) as stipulated in
the Noise Element of the General Plan. Measures may include sound attenuation walls, increased insulation
and insulated windows.
Mitigation Measure PUB -1: The project applicant/developer shall be subject to development impact fees for
fire and police services established by the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure PUB -2: The project applicant/developer shall be subject to school impact fees established
by Lodi Unified School District.
Mitigation Measure AES -1: Plans submitted for building permits shall show architectural enhancements for
street side elevations of units 41-63. Architectural enhancements shall be similar to that provided on the front
elevations of said units including, but not limited to, decorative iron work, window banding, shutters, and
varying roof -lines. Said plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development
Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -2: Plans submitted for the masonry wall along Harney Lane (whether or not a sound
wall is required) shall include decorative treatments such as cap stones and columns. Additionally, clinging
vines (on 3 -foot centers) and other landscaping shall be planted against to wall. Design of the wall shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -3: Outdoor lighting associated with the proposed development shall be designed and
located to minimize ambient light levels for any given application, consistent with public safety standards.
Lighting shall be placed in areas of pedestrian activity and at residential entrances, and shall be minimized
elsewhere. Ornamental, pedestrian scale lighting fixtures shall be utilized when possible. Lighting fixtures
shall be shielded and directed downward to minimize glare on neighboring properties.
Mitigation Measure CULT -1: If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered
during project construction activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be stopped and a qualified
archaeologist shall be contracted to evaluate the discoveries and make recommendations regarding their
potential significance and extent throughout the site. If such deposits cannot be avoided, they shall be
evaluated for their California and National Register eligibility. If the deposits are not eligible, additional
mitigation is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided or adverse project effects shall
be mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeologist's evaluation, a report shall be prepared documenting the
methods and results of the research, and recommendations for additional mitigation. In accordance with the
City's General Plan Urban Design and Cultural Resources Element, the City shall consult the California
Archeological Inventory, Central California Information Center, at Stanislaus State University, for
recommended mitigation measures.
49
H. AG 1'BY pmOmN[ r n4)PMM
3E• �t� ���� � � �ivrs P�f Qee� eed IAir�. �ddsred� die
�,W dN& I6090fed qpr#b be bww by inn rdmr� wiled U e =a etpglm
Marie b"U poylle410 *W Cem oft Dnd@pwW VMWm eed Diww of Pd&
VAMM
e b brirebi�oo�s.
PI
50
ATTACHMENT 6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT THE MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND -05-01) AND ASSOCIATED MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM PERPARED FOR THE MILLER RANCH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed
public meeting, as required by law, to consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, the subject properties are located at 349, 401 and 415 East Harney Lane (APN:
062-290-38, 062-290-37 and 062-290-14); and are more particularly described as:
PARCEL ONE:
The West 8 arcres of the South 20 acres, EXCEPT the West 170 feet of the South 201.6
feet thereof of the following described tract of land.
A portion of the southeast quarter of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East,
Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, commencing for the same at the southeast corner of
said Section 13. Township 3 North, Range 6 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian;
thence South 88 degrees West along the section line between Sections 13 and 24, a
distance of 1650 feet; thence north, 1056 feet; thence North 88 degrees East 1650 feet
to the east line of Section 13; thence south, 1056 feet to the point of beginning.
APN 062-290-14 and 062-290-37
PARCEL TWO:
The West 170.0 feet of the South 201.6 feet of the West 8 acres of the South 20 acres of
the following described tract of land.
A portion of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East,
Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, commencing for the same at the southeast corner of
said Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East, Mount Diablo Base Meridian; thence
South 88 degrees West along the Section line between Sections 13 and 24, a distance of
1650 feet; thence North 1056 feet; thence North 88 degrees East, 1650 feet to the east
line of Section 13; thence South, 1056 feet to the point of beginning.
APN 062-290-38
WHEREAS, an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (File No. ND -05-01) has been
prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, and the Guidelines provided there under; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Intention to adopt an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
was published in the Lodi News Sentinel and was posted at City Hall on December 24,
2005 and;
WHEREAS, the Notice of Intention and copy of said Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration were sent to responsible agencies and the San Joaquin County Clerk on
December 22, 2005 and;
WHEREAS, a copy of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was kept on file for
public review within the Community Development Department at 221 West Pine Street,
Lodi, CA for a 20 day comment period commencing on December 24, 2005 and ending
on January 13, 2006;
JAC....ity Develo .-T1..i.gV ES0L=006W.0"2 ND -05-01 Milk R..h.d.c
WHEREAS, the City received one comment letter in response to the Notice of Intention from
the San Joaquin County Air Pollution Control District stating that the District concurs
with the analysis and findings within the Air Quality Section of the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared in accordance
with CEQA and is attached herein as Exhibit A.
Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of
the City of Lodi makes the following findings:
1. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in
said Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration with respect to the Miller Ranch
Development Project.
2. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration represent the independent
judgment of the City.
3. Through the Initial Study it was determined that though the project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case
because Mitigation Measures have been agreed to by the project proponent and
incorporated into the proposal to reduce any impacts to a less than significant level.
Said Mitigation Measures are on file in the City of Lodi Planning Department, File No.
ND -05-01: Miller Ranch Development Project Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the Planning
Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends adoption of Mitigated Negative
Declaration (ND -05-01) to the City Council of the City of Lodi.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the
Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends adoption of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program included in Exhibit A to the City Council of the City of
Lodi.
Dated: January 25, 2006
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 06-02 was passed and adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on January 25, 2006, by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
1:\Conly Development\Planning\RESOLUTI\2006\PCres 06-02 ND -05-01 MillerRanch.doc (02/09/2006)
EXHIBIT A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MILLER RANCH DEVLOPMENT PROJECT
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was formulated based on the findings
of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Miller Ranch Development
project. This MMRP is in compliance with Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires
that the Lead Agency "adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has
required in the project and the measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental
effects." The MMRP lists mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND and identifies
mitigation monitoring requirements. These requirements are provided only for mitigation measures
that would reduce or avoid significant impacts of the proposed project.
Table A presents the mitigation measures identified for the proposed project. Each
mitigation measure is numbered according to the topical section to which it pertains. As an
example, Mitigation Measure GEO-1 is the first mitigation measure identified in Section III,
Geology and Soil.
The first column of Table A provides the mitigation measures that were identified in the
IS/MND. The column entitled "Party Responsible for Implementing Mitigation" identifies
the party responsible for carrying out the required actions. The columns entitled "Party
Responsible for Monitoring," and "Timing," identify the party ultimately responsible for
ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented, and the approximate timeframe for the
oversight agency to ensure implementation of the mitigation measure.
1:\Conly Development\Planning\RESOLUTI\2006\PCres 06-02 ND -05-01 MillerRanch.doc (02/09/2006) 3
Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Party Responsible
Party
for Implementing
Responsible for
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
I. Land Use and Planning
No mitigation required.
II. Population and Housing
No mitigation required.
III. Geology and Soils
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Geotechnical Investigation shall be
Project Sponsor
Community
Prior to issuance of
prepared for the project site. The project applicant shall incorporate any grading and site preparations as
Development
grading permits
recommended in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation.
Department
IV. Hydrology and Water Quality
Mitigation Measure HYD -1: As a condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the
Project Sponsor/
Public Works
Prior to approval of
project, the Public Works department shall verify that the Master Utility Plan for the site will comply with
Developer
Department
grading plans
the City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -2: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans, the project
Project Sponsor/
Public Works
Prior to approval of
engineer shall provide a hydraulic analysis to the Public Works Department for verification that
Developer
Department
grading plans
implementation of the proposed drainage plans would comply with the City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -3: The project shall include landscape areas, as shown titled "Revised 2005
Project Sponsor/
Community
Prior to issuance of
Development Plan" prepared by Baumbach & Piazza, Inc., dated May, 2005, to allow for groundwater
Developer
Development
building permits
recharge.
Department
Mitigation Measure HYD -4: As a part of the compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Project Sponsor/
Public Works
Prior to site grading and
(NPDES) requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) and associated fees would need to be submitted to the Central Valley
Contractor
Department
construction
Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) providing notification and intent to comply with the General
Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity for this project (copies of the NOI and fee
payment shall be provided to the City). Prior to construction and site grading, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) is required for construction activities and remediation on-site. The project applicant shall prepare a Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the
construction and life of the project. The SWPPP would act as the overall program document designed to provide
measures to mitigate potential water quality impacts associated with the implementation and operation of the propose
project. The project proponent shall prepare a SWPPP designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality
through the construction period of the project. The SWPPP must be maintained on-site and made available to City
inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs designed to
mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include practices to minimize the contact of
construction materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhesives) with
stormwater. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas that keep these materials out of the
rain.
Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Party Responsible
Party
for Implementing
Responsible for
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
V. Air Quality
Mitigation Measure AIR -1: The following construction equipment mitigation measures are to be
Project Sponsor/
Building
Prior to issuance of
implemented at construction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions:
Construction
Inspection
demolition permits and
• Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -fired equipment;
Contractor
Division
during grading and
• Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as recommended by the manufacturer
construction activities
manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
• Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduce emissions associated
with idling emissions;
• Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use to
7:00am to 7:00pm; and
• Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing
of construction activity during thepeak-hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways.
Mitigation Measure AIR -2: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions of the
Project Sponsor/
Building
Prior to issuance of
SJVAPCD, the following controls are required to be implemented at all construction sites and as
Construction
Inspection
demolition permits and
specifications for the project.
Contractor
Division
during grading and
• All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being used on a daily basis for construction
construction activities
purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant,
covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.
• All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust
emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
• All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition
activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by
presoaking.
• During the demolition of existing buildings, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during
demolition.
• When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit
visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be
maintained.
• All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent
public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except
where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of
blower devices is expressly forbidden.)
Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Party Responsible
Party
for Implementing
Responsible for
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
• Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage
piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or
chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
• Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the
site and at the end of each workday.
• Site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Prevention measures
include requiring all trucks to drive over a bed of gravel to rid the tires of dirt and mud prior to exiting
the site.
VI. Transportation and Circulation
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1: To mitigate its share of traffic impacts on City streets, the project
Project Sponsor/
Community
Prior to issuance of
applicant/developer shall be subject to traffic impact fees assessed by the City of Lodi.
Developer
Development
building permits
Department/
Public Works
Department
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2: To mitigate its share of impacts on SR -99, the project applicant/developer
Project Sponsor/
Public Works
Prior to issuance of
shall be subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis as stipulated in the soon -to -be -adopted regional traffic
Developer
Department
building permits
impact fees established by the San Joaquin County Council of Governments.
VII. Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure BIO -1: Consistent with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open
Project Sponsor/
San Joaquin
Prior to issuance of
Space Plan (SJMSCP), a SJMSCP biological survey must be completed and the appropriate fees shall be
Developer
Council of
building permits
paid prior to receiving building permits.
Governments
VIII. Mineral Resources
No mitigation required.
IX. Hazards
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: To ensure that the project does not interfere with emergency evacuation plans,
Project Sponsor/
Fire Department
Prior to issuance of
grading and building plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Fire Department.
Construction
grading permits and
Contractor
building pe its
X. Noise
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: To minimize temporary construction noise impacts on surrounding residences,
Project Sponsor/
Building
During construction
construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., seven days a week.
Construction
Inspection
Contractor
Division
Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Party Responsible
Party
for Implementing
Responsible for
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
Mitigation Measure N0I-2: To minimize long term noise impacts on future residents, a sound attenuation
Project Sponsor/
Community
Prior to issuance of
study shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Said study shall provide
Construction
Development
building permits
measure to reduce the potential outdoor noise to a level acceptable for residential units (below 60db) as
Contractor
Department/
stipulated in the Noise Element of the General Plan. Measures may include sound attenuation walls,
Building
increased insulation and insulated windows.
Division
XI. Public Services
Mitigation Measure PUB -1: The project applicant/developer shall be subject to development impact fees
Project Sponsor/
Police
Prior to issuance of
for fire and police services established by the City of Lodi.
Developer
Department/Fire
building permits
Department
Mitigation Measure PUB -2: The project applicant/developer shall be subject to school impact fees
Project Sponsor/
Lodi Unified
Prior to issuance of
established by Lodi Unified School District.
Developer
School District
building permits
XII. Utilities and Service Systems
No mitigation required.
XIII. Aesthetics
Mitigation Measure AES -1: Plans submitted for building permits shall show architectural enhancements
Project Sponsor/
Community
Prior to issuance of
for street side elevations of units 41-63. Architectural enhancements shall be similar to that provided on the
Developer
Development
building permits
front elevations of said units including, but not limited to, decorative iron work, window banding, shutters,
Department
and varying roof -lines. Said plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -2: Plans submitted for the masonry wall along Harney Lane (whether or not a
Project Sponsor/
Community
Prior to issuance of
sound wall is required) shall include decorative treatments such as cap stones and columns. Additionally,
Developer
Development
building permits
clinging vines (on 3 -foot centers) and other landscaping shall be planted along the wall. Design of the wall
Department
shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -3: Outdoor lighting associated with the proposed development shall be designed
Project Sponsor/
Community
Prior to issuance of
and located to minimize ambient light levels for any given application, consistent with public safety
Developer
Development
building permits
standards. Lighting shall be placed in areas of pedestrian activity and at residential entrances, and shall be
Department
minimized elsewhere. Ornamental, pedestrian scale lighting fixtures shall be utilized when possible.
Lighting fixtures shall be shielded and directed downward to minimize glare on neighboring properties.
Table A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Party Responsible
Party
for Implementing
Responsible for
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation
Monitoring
Timing
XIV. Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure CULT -1: If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are
Project Sponsor/
Community
Prior to issuance of
encountered during project construction activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be stopped
Archaeologist
Development
demolition permits
and a qualified archaeologist shall be contracted to evaluate the discoveries and make recommendations
Department
regarding their potential significance and extent throughout the site. If such deposits cannot be avoided,
they shall be evaluated for their California and National Register eligibility. If the deposits are not eligible,
additional mitigation is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided or adverse project
effects shall be mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeologist's evaluation, a report shall be prepared
documenting the methods and results of the research, and recommendations for additional mitigation. In
accordance with the City's General Plan Urban Design and Cultural Resources Element, the City shall
consult the California Archeological Inventory, Central California Information Center, at Stanislaus State
University, for recommended mitigation measures.
XV. Agricultural Resources
No mitigation required.
ATTACHMENT 7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 06-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ALLOCATE THE REQUEST OF
JEFFREY KIRST FOR 65 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL GROWTH
MANAGEMENT UNITS (GM -05-003) PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 15.34 OF THE CITY
OF LODI MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, on May 27, 2005, Jeffrey Kirst, filed an application for a Residential Growth
Management Review Application with the City of Lodi, for three parcels totaling 7.92
acres in size that are designated for medium density residential development in the Lodi
General Plan on the north side of Harney Lane between Melby Lane and Panzani Way
more particularly described as:
PARCEL ONE:
The West 8 arcres of the South 20 acres, EXCEPT the West 170 feet of the South
201.6 feet thereof of the following described tract of land.
A portion of the southeast quarter of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East,
Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, commencing for the same at the southeast corner
of said Section 13. Township 3 North, Range 6 East, Mount Diablo Base and
Meridian; thence South 88 degrees West along the section line between Sections 13
and 24, a distance of 1650 feet; thence north, 1056 feet; thence North 88 degrees
East 1650 feet to the east line of Section 13; thence south, 1056 feet to the point of
beginning.
APN 062-290-14 and 062-290-37
PARCEL TWO:
The West 170.0 feet of the South 201.6 feet of the West 8 acres of the South 20
acres of the following described tract of land.
A portion of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East,
Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, commencing for the same at the southeast corner
of said Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East, Mount Diablo Base Meridian;
thence South 88 degrees West along the Section line between Sections 13 and 24, a
distance of 1650 feet; thence North 1056 feet; thence North 88 degrees East, 1650
feet to the east line of Section 13; thence South, 1056 feet to the point of beginning.
APN 062-290-38
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department did study and recommend
approval of said request; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration (ND -05-01) pursuant to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the required public hearing on January 25, 2006 was duly advertised and
held in a manner prescribed by law; and
WHEREAS, after due consideration of the project, the Planning Commission did
recommend approval of the project to the City Council; and
Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning
Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings:
1. The applicant has submitted a Development Plan that complies with the
requirements of the Section 15.34.070 of the Growth Management Plan for
Residential Development Ordinance.
2. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND -05-01) for this project was recommended for
approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-02.
3. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and
held in a manner prescribed by law.
4. The proposed design and improvement of the site is consistent with all applicable
standards adopted by the City in that the project, as conditioned, will conform to
adopted standards and improvements mandated by the City of Lodi Public Works
Department Standards and Specifications, Zoning Ordinance as well as all other
applicable standards.
5. The size, shape and topography of the site is physically suitable for the residential
development proposed in that the site is generally flat and is not within an identified
natural hazard area.
6. The site is suitable for the density proposed by the project in that the site can be
served by all public utilities and creates design solutions for storm water, traffic and
air quality issues.
7. The design of the proposed project and the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Environmental impacts identified though the Initial Study would not be significant
because mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce any
impacts to a level of less than significant.
8. The design of the proposed project and type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems in that all public improvements will be built per City
standards and all private improvements will be built per the Uniform Building Code.
9. The design of the proposed project 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 in that as conditioned the project will provide
dedication of adequate right-of-way for Harney Lane, and said improvements will be
illustrated on the Tentative Map for the project.
10. The project is conditioned to construct improvements to Harney Lane thereby
insuring that an adequate Level of Service is maintained on the roadways within the
area.
11. The project site is not considered to be Farmland of Importance in that the site is
classified as Urban Built Up Land under the California Department of Conservation
Land Evaluation.
12. The project allows for the orderly development of Lodi in that the Land Use and
Growth Management Element calls for the development of the site at a density of 7.1
to 20.0 dwelling units per acre and the allocation of units proposed sets a density of
8.2 dwelling units per acre.
2
13. The project complies with Chapter 15.34 of the City of Lodi Municipal Code in that
the proposed development plan is within Priority Area 1.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the Planning
Commission hereby recommends approval of the requested 65 medium density
Residential Growth Allocations (GM -05-003) to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the
Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends to the City Council for
approval pursuant to the City Ordinances and no waiver of any requirement of said
Ordinances are intended or implied except as specifically set forth in this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi,
State of California, at a regularly scheduled meeting thereof, this 251h day of January,
2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Secretary to the Planning Commission
3
ATTACHMENT 8
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUEST OF
JEFFREY KIRST, TOKAY DEVELOPMENT, FOR REZONING Z-05-04 TO CHANGE THE
ZONING OF 349, 401 AND 415 EAST HARNEY LANE FROM R -MD, RESIDENTIAL
MEDIUM DENSITY TO PD(38), PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 38 AND APPROVAL
OF THE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly
noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Rezoning/ Development
Plan in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter
17.84, Amendments; and
WHEREAS, the properties are located at 349, 401 and 415 East Harney Lane (APN:
062-290-38, 062-290-37 and 062-290-14); and are more particularly described as:
PARCEL ONE:
The West 8 arcres of the South 20 acres, EXCEPT the West 170 feet of the South
201.6 feet thereof of the following described tract of land.
A portion of the southeast quarter of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East,
Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, commencing for the same at the southeast corner
of said Section 13. Township 3 North, Range 6 East, Mount Diablo Base and
Meridian; thence South 88 degrees West along the section line between Sections 13
and 24, a distance of 1650 feet; thence north, 1056 feet; thence North 88 degrees
East 1650 feet to the east line of Section 13; thence south, 1056 feet to the point of
beginning.
APN 062-290-14 and 062-290-37
PARCEL TWO:
The West 170.0 feet of the South 201.6 feet of the West 8 acres of the South 20
acres of the following described tract of land.
A portion of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East,
Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, commencing for the same at the southeast corner
of said Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 6 East, Mount Diablo Base Meridian;
thence South 88 degrees West along the Section line between Sections 13 and 24, a
distance of 1650 feet; thence North 1056 feet; thence North 88 degrees East, 1650
feet to the east line of Section 13; thence South, 1056 feet to the point of beginning.
APN 062-290-38
WHEREAS, the property owners are Donald and Nancy Miller whom have provided
consent to the project proponent and applicant for this zone change/development
plan request; and
WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Jeffrey Kirst of Tokay Development,
P.O. Box 1259, Lodi, CA, 95258; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration
(ND -05-01) and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pursuant to CEQA;
and
WHEREAS, the property has a general plan designation of MDR (Medium Density
Residential) with a density range of 7.1-20 dwelling units per acre; and
WHEREAS, the property is currently zoned R -MD, Residential Medium Density; and
WHEREAS, the request is to change the zoning of the property to PD (38), Planned
Development number 38; and
WHEREAS, the development plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D
Planned Development District, shall be the Revised 2005 Development Plan
prepared by Baumbach and Piazza dated May, 2005, kept on file in the Community
Development Department and said development plan has a density of 8.3 dwelling
units per acre; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred.
Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning
Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings:
1. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND -05-01) for this project was recommended for
approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-02.
2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and
held in a manner prescribed by law.
3. It is found that the requested Rezoning does not conflict with adopted plans or
policies of the General Plan and will serve sound Planning practice.
4. It is further found that the parcels of the proposed rezoning are physically suitable
for the development of the proposed project.
5. The proposed design and improvement of the site is consistent with all applicable
standards adopted by the City in that the project, as conditioned, will conform to
adopted standards and improvements mandated by the City of Lodi Public Works
Department Standards and Specifications, Zoning Ordinance as well as all other
applicable standards.
6. The size, shape and topography of the site is physically suitable for the residential
development proposed in that the site is generally flat and is not within an identified
natural hazard area.
7. The site is suitable for the density proposed by the project in that the site can be
served by all public utilities and creates design solutions for storm water, traffic and
air quality issues.
8. The design of the proposed project and the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Environmental impacts identified though the Initial Study would not be significant
because mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce any
impacts to a level of less than significant.
9. The design of the proposed project and type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems in that all public improvements will be built per City
standards and all private improvements will be built per the Uniform Building Code.
10. The design of the proposed project 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 in that as conditioned the project will provide
dedication of adequate right-of-way for Harney Lane, and said improvements will be
illustrated on the Tentative Map for the project.
11. The project is conditioned to construct improvements to Harney Lane thereby
insuring that an adequate Level of Service is maintained on the roadways within the
area.
12. The project site is not considered to be Farmland of Importance in that the site is
classified as Urban Built Up Land under the California Department of Conservation
Land Evaluation.
13. The project allows for the orderly development of Lodi in that the Land Use and
Growth Management Element calls for the development of the site at a density of
7.1 to 20.0 dwelling units per acre and the development plan sets a density of 8.2
dwelling units per acre.
14. The project complies with Chapter 15.34 of the City of Lodi Municipal Code in that
the proposed development plan is within Priority Area 1.
15. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the development plan
dated May 2005, submitted by Baumbach and Piazza.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the
Planning commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the Re -zone to
PD(38) and associated Development Plan (file Z-05-04) to the City Council of the City of
Lodi subject to the following conditions of approval:
All mitigation measures for the project identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND -05-01)
are hereby incorporated into this recommendation of approval:
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a
Geotechnical Investigation shall be prepared for the project site. The project
applicant shall incorporate any grading and site preparations as recommended in
the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation.
Mitigation Measure HYD -1: As a condition of approval of the final grading and
drainage plans for the project, the Public Works department shall verify that the
Master Utility Plan for the site will comply with the City's storm water
requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -2: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage
plans, the project engineer shall provide a hydraulic analysis to the Public Works
Department for verification that implementation of the proposed drainage plans
would comply with the City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -3: The project shall include landscape areas, as shown
titled "Revised 2005 Development Plan" prepared by Baumbach & Piazza, Inc.,
dated May, 2005, to allow for groundwater recharge.
Mitigation Measure HYD -4: As a part of the compliance with National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) and
associated fees would need to be submitted to the Central Valley Regional Water
Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) providing notification and intent to comply
with the General Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction
Activity for this project (copies of the NOI and fee payment shall be provided to the
City). Prior to construction and site grading, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) is required for construction activities and remediation on-site. The
project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the
construction and life of the project. The SWPPP would act as the overall program
document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential water quality
impacts associated with the implementation and operation of the propose project.
The project proponent shall prepare a SWPPP designed to reduce potential
impacts to surface water quality through the construction period of the project.
The SWPPP must be maintained on-site and made available to City inspectors
and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed
BMPs designed to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs
shall include practices to minimize the contact of construction materials,
equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents,
adhesives) with stormwater. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed
centralized storage areas that keep these materials out of the rain.
Mitigation Measure AIR -1: The following construction equipment mitigation
measures are to be implemented at construction sites to reduce construction
exhaust emissions:
1. Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil
fuel -fired equipment;
2. Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as
recommended by the manufacturer manuals, to control exhaust
emissions.
3. Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to
reduce emissions associated with idling emissions;
4. Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount
of equipment in use to 7:00am to 7:00pm; and
5. Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant
concentrations; this may include ceasing of construction activity during
the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways.
Mitigation Measure AIR -2: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PMlo
Prohibitions of the SJVAPCD, the following controls are required to be
implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the project.
All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being used on a
daily basis for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust
emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/ suppressant, covered with a
tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.
All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be
effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical
stabilizer/ suppressant.
All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading,
cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of
fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking.
4. During the demolition of existing buildings, all exterior surfaces of the
building shall be wetted during demolition.
5. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or
effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of
freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained.
6. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud
or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of
dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or
accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use
of blower devices is expressly forbidden.)
7. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the
surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of
fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or chemical
stabilizer/ suppressant.
Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it
extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday.
9. Site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and
trackout. Prevention measures include requiring all trucks to drive over a
bed of gravel to rid the tires of dirt and mud prior to exiting the site.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1: To mitigate its share of traffic impacts on City streets,
the project applicant/ developer shall be subject to traffic impact fees assessed by
the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2: To mitigate its share of impacts on SR -99, the project
applicant/ developer shall be subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis as stipulated
in the soon -to -be -adopted regional traffic impact fees established by the San
Joaquin County Council of Governments.
Mitigation Measure BIO -1: Consistent with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), a SJMSCP biological survey must
be completed and the appropriate fees shall be paid prior to receiving building
permits.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: To ensure that the project does not interfere with
emergency evacuation plans, grading and building plans shall be subject to review
and approval by the Fire Department.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: To minimize temporary construction noise impacts on
surrounding residences, construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00
p.m., seven days a week.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: To minimize long term noise impacts on future
residents, a sound attenuation study shall be submitted for review and approval
by the Planning Division. Said study shall provide measure to reduce the potential
outdoor noise to a level acceptable for residential units (below 60db) as stipulated
in the Noise Element of the General Plan. Measures may include sound
attenuation walls, increased insulation and insulated windows.
Mitigation Measure PUB -1: The project applicant/ developer shall be subject to
development impact fees for fire and police services established by the City of
Lodi.
Mitigation Measure PUB -2: The project applicant/ developer shall be subject to
school impact fees established by Lodi Unified School District.
Mitigation Measure AES -1: Plans submitted for building permits shall show
architectural enhancements for street side elevations of units 41-63. Architectural
enhancements shall be similar to that provided on the front elevations of said
units including, but not limited to, decorative iron work, window banding,
shutters, and varying roof -lines. Said plans shall be subject to the review and
approval of the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -2: Plans submitted for the masonry wall along Harney
Lane (whether or not a sound wall is required) shall include decorative treatments
such as cap stones and columns. Additionally, clinging vines (on 3 -foot centers)
and other landscaping shall be planted against to wall. Design of the wall shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -3: Outdoor lighting associated with the proposed
development shall be designed and located to minimize ambient light levels for
any given application, consistent with public safety standards. Lighting shall be
placed in areas of pedestrian activity and at residential entrances, and shall be
minimized elsewhere. Ornamental, pedestrian scale lighting fixtures shall be
utilized when possible. Lighting fixtures shall be shielded and directed downward
to minimize glare on neighboring properties.
Mitigation Measure CULT -1: If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during project construction activities, all work within
50 feet of the discovery shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist shall be
contracted to evaluate the discoveries and make recommendations regarding their
potential significance and extent throughout the site. If such deposits cannot be
avoided, they shall be evaluated for their California and National Register
eligibility. If the deposits are not eligible, additional mitigation is not necessary. If
the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided or adverse project effects shall be
mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeologist's evaluation, a report shall be
prepared documenting the methods and results of the research, and
recommendations for additional mitigation. In accordance with the City's General
Plan Urban Design and Cultural Resources Element, the City shall consult the
California Archeological Inventory, Central California Information Center, at
Stanislaus State University, for recommended mitigation measures.
2. Prior to the development of the Miller Ranch Development project, the
applicant/ developer shall file for a tentative subdivision map. Review and approval
of the tentative subdivision map is a discretionary action and additional conditions
of approval may be placed on the project at that time.
3. All applicable state statutes, and local ordinances, including all applicable
Building and Fire Code requirements for hazardous materials shall apply to the
project.
4. Prior to submittal of building permits, the applicant shall submit construction
elevations, perspective elevations, precise landscape and irrigation plans, as well
as building materials for the review and approval of the Community Development
Director. Said plans shall indicate that all corner lots shall have architectural
treatments on both street facing elevations.
5. Prior to submittal of building permits, the applicant shall submit a walls and
fencing plan. Said plan shall show all proposed walls and fencing. Fencing visible
to the public right of way shall be constructed of treated wood or alternative
material to prevent premature deterioration. Furthermore, all fencing within the
project site shall be designed with steel posts, or a functional equivalent, to
prevent premature deterioration and collapse.
6. The proposed public lanes shall incorporate stamped concrete, pavers or an
equivalent subject to approval by the Public Works Department and Community
Development Department.
7. The proposed project shall be subject to the San Joaquin County Air Pollution
Control District Rules.
8. The proposed project should incorporate as many energy conserving and emission
reducing features as possible, as outlined in correspondence from San Joaquin
County Air Pollution Control District, dated January 13, 2006 and kept on file in
the Community Development Department.
9. Prior to submittal of any further plan check or within 90 days of the approval of
this project, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall sign a notarized affidavit
stating that "I(we), , the owner(s) or the owner's representative have read,
understand, and agree to the conditions approving GM 05-003." Immediately
following this statement will appear a signature block for the owner or the owner's
representative which shall be signed. Signature blocks for the City Community
Development Director and City Engineer shall also appear on this page. The
affidavit shall be approved by the City prior to any improvement plan or final map
submittal.
16. As shown on the development plan, submitted by Baumbach and Piazza and dated
May 2005, and as further described in correspondence from the project applicant,
the proposed development shall be subject to the development criteria described in
the following table:
Standard
Proposed Project
Minimum lot size
2,625 s .ft.
Minimum lot width
50 feet
Building Height
2 stories not to exceed 35
feet
Front Setback
7 feet and 6 inches to 12 feet
Side Setback
4 feet
Street side setback
4 feet
Rear Setback
8 feet
Parking Spaces
2 covered spaces per unit
Lot Coverage
50%
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 06-04 was passed and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on January 25,
2006, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
PARTIAL MINUTES DRAFT
LODI PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING
CARNEGIE FORUM, 305 WEST PINE STREET
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 25, 2006
CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
The Regular Planning Commission meeting of January 25, 2006, was called to order by
Chair Heinitz at 7:03 p.m.
Present: Planning Commissioners — Cummins, Haugan, Kuehne, Moran, and
Chair Heinitz
Absent: Planning Commissioners — White
Also Present: Community Development Director Randy Hatch, Planner Manager Peter
Pirnejad, Associate Planner Mark Meissner, Deputy City Attorney Janice
Magdich, and Administrative Secretary Kari Chadwick
2. MINUTES
a) None
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
b) Notice thereof having been published according to law, an affidavit of which
publication is on file in the Community Development Department, Chair Heinitz
called for the public hearing to consider Request for the Planning Commission to
consider recommendations of approval to the City Council for a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Growth Management Allocations for 65 medium density
units, and a zone change from R -MD, Residential Medium Density to PD(38),
Planned Development to construct 65 single-family residential homes at 349,
401, and 415 East Harney Lane. (Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay Development,
Applicant)(File #'s ND -05-01, GM -05-003, Z-05-04)
CEQA Status: Mitigated Negative Declaration ND -05-01
Resolution #: P.C. 06-02, P.C. 06-03, & P.C. 06-04
Vice Chair Kuehne recused himself.
Charity Wagner, LSA Associates, the project is located at 349, 401 and 415 East
Harney Lane. The current area has 2 single family homes and some accessory
buildings associated with those homes, a commercial flower garden, and a
cherry tree farm. The Miller Ranch Project will consist of 65 single family homes
and demolish the existing structures. The project is three fold with a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Growth Management Allocations, and a Zone change
request. The initial study prepared by staff found that there would not be any
significant environmental impact from the project with proposed mitigations. The
MND was prepared and noticed according to the rules set by CEQA. The San
Joaquin Valley Air Control District had some additional conditions that staff
incorporated into the conditions of approval to the project. The Growth
Management Allocations involves 65 medium density units and is designed to fit
in with the Villa's Development that is currently under construction adjacent to
this project. The third part of the proposal is the Zone change request from a
multi -family residential zone to a planned development zone. Planned
development zones allow variations of zoning code standards in order to get the
most efficient and high quality architectural plan for a development. Staff
PARTIAL MINUTES
recommends that the Commission recommend to Council to adopt the MND, to
approve the Growth Management Allocations as proposed and to approve the
zone change with the associated conditioned development plan.
In response to Chair Heinitz, Randy Hatch stated that each item needed a
separate motion and vote.
In response to Chair Heinitz, Ms. Wagner stated that the main access will be off
of Panzani Way or Melby Drive which both intersect with Harney Lane.
In response to Commissioner Moran, Ms Wagner agreed that the noise time
frame for construction listed in the initial study checklist was reversed. She also
stated that the block wall height will be determined by the Public Works
Department.
Hearing Opened to the Public
• Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay Development Co., applicant on behalf of the current
owners, the Miller Family, stated that the Miller Family has been farming this
property for many decades and are now ready to relocate further to the west
of Lodi. All parties involved in the project are in agreement with the
conditions set forth by city staff.
In response to Chair Heinitz, Mr. Kirst stated that the style of home is a single-
family home on a small lot. The price range has not been determined as of yet,
but because of the land density the prices should be in the entry level category.
Public Portion of Hearina Closed
MOTION /VOTE:
The Planning Commission, on motion of Commissioner Cummins, Moran
second, recommend to Council to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND -05-01) and the associated mitigation monitoring and reporting program
attached. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Commissioners — Cummins, Haugan, Moran, and Chair Heinitz
Noes: Commissioners — None
Abstain: Commissioners — Vice Chair Kuehne
MOTION /VOTE:
The Planning Commission, on motion of Commissioner Moran, Heinitz second,
recommend to Lodi City Council of the request of Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay
Development, for rezoning (Z-05-04) to change the zoning of 349, 401 and 415
East Harney Lane from R -MD, residential medium density to PD(38), Planned
Development number 38 and approval of the associated conditioned
development plan. The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Commissioners — Cummins, Haugan, Moran, and Chair Heinitz
Noes: Commissioners — None
Abstain: Commissioners — Vise Chair Kuehne
PARTIAL MINUTES
MOTION /VOTE:
The Planning Commission, on motion of Commissioner Haugan, Cummins
second, recommend to the Lodi City Council to approve the allocation request of
Jeffrey Kirst for 65 medium density residential growth management units (GM -
05 -003) pursuant to chapter 15.34 of the City of Lodi municipal code subject to
the conditions in the attached resolution. The motion carried by the following
vote:
Ayes: Commissioners — Cummins, Haugan, Moran, and Chair Heinitz
Noes: Commissioners — None
Abstain: Commissioners — Vice Chair Kuehne
Vice Chair Kuehne has rejoined the Commission.
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-29
A RESOLUTIONOF THE LODE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING
THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONAS ADEQUATE
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR THE MILLER
RANCH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (File No. ND -05-01) was
prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and
the Guidelines provided hereunder. The Community Development Department has determined
that all environmental impacts that result from this project can be mitigated to a less than
significant level; and
WHEREAS, all the required referrals, notice, and posting have been performed for the
required time per the Act and Guidelines referred to above; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared in
accordance with CEQA and will be adopted as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
package to assure that all potentially significant impacts will be mitigated; and
WHEREAS, all mitigations necessary to reduce any impact from the project to a less
than significant level have been agreed to by the project proponent and incorporated into the
proposal; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council approve the filing of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration by the Community Development Director as adequate environmental
documentation for the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council has reviewed all
documentation and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration as adequate
environmental documentation for the Miller Ranch Development Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts
the Mitigated Monitoring and Reporting Program included as ExhibitA
Dated: February 15,2006
W_-_—_-r--=_---==_—___-___---___
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006-29 was passed and adopted by the City
Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held February 15, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS —Beckman, Hansen, Johnson, Mounce, and
Mayor Hitchcock
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS— None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
City Clerk
2006-29
JEXHIBIT Al
Miller Ranch Development Project
DRAFT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 05-01
Growth Management Allocations and Planned
Development Zone Change
(GM -05-003 and 2-05-02)
(New Zone file # 2-05-04)
APPLICANT: Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay Development
PREPARED FOR
City of Lodi
Community Development Department
P.OBOX 3006
LODI, CA 95241
PREPARED BY:
LSA Associates, Inc
2215 Fifth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
(510) 540-7331
www,lsa-assoc.com
December 2005
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
TABLE CF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................... I .... I... ......... ... I ..... ........... . ........... I
B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLYAFFECTED ............................................................ 8
C. LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION.................................................................................... ...............9
D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST ...................................................... .............................. 10
E. E VAL UA TION 0 F ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ..................................................................... ......17
F. SOURCES .......................................................................................................................................... 45
G. MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE INCL UDED IN THEPR OJECTAND AGREED TO BY THE
PROJECT SPONSOR AND ALL SUBSEQUENT PROPERTY OWNERSAND PERMITTEES ....... 47
H. AGREEMENT BYPROJECT SPONSOR ...................................................... .................................... so
1
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Environmental Checklist Form
Prepared Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
I . Project title: Miller Ranch Development Project
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Lodi, Community Development Department
Box 3006, Lodi, CA 95241
3. Contact person and phone number:
Randy Hatch
Community Development Director
(209) 333-6711
4. Project location:
349,401 and 415 East Harney Lane
City of Lodi, San Joaquin County
Project sponsor's name and address:
Jeffrey Kirst, Tokay Development
PO Box 1259
Lodi, CA 95258
6. General Plan Land Use designation: MDR, Medium Density Residential.
7. Zoning designation: R -MD, Residential Medium Density.
8. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None.
9, Description of project: The following provides a description of the Miller Ranch
Development Project.
Existing Conditions
The project area is comprised of three parcels on the north side of Harney Lane, west of
Panzani Way and east of Melby Lane. The project sites are located in the City of Lodi
and are identified as 349 Harney Lane (APN 062-290-38), 401 East Harney Lane (APN
062-290-37) and 415 East Harney Lane (APN 062-290-14). A project vicinity map is
provided as Figure 1 and photos of the project site are provided in Figure 2.
SOURCE: CSAR, 2005; LSA ASSOCIATES. INC.. 3005
I:sLOD530 alct m-hllip-kYig_lAi (11122.105)
Miller Ranch Development Plan
Project Location
and Regional Vicinity
6
1000
2000
SOURCE: CSAR, 2005; LSA ASSOCIATES. INC.. 3005
I:sLOD530 alct m-hllip-kYig_lAi (11122.105)
Miller Ranch Development Plan
Project Location
and Regional Vicinity
Single-family home at 349 But Harney Lane
Agricultural land at 401 Bast Harney Lane
LSA
SOURCE: LSA ASSOCIATES .IIC..'-Dt15.
13L0D530 miller ranch1AgurcAFiQ_2.ni (I1-17-05)
FIGURE 2
Miller Ranch Development Plan
Photos of the Project Site
City of Lod i Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
349 East Harney Lane
This parcel is approximately 0.68 acres and is developed with a single-family residence
and a detached workshop/storage building. The home is single -story and faces Harney
Lane. The home is currently inhabited by the property owners that farm the property at
401 East Harney Lane (also part of this project). The detached workshop/storage
building is located behind the home and is not entirely visible to Harney Lane. The
workshop is used for the farming operations including storage of farming equipment.
Vehicular access to the site is provided by two driveways off of Harney Lane: one
driveway leads to the garage and the other leads to the rear of the home and workshop.
There is no sidewalk on Harney Lane. The home is setback approximately 25 feet from
Harney Lane and the entire front yard is landscaped with the exception of a driveway and
walkway. There is a septic tank on site to service the residence and there are mature trees
and shrubs along the north and east property lines.
401 East Harney Lane
This parcel is approximately 6.57 acres and there are no permanent structures on-site.
The site is used for commercial agriculture, growing cherries and flowers. The cherry
trees are located in rows along the western side of the property, while the flowers
occupy the central and eastern portions of the site. There are also miscellaneous
temporary structures on-site, including a portable restroom, and storage of
miscellaneous farming materials, including wood pallets, in the northeast and northwest
portions of the site.
Access to the site is provided by a dirt access road off of Harney Lane and there are no
designated parking spaces on site.
415 East Harney Lane
This parcel is approximately 0.67 acres and is developed with a single-family home and
a workshop (the home is currently utilized as a construction office for the residential
development occurring immediately east of the project site). Both structures are located
along the east property line, The home is single -story and is setback approximately 30
feet from Harney Lane, The workshop is located behind the home and is utilized as
storage area. Access to the site is provided by two driveways on Harney Lane.
Proposed Project
The proposed project includes the demolition of all existing structures on the project site
and the construction of 65 single-family units. A conceptual site plan of the proposed
project is shown in Figure 3. The General Plan designates the project site for Medium
Density Residential land uses (MDR) at a density of 7.1 to 20 dwelling units per gross
acre. At 8.2 dwelling units per gross acres, the proposed project would be consistent
with the General Plan.
To implement the proposed project, the project applicant has submitted applications for
a Zone Change (from Residential, Multiple -Family to a Planned Development Zone) and
Growth Management Allocations. The project applicant proposes the construction of 65
single-family detached homes on the project site. The units would be built and sold as
individual homes on separate lots.
5
usj,j ajq; jvnjdoauo;D
cold JUAW401anpa V.?Uoff Iall!pv
9 Tarloll
(Wriul JzjJ!up
v s I
AMA, i "t.
VR' 51 62
K q1t 1:1
0
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
This project does not include any affordable housing units. All of units would be sold at
market -rate value.
The applicant has indicated that product types would match the planned development
project currently under construction to the east of the project site, The Villas. The Villas
include three floor plans varying in size from 1,700 square feet to 1,800 square feet. All
units are two-story structures, include a two -car garage, have 3 to 4 bedrooms, and 2%
bathrooms.
Access to the site would be provided by an existing intersection at Panzani Way and
Harney Lane and the extension of Driftwood Drive (a residential street to the west).
Internal circulation would be provided by one main tastlwest roadway in the project that
would connect with two existing roads, Ponta Rosa to the east and Driftwood Drive to
the west. There are also two cul-de-sac streets that would provide northlsouth access
within the site. Most of units would be accessed from 24 -foot public lanes.
The project includes a 20 -foot dedication for right-of-way improvements on Harney
Lane. Improvements include expansion of road way and a bicycle and pedestrian path.
All of the homes would include a two -car garage. Guest parking would be provided in
individual driveways, on the main roadway and two cul-de-sacs. No parking would be
allowed in the 24 -foot wide public lanes. Approximately 35 on -street parking spaces
would be provided.
The proposed project would include private yard for each of the units and a minimum
landscaped setback of 12 feet in the front yard (front yard setback is reduced to 7.5 feet
for homes on public lanes). Rear yards proposed with this project range from 560 to
2,240 square feet. There is no common landscape or play area proposed.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Single-family residential units are located immediately north, east and west of the project
site (homes to the east are currently under construction). One single-family home and
agriculture lands are located to the south, across Harney Lane. Property to the north and
west is zoned R-2 (Residential, Single -Family) and the property to the east is zoned PD
(Planned Development). The property south of Harney Lane is located in the County.
San Joaquin County designates these parcels as AG -40 (General Agriculture, 40 acre
minimum lot size). A project vicinity map is provided in Figure 1.
7
City of Lod i Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages
Land Use and Planning
Transportation/Circulation
Utilities and Service
Systems
0 Population and Housing
0
Biological Resources
0
Aesthetics
0 Geology and Soils
0
Mineral Resources
0
Cultural Resources
Hydrology and Water
• Quality
•
Hazards
Recreation
Air Quality
Noise
Mandatory Findings of
0
0
•
Significance
0 Agricultural Resources
0
Public Services
8
p I ft Gt .D NOT iar a nowt adaet an de
Md�MM AMS TEM vA tie pop
0 if bAAm� -0 do p w , m pll#W orAd be a off" M oa.a 6 a — - -
dlrs Ow le a doMmi Mob lbb cm boomm - v i boom bs Gln poi jed boo been
■ra3 rea bV the p�sdprop a I A 1►�'TMTI D l+lit'iA'f M
D *W br v pNr�ed
p 3 N MAY Y� s WWNUSS at a onto
rm R ood o0
AL AC? RIFT is ro p h - i
E3 plipall I pr1j" MAY bras a. pop-owk Impw W' Pomm wf v
r11e#il srMb*d"' �Meo■ Ire a�io��loot, rets iarltaas�iat 2} rr hro
d w rr e.r#i.rPOWtib 1a�et arii. sad
>�od 1wmompb0 aye ii a mf * � r dfa
wd as
Am EAR�lMOCT NOW2 k tagrired. bit i m=6
dralialr � �rito bs oeid�ieraad.
G 1 tre peop�aeed �� jr.t mrti dove a �[Ikwnt aA�we as Irr arwaa�
dao la rilrei1.14 . bum � ) bw bomm%*W adapo* is as aa:0
EIL V pe'!`M 7f*palllal I a ioabla arw6Pdo6and (b)bm boon
� as a — ell ar — Nt v'li Wdre + ARATM. M*dbg
aR 1�IOM 11�C iK'lapOMd prgje�el, ���
ft�rdbr is�la�rirad.
c., h?Z4Oats+ I W
PI%= RsaW. Cmwurb Dardap� nlrr m For OW efLadi
City of Lodi Community Development Department
D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
Initial Study Checklist
Potentially Potentially Len than
Significant Significant significant No
Impact Unless Impact Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
I. LAN DUSEAND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ❑
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of any ❑
agency with jurisdiction over the project(including, but not limited to
the general plan. specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicabk habitat or conservation plan? ❑
II. POPULATIONAND HOUSING. Wouldtheproject:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ❑
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by ❑
proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads and other infrastructure)?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?
III, GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential rubstantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area o r based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
iii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss oft op soil?
c) Be located on a geological unitor soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on -or
off landslide, lateral spreading. subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, asdefined in Table 18-1-H ofthe Uniform
Building Code (1994). creating substantial risk to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternate wastewater disposal systems where sewers are notavailable for
the disposal of waste water.
W
FW-
❑ 121
❑ B
❑ '®
P m
❑
® ❑
❑
® ❑
❑
0 ❑
❑ 0 ❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
la
❑
❑
B
❑
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
❑
Ea
10
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the project,
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
❑
Potentially Potentially bees than
Eff
E7
Significant Significant Significant No
!Impact Unless Impact Impact
h) Violate air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
Mitigation
0
❑
Incorporated
IV. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a)
Violate any water standards or waste discharge requirements?
❑ ❑ lZ ❑
b)
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
❑
with groundwater recharge such that there would he a net deficit in
pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,
the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop I o a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
permits have been granted)?
c)
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site o r area.
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
including through the alteration ofthe course of stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount ofsurface runoffin a manner
❑
81
which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site?
❑
d)
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern ofthe site or area,
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
0
including through the alteration ofthe course ofa stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount ofsurface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on or off-site?
e)
Create or contribute to run-off water which would exceed the capacity
❑ ❑ 81 ❑
ofexisting or planned Stormwater drainagesystems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f)
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
❑ ❑ 81 ❑
g)
Place housing within a 100-yearflood hazard area as mapped on a
❑ ❑ 0 0
federal Flood Hazards Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
other flood hazard delineation map?
h)
Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
impede or redirect flood flows?
i)
Expose people o r structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of levee
ora dam?
j)
Inundation by sieche, tsunami. or mudfiow?
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the project,
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
❑
❑
Eff
E7
plan?
h) Violate air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
❑
0
❑
❑
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
❑
0
❑
❑
pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an
applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
❑
81
❑
❑
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
❑
❑
0
❑
11
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
12
Polentially Potentially less than
Significant Significant Stp-nificant No
Impact Unless Impact Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
VL TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project:
a)
Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
❑ ❑
existingtraffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in
substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b)
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
❑ La ❑ ❑
established by the county congestion management agency or designated
roads or highways?
c)
Result in a change in a f r traffic patterns, including either an increase in
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety
risks?
d)
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e g., sharp
❑ ❑ La ❑
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e)
Result in inadequate emergency access?
11 ❑ La ❑
f)
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
❑ Cl La ❑
g)
Conflict with adopted policies. plans, or programs supporting
❑ ❑ EI ❑
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Vil. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project,
a)
Have a substantial adverseef7ect, either directly or through habitat
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special species status in local or regional plans, policies or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish and Game of U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b)
Have a substantial adverseeffect on any riparian habitat or other
❑ ❑ La ❑
sensitive natural community identifies in local or regional plans,
policies regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c)
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
❑ ❑ ❑ La
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d)
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
❑ ❑ ❑ La
migratory fish or wildlife species o r with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e)
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
❑ ❑ ❑ La
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f)
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local,
regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
12
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
IX. HAZARDS. Would the project:
a)
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
the routine transport. use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Significant
Significant
Significant
No
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
Impact
Unless
Impact
impact
c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
Mitigation
materials. substances, or waste within % mile of an existing o r proposed
Incorporated
d)
V111. MINERAL RESOURCES. Wouldthe project.,
❑ ❑ ❑ fa
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
a) Result in the loss ofavailability ofa known mineral resource that
❑
❑
❑
fa
would be of value to the region and the residents of the State?
e)
For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a
❑ ❑ ❑ fa
b) Result in the loss of availability ofa locally -important mineral resource
❑
❑
❑
El
recovery s ite delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other
residing orworking in the project area?
Q
For a project located within the vicinity ofa private airstrip, would the
land use plan?
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
IX. HAZARDS. Would the project:
a)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
❑ ❑ fa ❑
the routine transport. use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
❑ ❑ El ❑
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
materials. substances, or waste within % mile of an existing o r proposed
school?
d)
Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials
❑ ❑ ❑ fa
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result. would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e)
For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a
❑ ❑ ❑ fa
plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles ofa public airport or public
use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing orworking in the project area?
Q
For a project located within the vicinity ofa private airstrip, would the
❑ ❑ ❑ 81
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
g)
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
❑ fa ❑ ❑
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h)
Expose people o rstructu res to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
X.
NOISE. Would dmproject result in:
a)
Exposure of persons to orkeneration of noise levels in excess of
❑ 81 ❑ ❑
standard established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b)
Exposure of persons to or generation ofexcessive ground borne
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
vibration or ground bourne noise levels.
c)
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
❑ Cl fa ❑
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d)
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in
❑ fa ❑ ❑
the projectvicinity above levels existing without the project?
13
City of Lodi Community Development Department
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such
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.
i) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Xl, PUBLICSERVICES.
a) Would the project result insubstantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered 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:
i) Fire protection?
iii) Police protection?
iii)Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
X)), UTILITIESAND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project.-
Exceed
roject.Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which would cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require o r result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities o r expansion of existing facilities, the Construction of which
wflgld cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project's projected demand in addition tothe provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Z) Comply with federal, State and local statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
X111. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a Substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
1nitW Study Checklist
Potentially
Poteatially
Less than
Significant
Significant
Significant No
]Impact
Unless
Impact Impart
EI
Mitigation
❑
❑
Incorporated
❑
❑
❑
❑ Q
❑ ❑ ❑ 1]
❑
EI
❑
13
❑
B
❑
❑
❑
EI
❑
❑
❑
EI
❑
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
H
❑
❑
H
❑
❑
❑
®
4
❑
❑
o
a
❑ ❑
0
❑
❑ ❑
0
❑
❑ ❑
fl
PJ
14
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would Nie proposal.-
a)
roposal.
a) Create a substantial adverse change in the significance of historical
Potentially
Potentially
Less than
0
resource as defined in CEQA Section 15064.57
!Significant
Significant
Significant
No
h) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
Impact
Unless
Inpaet
Impact
archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Section 15064.5?
Mitigation
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site
❑
Incorporated
❑
❑
b) Substantially damage a scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
❑
❑
❑
0
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic
❑
0
❑
❑
highway.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or qualify of the site
❑
0
❑
❑
and its surroundings?
❑
❑
0
❑
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
❑
0
❑
❑
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would Nie proposal.-
a)
roposal.
a) Create a substantial adverse change in the significance of historical
❑
❑
❑
0
resource as defined in CEQA Section 15064.57
h) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
❑
0
❑
❑
archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Section 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site
❑
0
❑
❑
or unique geological feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, includingthose interred outside of formal
❑
0
❑
❑
cemeteries?
XV. RECREATION. Wouldtheproject:
a) increasethe use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
❑
❑
0
❑
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction o r expansion
❑
❑
0
❑
of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
XVI. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to
agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer ro the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Sire
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by tke California Dept. of Conservation
as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. Would the pmjecr.
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency. to a non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, ora Williamson Act ❑ ❑ ❑ 81
contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural use?
15
City of Lodi Community Development Department
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGSOF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause fsh or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant o r animal community,
reduce the number o r restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal o r eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or pre -history?
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).
c) Doesthe project have environmental effects, which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
I n i t i a l Study Checklist
Potentially
Potentially
Lean than
Significant
Significant
Significant Na
Impact
Unless
Impact Impact
Mltigatlon
Incorporated
❑ 0 ❑ 13
❑ ❑ p ❑
16
City of Lodi Community Development Department
E. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
An evaluation of each environmental impact topic is provided below.
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Summary of Land Use and Planning Impacts and Mitieation Measures
Initial Study Checklist
The Lodi General Plan includes goals and policies for development and urbanization within the City limits
and the City's Sphere of Influence. The Sphere of Influence (also referred to as the planning area) includes
unincorporated areas adjacent to the City, to which the City intends to expand and urbanize. The General
Plan designates properties within the SO] for future land uses, once incorporated in the City.'
The General Plan establishes a land use pattern for development of the City and the City's Sphere of
Influence. Though a portion of the project site is currently agricultural land (cherry orchard and flower
gardens) the General Plan indicates that the project site and surrounding area (including property south of the
Harney Lane, which is within the Sphere of Influence) are planned for urbanization and development. More
specifically, the General Plan land use element designates the subject site and surrounding areas for
residential development.
The General Plan Land Use Map designates the project area as MDR (Medium Density Residential Land
Uses, 7.1-20 dwelling units per gross acre). Properties to the north, east and west are also designated for
Medium Density land uses, and have been developed as such. The Medium Density Residential land use
designation is intended for development of single-family and multiple -family units. Product types within the
MDR designation include both attached and detached units.
Properties to the south, across Harney Lane, are located in the County; however these properties are within
the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI). The General Plan designates the properties across Harney Lane as PR
(Planned Residential, seven dwelling units per gross acre).
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a physical feature
that would impair mobility within an existing community, or between a community and outlying areas. The
proposed project would include residential uses that would be surrounded by other existing residential uses.
The proposed project would not physically divide an established community.
b) Would the proposal conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation ceany agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the generalplan, specific plan, local coastal
program or zoning ordinance) adoptedfor thepurpose cf avoiding environmental effects?
The purpose of this Initial Study is to evaluate the proposed project in compliance with CEQA and the City's
applicable environmental plans and policies. The City evaluates development projects against plans and
policies of the City's General Plan, Municipal Code and San Joaquin County's Multi -Specie Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan.'
Lodi. City of. 1991. General Plan. June
z San Joaquin County, 2001. San Joaquin's Multi -Species and Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.
17
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
The proposed project would develop a total 65 single-family detached dwelling units at an overall density of
8.2 dwelling units per gross acre (65 units/7.92 acres). The current General land use designation of Medium
Density Residential permits development of attached or detached units between 7.1-20.0 dwelling units per
gross acre. The proposed project complies with the product type and density range established by the General
Plan.
The current zoning is RMD (Residential, Medium Density), but this project includes a zone change to PD
(Planned Development). The intent of the PD zones is to allow for flexibility of traditional zoning code
standards in effort to achieve a high quality, livable project without compromising the functionality or safety
of the development. The proposed PD zone would modify the development standards of the Zoning Code to
be consistent with an existing PD zone immediately east of the project site (PD 36, The Villas). Once
amended, the proposed project would comply with the City's PD zone requirements.
The project is subject to the City's Right -to -Farm Ordinance because its proximity to agricultural lands.
c) Would theproject conflict with any applicable habitat or conservationplan?
The San Joaquin Council of Governments established the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan in 2000.' The purpose of the plan is to provide a strategy for balancing
development while preventing pre -mature development of agricultural lands and protecting endangered
species in San Joaquin County. City of Lodi Municipal Code (Section 15.68 San Joaquin County Multi -
Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP) Development Fees) was adopted in 2001, in
order to implement the goals and objectives of the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation
and Cpm Space Plan (SJMSCP), and to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development on
undeveloped lands within the city of Lodi and in San Joaquin County. The City has established a fee
ordinance for purposes of collecting fees to finance the SJMSCP. Development of the project site is subject
to the payment of fees in accordance with the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and
Open Space Plan.
Mitieation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant land use impacts; no mitigation measures are
required.
11, POPULATION AND HOUSING
Summary, of Population and Housine Impacts and Mitieation Measures
The City of Lodi's current population is 60,521. The City's General Plan (Section 2, Land Use Standards, page
2-2)4 assumes 2.25 persons per household for medium density product development. Using this average
household number, it is estimated that the proposed development would result in 146 residents. The City's
Growth Management Ordinance anticipates growth at 2 percent of the population per year. Approval of Growth
Management Allocations is required prior to issuance of building permits.
a) Would theproposal cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections?
Plan.
3 San Joaquin Council of Governments, 2000. San Joaquin County Multi-SpeciesHabitat Conservation and Open Space
° Lodi, City of, 1991. General Plan. June.
18
City of Lodi Community Development Department initial Study Checklist
The proposed project would result in the construction of 65 units. The estimated population that would be
generated would be approximately 146 residents (65 units x 2.25 persons per unit). The General Plan
assumes a density of 12 dwelling units per acre when establishing growth patterns for the medium density
land use designation (Table A-3, page A-5).5 This project is 8.2 dwelling units per acre and would not exceed
population projections
The project applicant has tiled for 65 medium density growth allocation units (this project would consist of
single-family detached homes, but the units are referred to as medium density units because they fall into the
medium density land use designation density of 7.1-20 dwelling units per gross acre). There are 45 medium
density allocations available for 2005 and 298 medium density allocations available from previous years (the
City has not grown at 2 percent per year, so there are allocations/units from previous year that have not been
granted)! The applicant is requesting approval of the 45 units for 2005 and for 20 units from previous years.
b) Would theproposal induce substantial growth in area either directly for example, byproposing new
homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads and other infrastructure)?
The proposed project would generate a population of approximately 146 residents by constructing 65 new
single-family residential units in compliance with the City's General Plan land use designation. New roads
and utilities would be added to service the units within the project. The project also includes dedication of 20
feet for widening of Harney Lane, as required by the City's Public Works Department. The project does not
include extensions of major roads or infrastructure beyond what is anticipated in the General Plan.
c) Would theproposal displace substantial numbers ofpeople. necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
The project site is currently developed with two single-family homes, one of which is currently used as an
office for the residential construction activities immediately east of the project site. The home that is utilized
as a residence is occupied by the property owners, who have indicated that they intend to move to another
home in the City of Lodi. The two existing units are not affordable because they are located on large parcels.
The proposed project would remove the two existing homes and replace with 65 new housing units for a net
increase o f the 63 units.
Mideation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant population and housing impacts; no mitigation
measures are required.
III. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Summary of Geoloeic Impacts and Mitieation Measures
The project site is located in the southern portion of the Sacramento Valley. Large coalescing alluvial fans
have developed along each side of the valley. The larger and more gently sloping fans occur on the east side
and consist of deposits derived from rock sources in the Sierra Nevada. The valley deposits are derived from
the Coast Ranges to the west and the Sierra Nevada to the east. Basement rocks composed of meta -sediments,
s Lodi, City of, 1991, General Plan. June
6 Lodi, Oy of, 1991. Municipal Code Chapter 15.38: Growth bbrk-jsne nt Plan for Residential Development.
19
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
volcanic, and granites underlie these deposits. The valley geomorphology includes dissected uplands, low
alluvial plains and fans, river flood plains and channels, and overflow lands and lake bottoms.
The project site is relatively flat and ground water is located approximately SO feet below ground level.'
a) Would theproject exposepeople or structures topotential substantial adverse effects, including the risk
cf lass, injury, or death involving.
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault; or ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Ground shaking is a general term referring to all aspects of motion of the earth's surface resulting from an
earthquake, and is normally the major cause of damage in seismic events. The extent of ground shaking is
controlled by the magnitude and intensity of the earthquake, distance from the rupture, and local geologic
conditions. Magnitude is a measure of the energy released by an earthquake; it is assessed by seismographs
that measure the amplitude of seismic waves. No faults are known to cross the City; however, ground shaking
may result from an earthquake outside the City and may cause damage to structures. The nearest seismic
areas are the Midland Fault, approximately 20 miles west of the City. Based on the inactivity status of this
fault, the project site is not identified as being in a special study zone, as would be defined by the Alquist-
Priolo Act." The City requires that all new structures comply with California Building Code, Seismic
Requirements. Because the project site is not located in a special study zone, the Building Code requirements
would provide adequate provisions for development on the site.
iii) Seismic -related groundfailure. including liquefaction?
Liquefaction is the temporary transformation of loose, saturated granular sediments from a solid state to a
liquefied state as a result of seismic ground shaking. In the process, the soil undergoes a temporary loss of
strength, which commonly causes ground displacement or ground failure to occur. Since saturated soils are a
necessary condition for liquefaction, soil layers in areas where the groundwater table is near the surface have
higher liquefaction potential than those in which the water table is located at greater depths. Based on the
dense soils and that groundwater is at a depth of 50 feet, the risk of liquefaction is low?
iv) Landslides?
The site and immediately adjacent areas are relatively flat. The potential for landslides is considered very low
on the site and vicinity and the risk of injury or death associated with land sliding is less than significant.
b) Result in substantial erosion or loss of top soil?
The proposed project will include grading and excavation to construct roadways and infrastructure; however,
the site will remain relatively flat with little change to the existing topography. To mitigate possible erosion
during construction, erosion control measures are included in Mitigation Measure GEO-I .
' Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November.
'Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991. April.
4 Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates. November
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
c) Wouldtheproject be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable
as o result of the project, andpotentially result in or offsite site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
Differential settlement or subsidence could occur if buildings or other improvements were built on low -
strength foundation materials (including imported fill). Pilings are often used to anchor structures to firmer
deposits below the surface in these situations. Although differential settlement generally occurs slowly
enough that its effects are not dangerous to inhabitants, it can cause significant building damage over time.
Areas of the project sites that contain loose or uncontrolled (non -engineered) fill may be susceptible to
settlement. Although ground soils within the project area consist of strong, non -expansive soils, a
Geotechnical Investigation will be conducted to provide grading and site preparations to prevent any such
settlement of proposed buildings (see Mitigation Measure GEO-I).
d) Would theproject be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B aE the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risk to life or property?
Ground soils within the project area consist of Tokay fine sandy loam and Tokay fine sandy loam hardpan
substratum. Both of these soil types have good bearing strength, are not expansive, and pose little constraint
to development. '°
e) Wouldtheproject have soils incapable cf adequately supporting the use cfseptic tanks or alternate waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not availablefor the disposal cfwaste water?
The proposed project would be connected to Lodi's sanitary sewer system and would not entail the use of
septic tanks or alternative water disposal systems.
Mitieation Measures
Mitieation Measure GEO-I : Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Geotechnical Investigation shall be
prepared for the project site. The project applicant shall incorporate any grading and site preparations as
recommended in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation.
IV. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Summary of Water Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Lodi and its surrounding areas are underlain by alluvial soils deposited by runoff from surrounding mountain
ranges. The alluvium is underlain with sedimentary layers that contain a major aquifer system that extends
throughout the Central Valley. The alluvium is saturated below a relatively shallow depth, making the
sedimentary layers underneath the area part of the major aquifer system that extends throughout the Central
Valley. The Mokelumne River flows along the northern boundary of the City of Lodi. The river serves to
recharge groundwater aquifers, and further to the west, provides drinking water and irrigation water to
agricultural lands and communities. City of Lodi obtains all of its fresh water supply from 24 existing water
wells that pump groundwater from the Longer San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin."
i0 Lodi, General Plan Final EIR. 1991, April.
" Brown and Caidvrel I, 2001, Urban Water Management Plan, Chi of Lodi, June.
21
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
The City's General Plan EIR (Chapter 12, Hydrology and Water Quality, pages 12-3 and 12-4)" includes
analysis and discussion of the City's water supply. In summary, the EIR found that the build out of the
General Plan would have significant adverse impacts on water supply because the cumulative demand for
water would increase by 67 percent. At the time the EIR was prepared, the City was already overdrafting
from its main water source, ground water. The General Plan EIR includes mitigation measures to reduce
impacts to water supply.
The project site is not located within a designated flood zone, nor are there any water bodies on the project
site.
a) Would the project violate any water standards or waste discharge requirements?
The proposed project (65 units) would discharge into surface waters at a higher volume than the current uses
on the site (two units). The project applicant will be required to prepare a Storm Water Prevention Plan
(SWPP) will be prepared for review and approval by the Public Works Department, prior to the approval of
grading permits for the proposed project (see mitigation measures below). The SWPP would be reviewed and
approved by the City to ensure that water discharge requirements are met during construction and throughout
the life of the project. The proposed project would not violate any water standards or waste discharge
requirements.
b) Substantially deplete ground water supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g,,
theproduction rate ofpre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land
uses orplanned usesfor whichpermits have been granted?
The project site is currently developed, and includes buildings, pavement, gravel, and dirt surfaces. While
there would be more impervious surfaces associated with the proposed project, landscaped areas would be
incorporated into the proposed project to allow for groundwater recharge. Because landscape area would be
incorporated in the project, the project would not result in a substantial reduction in the amount of ground
water; however, it will contribute to a cumulative loss of available water supply. The General Plan EIR
determined that significant cumulative impacts would result from the build out of the General Plan. Because
the proposed project would not independently have a significant affect on the available water supply, the
water supply impacts are found to be less -than -significant. (see more detailed discussion under the utilities
subsection on page 38)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainagepattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
The proposed project (65 units) would discharge into surface waters at a higher volume than the current uses
on the site (two units). Run-off discharge is discussed below under IV. e. A Storm Water Prevention Plan
(SWPP) will be required as detailed in mitigation measure HYD -4 below. The SWPP will provide
mechanisms to reduce storm water run-off during construction and throughout the life of the project. The
proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area.
d) Substantially alter the existing drainagepattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount ofsurface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on or offsite?
Ii Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991, April.
22
City of Lodi Community Development Department
See discussion I1! c above.
Initial Study Checklist
e) Would theproject create or contribute to run-off water which would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems orprovide additional substantial additional sources ofpollutedrun-
Construction will increase impervious surface, which will increase the volume of runoff water from the
project site. The City of Lodi municipal storm drainage system consists of an integrated system of trunk
lines, detention basins, and pump stations. Surface infrastructure such as gutters, alley, and storm ditches
provide for collection of storm water into the system. The runoff (precipitation and irrigation) would
discharge to the local storm drainage system. During periods of low runoff (not a major storm) the water will
flow to a regional -serving pump station (Beckman Park). The water is directly pumped into the Woodbridge
Irrigation District Canal adjacent to the park. During periods of intense rainfall, the runoff will spill into the
detention basin located at Salas Park (on Stockton Street northwest of the project site) where it will be- held
until the storm passes. The Beckman Park pumps will then drain the basin.i3 The City will utilize the SWPPP
to ensure that the project does not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff (see mitigation
measure HYD -4).
Utility plans are reviewed as part of the Public Works Department's review process, to confirm the capacity
of the existing drainage facilities around the project site are adequate to service the needs of the proposed
project.
f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
See response above related to impacts to surface water quality. The project includes 65 new residential units,
which will generate typical domestic water quality impacts to ground water. Domestic impacts related to
ground water quality would include seepage of automotive emissions and leaked fluids and household and
garden chemicals into the groundwater, which is about 50 feet below the surface. These impacts are typical
of residential development and would not result in substantial impacts to water quality.
g) Would theprojectplace housing within a 100 year flood hazard area as mapped on afederal Flood
Hazards Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or otherflood hazard delineation map?
The project site is not located in a flood hazard zone. FEMA designates the project site as Flood Zone X
(outside 100 year flood plane).
h) Would theprojectplace housing within a 100 yearflood hazard area structures which would impede or
redirect f ood Rows?
See discussion JVg above.
i) Would theproject exposepeople or structures to a significant risk cf loss. injury or death involving
flooding, inchdingflooding as a result of thefailure of a levee or a dam?
" Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November
23
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
The proposed project consists of 65 residential units in a residential neighborhood. The project site is not
located near a body of water, a levee or a dam. No such risks of loss, injury or death would result from this
project.
fj Would the project exposepeople or structures to inundation by sieche, tsunami or mudflow?
The project site is not located near an ocean, lakefront or other large body of water; tsunamis or seiches are
not probable.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure HYD -I :As a condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the
project, the Public Works department shall review the Master Utility Plan for the site for compliance with the
city's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -2: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans, the project
engineer sha [ I provide a hydraulic analysis to the Public Works Department for review and approval so that
implementation of the proposed drainage plans will comply with the City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -3: The project shall include landscape areas, as shown titled "Revised 2005
Development Plan" prepared by Baumbach & Piazza, Inc., dated May, 2005, to allow for groundwater
recharge.
Mitigation Measure HYD -4: As a part of the compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) and associated fees would need to be submitted to
the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) providing notification and intent to
comply with the General Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity for this
project (copies of the NOI and fee payment shall be provided to the City). Prior to construction and site
grading, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for construction activities and
remediation on-site. The project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the construction and life of the project.
The SWPPP would act as the overall program document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential
water quality impacts associated with the implementation and operation of the proposed project. The project
proponent shall prepare a SWPPP designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the
construction period of the project. The SWPPP must be maintained on-site and made available to City
inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs
designed to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include practices to minimize
the contact of construction materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e,g., fuels, lubricants, paints,
solvents, adhesives) with stormwater. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas
that keep these materials out of the rain.
An important component of the stormwater quality protection effort is the acknowledgement of the site
supervisors and workers. To educate on-site personnel and maintain awareness of the importance of
stormwater quality protection, site supervisors shall conduct regular tailgate meetings to discuss pollution
prevention. The frequency of the meetings and required personnel attendance list shall be specified in the
SWPPP.
The SWPPP shall specify a monitoring program to be implemented by the construction site supervisor, which
must include both dry and wet weather inspections. In addition, in accordance with State Water Resources
U
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Control Board Resolution No. 2001-046,14 monitoring would be required during the construction period for
pollutants that may be present in the runoffthat are "not visually detectable in runoff."" RWQCB and/or City
personnel, who may make unannounced site inspections, are empowered to levy considerable fines if it is
determined that the SWPPP has not been properly prepared and implemented.
BMPs designed to reduce erosion of exposed soil may include, but are not limited to: soil stabilization
controls, watering for dust control, perimeter silt fences, placement of hay bales, and sediment basins. The
potential for erosion is generally increased if grading is performed during the rainy season as disturbed soil
can be exposed to rainfall and storm runoff. If grading must be conducted during the rainy season, the
primary BMPs selected shall focus on erosion control; that is, keeping sediment on the site. End -of -pipe
sediment control measures (e.g., basins and traps) shall be used only as secondary measures. If hydroseeding
is selected as the primary soil stabilization method, then these areas shall be seeded by September 1 and
irrigated as necessary to ensure that adequate root development has occurred prior to October I. Entry and
egress from the construction site shall be carefully controlled to minimize off-site tracking of sediment.
Vehicle and equipment wash -down facilities shall be designed to be accessible and functional during both
dry and wet conditions.
The City Public Services Department shall review the SWPPP and drainage plan prior to approval of the
grading plan. City staff may require more stringent stormwater treatment measures, at their discretion.
Implementation of this mitigation would reduce the level of significance of this impact to a less -than -
significant level.
V. AIR QUALITY
Summary of Air Quality Imoacts and Mideation Measures
The proposed project is located within the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). In
accordance with the City's General Plan, the City coordinates development review with SJVAPCD standards
in order to minimize impacts to air quality.
a) Would theproject conflict with or obstruct implementation CE the applicable air qualityplan?
The proposed project would construct 65 single-family units, as intended by the general plan, and is subject
to SJVAPCD regulations. The project would not conflict or obstruct any air quality plans.
b) Would the project violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation to an existing orprojected air quality violation?
The proposed project would develop 65 single-family dwelling units in the Multiple -Family Residential land
use designation. According to SJVAPCD, a single-family project with less than 152 units requires an air
quality analysis at the "Small Project Analysis Level" (SPAL). SJVAPCD has pre -calculated the emissions
of projects that qualify as SPAL and there is no possibility of exceeding air quality emission thresholds.
However, SPAL does not eliminate other factors such as toxic air contaminants, hazardous materials,
asbestos and odors resulting from project construction. The following discussion describes potential air
14 State Water Resources Control Board, 2001. Modification of Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ State Water Resources
Contro! Board (SWRCB)National Pollutant Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated
with Construction Activity.
19 Construction materials and compounds that are not stored in water-tightcontaincrs under a water -tight roof or inside a
building are examples ofmaterials for which the discharger may have to implement sampiirtg and analysisprocedums.
25
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
quality violations that could occur as a result of construction equipment exhaust emissions, fugitive dust, and
long-term vehicular emissions.16
Project -related construction activities would include demolition, site preparation, earthmoving and general
construction. Site preparation includes activities such as general land clearing. Earthmoving activities include
cut and fill operations, trenching, soil compaction, and grading. General construction includes adding
improvements such as roadways surfaces, structures, and facilities. The emissions generated from
construction activities include dust, combustion emissions, and evaporative emissions from asphalt paving
and architectural coating applications.
Construction activities would also result in emissions from equipment exhaust, construction -related vehicular
activity and construction worker automobile trips. Emission levels for construction would vary depending on
the number and type of equipment, duration of use, operation schedules, and the number ofconstruction
workers. Criteria pollutant emissions of ROG and NOX from these emission sources would incrementally add
to regional atmospheric loading of ozone precursors during project construction. SJVAPCD's CEQA
Guidelines recognize that construction equipment emits ozone precursors, but indicate that such emissions
are included in the emission inventory that is the basis for regional air quality plans.
Demolition may result in airborne entrainment of asbestos, a toxic air contaminant, particularly where
structures built prior to 1980 are being demolished. Some structural components of the buildings to be
demolished may contain hazardous materials such as asbestos used in insulation, fire retardants, cr building
materials, and lead-based paint. If asbestos were found to be present in building materials to be removed,
demolition and disposal would be required to be conducted in accordance with procedures specified by
SJVAPCD's regulations. Therefore, the required compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the
potential for public health hazards associated with airborne asbestos fibers or lead dust would be at less -than -
significant levels.
Construction -related fugitive dust emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the level and type of
activity, silt content of the soil, and the weather. In the absence of mitigation, construction activities may
result in significant quantities of dust, and as a result, local visibility and PM 1 o and PM2.5 (particulate matter)
concentrations may be adversely affected on a temporary and intermittent basis during the construction
period. In addition, the fugitive dust generated by construction would include not only PM10, but also larger
particles, which would fall out of the atmosphere within several hundred feet of the site and could result in
nuisance -type impacts. The SJVAPCD's recommends implementation of effective and comprehensive dust
control measures rather than detailed quantification of emissions. The District considers any project's
construction -related impacts to be less than significant if the required dust -control measures are implemented.
Without these measures, the impact is generally considered to be significant, particularly if sensitive land
uses are located in the project vicinity. In the case of this project, residential land uses are located
immediately adjacent to the boundaries of the project site. Therefore, without mitigation, the impact of
fugitive dust emissions would be considered significant.
Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM 10 Prohibitions of the SJVAPCD, the following controls are
required to be implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the project. Regulation VIII is
incorporated as Mitigation Measure AIR -2.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR -I and AIR -2 would reduce construction -related air quality
impacts to a less -than -significant level.
2002).
16 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 1998. Guidefor Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. (Revised
26
City of Lodi Community Development Depanment Initial Study Checklist
c) Would theproject result in cumulatively considerable net increase cf any criteria pollutantfor which the
project region is non -attainment under an applicablefederal or State ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholdsfor ozoneprecursors)?
See discussion (V b above.
d) Would theproject expose sensitive receptors to substandalpollutant concentrations?
The proposed project would expose surrounding residential units to pollutants during construction.
Mitigation Measures AIR -I and AIR -2 would reduce the construction related pollutants to a less -than -
significant level.
Air quality impacts related to the proximity of agricultural land uses to the south, across Harney Lane,
include fumes and odors from typical farming activities. The City's Right -to -Farm Ordinance requires that
the new home buyers be notified of farming activities, including odors, upon purchasing the units.
e) Would the proposal create objectionable odors effectinga substantial number ofpeople?
Some objectionable odors may be generated from the operation of diesel -powered construction equipment
and/or asphalt paving during the project construction period. However, these odors would be short term in
nature and would not result in permanent impacts to surrounding land uses, including sensitive receptors in
the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project involves residential uses, and would not involve any
component that would generate significant odors. Additionally, there are no potential odor sources within the
vicinity of the project site. Therefore, no significant impacts related to objectionable odors would result from
the proposed project.
Mitieation Measures
Mitigation Measure AIR -1: The following construction equipment mitigation measures are to be
implemented at construction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions:
i. Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -tired equipment;
2. Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as recommended by the manufacturer
manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
3. Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduce emissions associated with
idling emissions;
4. Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use to 7:00am
to 7.00pm; and
5. Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing
of construction activity during the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways.
Mitigation Measure AIR -2: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PMIo Prohibitions of the SJVAPCD,
the following controls are required to be implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the
project.
I. All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being used on a daily basis for construction
purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant,
covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.
21
City of Lodi CommunityDevelopment Department
Initial Study Checklist
2. A11 on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust
emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant,
3. A I I land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition
activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by
presoaking.
4. During the demolition of existing buildings, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during
demolition.
5. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit
visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be
maintained.
6. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public
streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where
preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower
devices is expressly forbidden.)
7. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage
piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or
chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
8. Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the
site and at the end of each workday.
9. Site with I SO or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Prevention measures
include requiring all trucks to drive over a bed of gravel to rid the tires of dirt and mud prior to exiting
the site.
VI. TRANSPORTATIONS/CIRCULATION
Summary of Transportation/Circulation Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The City reviews development projects for consistency with the General Plan Circulation Element" and the
Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan" Access to the project site is provided via Harney Lane and SR- 99
is the nearest highway. The General Plan designates Harney Lane as a 4 -lane divided arterial (General Plan,
Figure 2-1, page 2-7). The Bicycle Master Plan shows a Class II bike path on Hamey Lane. A Clams II bike
path is a striped bikeway within the paved area of a road (Bicycle Master Plan, Chapter N, page 23).
a) Wouldtheproposal cause an increase in tra)fc which is substantial in relation to the existingtrajfc load
and rapacity cfthe sheet system (i.e., result in substantial increase in either the number cevehicle hips, the
volume to capacity, ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
According the General Plan EIR (page 9-9) the multi -family land use designation trip ratio is 6 trips per
dwelling unit." The proposed project would generate approximately 390 vehicle trips per day (65 units x 6
trips). The General Plan land use element assumed development of 12 units per acre for properties designated
as MDR. At I2 units per acre, the General Plan assumed the subject site would be developed with 91 units.
The proposed project is below the density anticipated by the General Plan. Additionally, the General Plan
"Lodi, General Plan, 1991.
"Brady and Associates, Inc., 1994. Lodi Bicycle Transportation Mastcr Plan. November 16
"Lodi, General Plan Final EIR. 1991. April.
28
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
designates Harney Lane as a four -lane divided arterial. The proposed project includes dedication of 20 feet
on the north side of Harney Lane to accommodate the future right-of-way. The proposed project will not
increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion beyond the level anticipated by the General Plan and the project
will be subject to traffic impact fees, as required by the General Plan EIR (page 9-9).
b) Would theproject exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by
the county congestion management agency or designated roads or highways?
As stated above under VI.a, the proposed development is less dense than anticipated by the general plan and
would only produce approximately 390 vehicle trips per day. The proposed project would not exceed service
standards for Harney Lane or other adjacent roadways.
Additionally, Caltrans has reviewed the proposed project and determined that the project would not create a
major impact on SR -99; however, it would contribute to impacts when combined with existing and proposed
development in the City of Lodi. To mitigate its share of impacts on SR -99, the proposed project would be
subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis (see Mitigation Measure TRAF-2).
e) Would theproject result in a change to air trafficpatterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or
a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
The proposed projectis not in the vicinity of flight path. No impacts to air traffic would occur as a result of
the proposed project.
d) Would theproject increase hazards due to a designfeature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
The main access to the project would be provided by one controlled intersection at Harney Lane and Panzani
Way, Additionally, the project can be accessed from Driftwood (existing street) and Ponta Rosa (street
currently under construction). The project complies with City standards for street size and type and would
reduce the number of driveways on Harney Lane. The project would slightly increase vehicular traffic (390
trips per day), but access to the site would not burden the traffic pattern for farm equipment associated with
the agriculture uses to the south.
e) Wouldtheproposal result in inadequate emergency access?
The project would be accessed by one controlled intersection on Harney Lane. Access to the individual units
within the project site is provided by one e, st/west street, two cul-de-sac streets and several public lanes. The
main east/west street right-of-way is 50 feet and parking is permitted on both sides of the street. The cul-de-
sac street right of way is also 50 feet, parking is permitted on both sides of the street and the cul-de-sacs are
approximately 180 feet long. The public lanes are 24 feet wide, parking is not permitted on either side and
the public lanes are 90-120 feet long. The Fire Department has reviewed the proposed site plan and
determined that the proposed circulation pattern complies with the City standards. Access to nearby uses
would be provided by the east/west street that would connect Driftwood Drive (on the west) to Ponta Rossa
Way (on the east).
f) Wouldtheproposal result in inadequateparkingcapacity?
The Zoning Code requires two covered parking spaces per unit. The site plan (see Figure 3) indicates each
unit would have a two -car garage. On -street parking (approximately 35 parking spaces) is also permitted
29
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
within the project site. Guest parking would be provided in individual driveways and within the
approximately 35 on -street parking spaces.
g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, orprograms supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
The proposed site plan includes extension of an existing pedestrian walkway within a landscape area along
Harney Lane and sidewalks within the project site. The proposed project would also implement the City's
Bicycle Transportation Master Plan20 by dedicating additional right-of-way along Harney Lane to
accommodate a Class II bicycle lane. The proposed project would eliminate driveways along Harney Lane
and provide controlled access at intersections for a safer pedestrian/bike and car interactions. There are no
bus routes that service Harney Lane between Ham Lane and Lower Sacramento Road.
Mitieation Measures
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1: To mitigate its share of traffic impacts on City streets, the project
apps icant/developer shall be subject to traffic impact fees assessed by the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2: To mitigate its share of impacts on SR 99,the project applicant/developer shall
be subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis as stipulated in the soon -to -be -adopted regional traffic impact fees
established by the San Joaquin County Council of Governments.
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Summary of Biological Resourceinmacts and Mitigation Measures
The San Joaquin Council of Governments established the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan in 2000.' The purpose of the plan is to provide a strategy for balancing
development with protecting endangered species in San Joaquin County. City of Lodi Municipal Code
(Section 15.68 San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP)
Development Fees) was adopted in 2001, in order to implement the goals and objectives of the San Joaquin
County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), and to mitigate the cumulative
impacts of new development on undeveloped lands within the city of Lodi and in San Joaquin County. The
City has established a fee ordinance for purposes of collecting fees to finance the SJMSCP. Development of
the project site is subject to the payment of fees in accordance with the San Joaquin County Multi -Species
Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.
The project site is developed with two single-family homes, with ancillary storage buildings, and agricultural
farm land (cherry tree orchard a commercial flower garden). During a recent site visit, there was no evidence
of endangered species or natural habitat on-site.
a) Would theproject have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate. sensitive, or special status in local or regionalplans, policies or
regulations, or by the CaliforniaDepartment of Fish and Game or U.S Fish and Wildlife Service?
m Brady and Associates, Inc., 1994. Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. November 16.
" San Joaquin Council of Governments, 2000. Son Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space
Plan
30
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
No evidence of endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats was found during a recent site visit. In
compliance with the SJMSCP, a biological study will be prepared to determine if there are any species or
habitats on-site. Participation in the SJMSCP satisfies the state and federal endangered species acts, and
ensures that impacts are mitigated to a less -than -significant level.22 The San Joaquin Council of Governments
(SJCOG) has reviewed the proposed project and recommends Mitigation Measure BIO -1 listed below to
ensure compliance with the SJMSCP.
b) Would(he proposal have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies. and regulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and WildlifeService?
The project site is developed with two single-family homes and agricultural uses on Harney Lane in the City
of Lodi. No evidence of wetland habitat was found during a recent site visit. Mitigation Measure BIO -I
requires that a biological survey be conducted in compliance with the SJMSCP. Should the survey find
wetland habitat on-site, impacts fees would be assessed in accordance with the SJMSCP.
c) Would theproject have a substantial adverse effect onfederallyprotected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean WaterAct (including, but not limited to marsh, vernalpool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal,filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
There are no federally protected wetlands on the project site.
d) Would theproject interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratoryfish of
wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
The project site would not impact the movement of any native or wildlife species, nor would it impact a
migration corridor because it is not located within a migration corridor. The site is developed with two
single-family homes and an agricultural business. Furthermore, the site is surrounded by residences to the
north, east and west. However, Mitigation Measure B10-1 requires that a biological survey be conducted in
compliance with the SJMSCP. Should the survey find evidence of wildlife migration patterns on-site, impacts
fees would be assessed in accordance with the SJMSCP.
of Would the project conflict with any localpolicies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as
a treepreservation policy or ordinance?
There are a few shrubs and several non-native trees on the subject site that were planted several years ago
(excluding cherry and flower farming plants). The City does not a designate local species (e.g., heritage
trees). The City relies on the SJMSCP for regulation and mitigation of biological impacts. As stated in V1I.a,
the project would be subject to fees in compliance with the SJMSCP.
f) Would theproject conflict with theprovisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
The project site would comply with the provisions of the SJMSCP, which is the only applicable conservation
plan.
u [bid.
31
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Mitieation Measures
Mitigation Measure B10-1 : Consistent with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open
Space Plan (SJMSCP), a SJMSCP biological survey must be completed and the appropriate fees shall be paid
prior to receiving building permits.
VI 11, ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Summary of Energy and Mineral Resource Impacts and Mitieation Measures
The City implements the California State Building Codes related to energy efficient construction standards
a) Would the proposal result in the loss of availability cf a known mineral resource that would be of future
value to the region and the residents of the State?
Development of the site would not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resource that would
be of future value to the region and the residents of the State. There are no known mineral deposits within the
area. The soil in the area is a sandy loam type. There is no indication that valuable minerals are located
within the general area.
b) Would theproject 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 useplan?
The general plan does not designate this project area as a locally -important mineral recovery site. As
discussed under VIII.a, there are no known mineral deposits within the project area.
Mitieation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant energy and mineral resource impacts; no mitigation
measures are required.
IX. HAZARDS
Summary of Hazard Related Impacts and Mitieation Measures
The proposed project involves the demolition, site grading, and other construction activities to develop 65
new single-family homes. The project would include short term hazard impacts related to demolition of
existing structures and storage/use of typical construction materials of 65 single-family residential units. The
project would not involve storage of any explosives or hazardous substances, beyond the typical domestic
supplies of household chemicals or gardening supplies.
a) Wouldtheproject create a significant hazard to thepublic or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
32
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
The proposed project would construct 65 single-family homes in a residential neighborhood; however, there
are agricultural uses south of the project site, across Harney Lane in San Joaquin County. Similar land
patterns of agriculture next to single-family homes exist throughout the City. The City's "Right to Farm
Ordinance" requires that disclaimers are provided to new home buyers regarding the adjacency of
agricultural uses." The existing agricultural use would not present potential health hazards to people within
proposed residential units.
b) Would theproject create a significant hazard to thepublic or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
The proposed project consists of 65 new single-family homes on property designated as Residential Medium
Density in the City's General Plan. The proposed future development would not involve explosives or
hazardous substances, with the exception of possible gardening pesticides, and household chemicals, which
would not qualify as significant hazardous impact.
c) Would theproject emit hazardous emissions ar handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within %. mile of an existing orproposed school?
The project site is located within Amile of Lois E. Borchardt Elementary School; however, as discussed
above under IX b, the project would not emit hazardous materials.
d) Would theproject be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a signifcant hazard to the
environment?
The project site is nor listed as a hazardous material site.'
e) For a project located within an airport land useplan or where such applan has not been adopted, within
2 miles eeapublic airport orpublic use airport, would the project result in a safety hazardforpeople
residing or working in theproject area?
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public or public use
airport. The closest airport is Kingdon Airpark Airport which is approximately 5.6 miles southwest of the of
the project site.
f) For aproject located within the vicinity of aprivate airstip, would theproject result in a safety hazardfor
people residing ar working in theproject area?
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public or public use
airport. The closest airport is Kingdon Airpark Airport which is approximately 5.6 miles southwest of the of
the project site.
g) Would theproject impair orphysically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
'' Lodi, City of, 1991, op. cit
Z' State of California Department of Toxic Substance Control, 2005. DTSC's Hazardous Nda and Substance Site List
(Cortese List).Website: www,dtsc.ca.gov/database/Calsites/Cortem—List.cfm?county-39
33
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Tie proposed project would develop new residential units in an existing neighborhood. The Fire Department
has reviewed the proposed project and determined that plans meet the City's standards for accessibility for
emergency vehicles Additionally, building permits are subject to review and approval by the City's Fire
Department.
h) Would the project exposepeople or structures to a significant risk cf loss, injury or death involving
wildfires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized area or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands 7
The proposed project would construct 65 single-family homes in a residential neighborhood surrounded by
existing urban development and an arterial road. No significant risk of wildfire would result from the
proposed project.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure HAZ-I : To ensure that the project does not interfere with emergency evacuation plans,
grading and building plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Fire Department.
X. NOISE
Summary of Noise Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The City evaluates noise impacts based on the General Plan Noise Element and Chapter 9.24 of the
Municipal Code, Noise Regulation. The General Plan Noise Element (page 6-7) establishes the maximum
outdoor noise level of 55-60db as acceptable for residential units. Chapter 9.24 of the Municipal Code states
that noise, of a commercial or non-commercial nature, shall not exceed the ambient noise level by more the
five decibels at a point measured at the property line of any residential properly. The project would have
short terms impacts related to typical construction noise.
a) Wouldtheproject exposepersons to orgeneration cfnoise levels in excess oEstandards established in the
local generalplan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards cfother agencies?
The project would result in temporary noise impacts related to construction (truck traffic, demolition, etc.)
The City prohibits construction between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week. The site is
surrounded with homes and construction in the evening hours could result in a substantial impact. Mitigation
Measure NOI-I would limit construction hours to mitigate potential noise impacts to a level of less -than -
significant.
Increased noise would also result from project related traffic; however, as discussed above under Traffic and
Circulation, the project would result in only 390 vehicle trips per day, which would increase the noise level
by less than I decibel (dB). The human ear can only detect increases in noise levels of 3.0 dB or greater in
outdoor environments. Therefore, the increase of less than 1 db would not impose significant long term noise
impacts
Additionally, the residents of the future development could be exposed to potential long-term noise generated
by the vehicular traffic on Harney Lane. The City's General Plan identifies Hamey Lane to have a noise level
(Ldn) of 65-70db within 100 feet from the centerline of Harney Lane. For residential projects, 65-70db is
considered "Normally Unacceptable" without mitigation. Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would mitigate the
noise level for future residents to a less -than -significant level.
34
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
b) Would theproject exposepersons to or generation ofexcessive ground bourne vibration or ground
bourne noise levels?
The proposed project is entirely residential and no excessive ground bourne noise or vibration would result
from the proposed project. See discussion above under X. a for noise impacts related to vehicular traffic.
c) Would theproject result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in theproject vicinity
above levels existing without theproject.
The proposed project would construct new residential units in a residential neighborhood. The future
residents would be subject to the City's noise ordinance and no substantial permanent increase would result,
d) Would theproject result insubstantial temporary orperiodic increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without theproject?
See discussion above under X. a.
e) For a project located within an airport land useplan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
2 miles of apublic airport, orpublic use airport, would theproject exposepeople residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public or public use
airport. The closest airport is Kingdon Airpark Airport which is approximately 5.6 miles sauthwest of the of
the project site.
Mitieation Measures
Mitigation Measure N0I-3 : To minimize temporary construction noise impacts on surrounding residences,
construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p, m,, seven days a week.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: To minimize long term noise impacts on future residents, a sound attenuation
study shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Said study shall provide measure
to reduce the potential outdoor noise to a level acceptable for residential units (below 60db) as stipulated in
the Noise Element of the General Plan. Measures may include sound attenuation walls, increased insulation
and insulated windows.
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES
Summary of Public Service Imnacts and Mitigation Measures
Police and tire services are provided by the City of Lodi and Lodi Unified School District provides school
services. The addition of 65 homes to the City of Lodi will generate the need for expanded governmental
services including schools, fire, and police services. Impacts to police, fire and school services would be
mitigated through established capital impact fees.
a) Would theproject result insubstantial adversephysical impacts associated with theprovision of new or
physically altered governmentalfacilities, needfor new orphysically alteredfacilities, the construction of
which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or otherperformance objectivesfor any of the following public services:
35
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
i) Fire protection: The Lodi Fire Department provides fire protection services to the project site. Fire
Station 3, at 2104 South Ham Lane, provides fire service to the project site. There are three personnel
on duty at all times. The General Plan includes a policy to maintain a 3 -minute travel time for fire
emergency calls. The current response time is less than 3 minutes and impacts to response times are
not anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 2' The proposed project would be subject to the
Citywide Development Impact Mitigation Fee schedule that was adopted to insure that new
development generates sufficient capital revenue to maintain specified levels of service in Lodi,
including fire services.
ii) Policeprotection: The Lodi Police Department provides police protection for the project site. The
project site is located within the Heritage District, Patrol Beat 4, which has a minimum of one officer
on duty at all times.25
The General Plan includes a policy to maintain 1.3 police officers per 1,000 residents. The proposed
project would increase the population by 146 residents for a total of 60,667 residents (60,521 current
population + 146). With 60,667 residents, the City would need to have 78 police officers to maintain
the policy of 1.3 officers per 1,000residents (60.6x1.3=78). The City of Lodi's Police Department is
budgeted for 78 police officers. The proposed project would be subject to the Citywide Development
Impact Mitigation Fee schedule that was adopted to insure that new development generates sufficient
capital revenue to maintain specified levels of service in Lodi, including police services.
ii,) Schools: The Lodi Unified School District (LUSD) provides school service to the project site.
LUSD has 37 school sites and the project would be served by the following schools: Borchardt
Elementary (grades K-6), Lodi Middle School (grades 7-8), and Tokay High School (grades 9-12).
The 2005 enrollment figures for these schools are 33 1, 1167 and 2,870 respectively."
According to the LUSD, single family development generates 0.31 K -6th grade students per unit,
0.08 7th -8th grade students per unit, and 0.15 9th -12th grade students per unit."' Using this student
generation rate, the proposed project would generate twenty K -6th students, five 7 -8th grade students
and ten 9th -12th grade students. Borchardt Elementary and Lodi Middle School are currently under
capacity and the potential addition of students from this project will not exceed school capacities.
Tokay High School is currently over capacity by seventy students and the proposed project would
potentially add ten high school students. The addition of ten additional students to a school that is
already over capacity would not result in a significant impact on schools.2' The development is
subject to a mitigation fee of $3.79 per square foot for residential uses.
iv) Parks: There are no parks proposed as part of this project. The future residents will utilize
existing parks, the closest of which is Samuel Sakas Park, which is within 1,300 feet. The project
would be subject to the Citywide Development Impact Mitigation Fee schedule that was adopted to
insure that new development generates sufficient capital revenue to maintain specified levels of
service in Lodi, including park services.
'-s Hoover, Linda, 2005. Lodi Fire Department. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November.
ze Vers#eeg, Eric, 2005. Lodi Police Department. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc, November.
=' Lodi Unified School District, 2005 Lodi Unified School District Boundary Maps. website:
htip://sites.lodiusd.net/schoolcity/ssb/content.cfm.
"' Brum, Vickie, 2005. Lodi Unified School District. Personal communicafion with LSA Associates. November.
39 Brum, Vickie, 2005. Lodi Unified School District. Personal communication with LSA Associates. November.
36
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
v) Otherpublicfacilities: The Citywide Development Impact Mitigation Fee schedule was adopted to
insure that new development generates sufficient capital revenue to maintain specified levels of
service in Lodi, including public facilities.
Mitieation Measures
Mitigation Measure PUB -1: The project applicant/developer shall be subject to development impact fees for
fire and police services established by the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure PUB -2: The project applicant/developer shall be subject to school impact fees
established by Lodi Unified School District.
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Summary of Utilities and Service Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The project site is not currently connected to utilities. The City of Lodi provides water, wastewater and
electrical service to the site; Central Valley Waste Services provides solid waste disposal. Water, wastewater
and storm drain facilities are available in adjacent residential developments and may be extended to serve the
project site.
a) Would theproject exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
The proposed project, and the treatment of wastewater, would adhere to all applicable water quality
regulations and not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control
Board. No major modifications or additions to local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities would be required as a result of this project.
b) Would theproject require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatmentfacilities or
expansion of existingfacilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects?
See discussion under XII. a
c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainagefacilities or
expansion of existingfacilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects?
The runoff will discharge to the local storm drainage system. During periods of low runoff (not a major
storm) the water will flow to a regional -serving pump station at Beckman Park. The water is directly pumped
into the Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal adjacent to the park. During periods of intense rainfall, the
runoff will spill into the detention basin located at Salas Park (on Stockton Street northwest of the project
site) where it will be held until the storm passes. The Beckman Park pumps will then drain the basin.
The City is limited by agreement with Woodbridge Irrigation District on the rate of pumping into the WID
canals, City currently operates pump stations at two locations that discharge into the WID canals. When the
runoff from the storm event exceeds the allowed pumping rate, water backs up in the system and spills to a
number of storm detention basins around town. Salas Park is one of those basins.30
30 Sandelin, Waily, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc. November.
37
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Runoff water quality is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Nonpoint Source Program (established through the Clean Water Act); the NPDES program objective is to
control and reduce pollutants to water bodies from nonpoint discharges. The program is administered by the
California Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The project site would be under thejurisdiction of the
CVRWQCB.
In addition, the proposed project would disturb more than one acre of land" during construction and would
therefore be required to tile a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the RWQCB to be covered under the State NPDES
General Construction Permit for discharges of storm water associated with construction activity. A developer
must propose control measures that are consistent with the State General Permit. A Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must be developed and implemented for each site covered by the general permit. A
SWPPP should include Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface
water quality during the construction of the project. Mitigation Measure HYD -4 requires an SWPP be
prepared for this project.
d) Wouldtheproject have sufficient water supplies available to serve theprojectfrom existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Groundwater from 26 wells is the primary source of water supply for the City of Lodi.32 As discussed above
in under IV, i, the project proposed project would not substantially reduce the amount of ground water
otherwise available for public water supply; the proposed project would develop at a less intense rate than
anticipated in the General Plan. However, the project would contribute to cumulative impacts on availability
water supply. The General Plan EIR determined that there would not be adequate water supply to
accommodate build out of the General Plan; the City is currently implementing measures to increase the
supply (e.g., conservation methods, metering of all new units, and purchasing water rights to the Molkemune
River) and has determined that they can adequately serve the proposed project."
e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatmentprovider which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve theproject's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
The City of Lodi Public Works Department provides wastewater collection and treatment services to areas
within the City of Lodi. The collection system includes separate domestic and industrial lines. Untreated
sewage is piped to the City's treatment plant using both gravity flow and lifts stations.
As part of the development plan review process, the City of Lodi Public Works Department will review
utility plans and the applicant will be subject to sewer connection fees at the time of development.
3 ` The State Water Resources Control Board, Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES), General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (General Permit) states that: The
regulations provide that discharges of stormwater to waters of the United States fmn construction projects that enwrnpass five or
more acres of soil disturbance are effectively prohibited unless the discharge is in wrnpliance with an NPDES Permit. Regulations
(Phase I Rule) that became final on December 8, 1999 expand the existing NPDES program to address stormwaterdischargesfrom
construction sites that disturb land equal to or greater than 1 acre and less than 5 acres (small construction activity), The regulations
require that small construction activity, other than those regulated under an individual or Regional Water Quality Control Board
General Permit must be permitted no later than Mmoch 10,2 003.
33 Brown and Caldwell, 2001. Urban Water Management Plan, City of Lodi, June.
33 Sandel in, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, City of Lodi. Personal communicationwith LSA Associates, Inc. November
38
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
/) Would theproject be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate theproject's
solid waste disposal needs?
Central Valley Waste Services, a subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc., provides solid waste collection
services to the City of Lodi. Central Valley Waste collects solid waste from residential, commercial and
industrial properties in the City of Lodi and transports the waste to a Transfer Station and Materials Recovery
Facility (MRF). The waste is then transferred to large haul vehicles that transport the waste to the North
County Landfill. The proposed 65 single-family units is less than what was anticipated for this property by
the City's General Plan. No major modifications or additions solid waste disposal facilities would be required
as a result of this project.
p) Would the project comply withfederal, State and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The proposed project would comply with all federal, State and local statues and regulations related to solid
waste.
Mitieation Measures
The proposed project would not result in any significant utility and service system impacts; no mitigation
measures are required.
XIII. AESTHETICS
Summary of Aesthetic Impacts and Mitieation Measures
The existing visual character of the project site includes a two single-family homes, two storage/workshop
buildings, portable structures and outdoor storage materials used in connection with the agricultural business
(green house structures once visible to Harney Lane were recently demolished). The proposed project is
located on Harney Lane. Harney Lane is not designated as a scenic route and there are no scenic views of
natural hillsides or vistas to or from the project site.
a) Wouldtheproject have a substantial effect on a scenic vista?
The proposed project would not effect a scenic vista or scenic highway because there are no known or
recognized scenic views or highways in or immediately around the project area. The project area is
surrounded by existing single-family residential subdivisions with Harney Lane to the south. Harney Lane is
not designated as a scenic highway to street route.
b) Wouldtheproject substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
The project site consists of two single-family homes and agricultural land uses. There are no such scenic
resources on site and the project site is not visible from a scenic highway.
c) Wouldtheproject substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
The existing visual character of the project site includes two single-family homes and two workshop/storage
buildings. Additionally, the agriculture business includes views of utility cabinets, a portable bathroom and
outdoor storage of materials including several stacks of wood pallets. The single-family home at 349 Harney
39
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Lane has been well maintained and is currently occupied. The single-family home at 415 Hamey Lane has
been subject to deferred maintenance and is currently used as a construction office for the residential project
currently under construction to the east of the project site. Figure 2, shows photographs ofthe existing
condition of the project site.
The proposed project would include the construction of 65 single-family homes. These units would include a
level of detail similar to the existing single-family homes in the neighborhood immediately east ofthe project
site. The side elevations of units 41-63 would be visible to Harney Lane. Though not specifically shown on
the site plan (see Figure 3) the project would include a masonry wall along Harney Lane. The height ofthe
wall may be determined by a sound attenuation study, but never the less, the wall should include detailing or
landscaping to break up the length and massing. By providing architectural interest to side elevations of lots
41-63, as well as all others within the project, and by providingspecific details (such as cap stones and
landscaping) to the wall along Harney Lane, the proposed subdivision would result in an improvement to the
existing visual character ofthe site.
d) Would the project create anew source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affectday or
nighttime views in the area?
Tile existing conditions on the project site include exterior lighting. The new development would emit some
light and glare during evening hours, as is typical in residential environments. The proposed project would
include indoor lighting and outdoor lighting for safety purposes. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES -
3 would reduce potential impacts associated with light and glare to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AES -1: Plans submitted for building permits shall show architectural enhancements for
Street side elevations of units 41-63. Architectural enhancements shall be similar to that provided on the front
elevations of said units including, but not limited to, decorative iron work, window banding, shutters, and
varying roof -lines. Said plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development
Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -2: Plans submitted for the masonry wall along Harney Lane (whether or not a sound
wall is required) shall include decorative treatments such as cap stones and columns. Additionally, clinging
vines (on 3 -foot centers) and other landscaping shall be planted on the wall. Design ofthe wall shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -3: Outdoor lighting associated with the proposed development shall be designed
and located to minimize ambient light levels for any given application, consistent with public safety
standards. Lighting shall be placed in areas of pedestrian activity and at residential entrances, and shall be
minimized elsewhere. Ornamental, pedestrian scale lighting fixtures shall be utilized when possible. Lighting
fixtures shall be shielded and directed downward to minimize glare on neighboring properties.
40
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Summary of Cultural Resource Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Based on the General Plan EIR (Chapter 11, Cultural Resources, pages 11-1 and 11-2)31, there are no
archaeological or cultural resources recorded within the City of Lodi. It is also noted that there are two
cultural resources (Native American occupationiburial sites north of City near the Mokelumne River). The
General Plan designates the project site for residential land uses. Should cultural resources be discovered
during project grading/construction, a Mitigation Measure is incorporated to reduce potential impacts to a
less -than -significant level.
a) Would theproject create a substantial adverse change in the significance cf a historical resource as
defined in CEQA Section 15064.5?
The project site is surrounded by residential development. The proposed residential subdivision would not
affect unique ethnic cultural or historical values as there is no information that such values exist on-site. The
project site does not contain a registered or listed historical landmark?'
b) Would theproject cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource
pursuant to CEQA Section 15064.5
Based on the General Plan EIR and a recent site visit, there is no evidence of archeological or paleontological
resources on site. The proposed project would require site grading to accommodate roads and proper
drainage. During the grading process, the developer shall cease operations and contact the proper authorities
if anything of archeological or paleontological significance is found.
cj Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a uniquepaleontological resource or site or unique
geologicalfeature?
See discussion underXIV.b
d) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
No human remains are known to exist on the project site. The vicinity of the project site has a low potential
for Native American sites. The project is proposed in a location that has been subject to previous ground
disturbing activities related the construction of the existing homes and agricultural operations. If human
remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance
shalt occur until the County Coroner has made determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the
remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner is required to notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (NM) With the
permission of the owner of the land or his/her representative, the descendant shall inspect the site of the
discovery. The descendant shall complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The
MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated
with Native American burials.
" Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991
'S CERES: State Historical Landmarks for San Joaquin County, 2005. Website;
www.ceres.ca.eov/sceo arca/counties/5an--toaouin/landmarks.html.
41
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Mitigation Measures
Initial Study Checklist
Mitigation Measure CULT -I : If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered
during project construction activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be stopped and a qualified
archaeologist shall be contracted to evaluate the discoveries and make recommendations regarding their
potential significance and extent throughout the site. If such deposits cannot be avoided, they shall be
evaluated for their California and National Register eligibility. If the deposits are not eligible, additional
mitigation is not necessary. if the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided or adverse project effects shall
be mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeologist's evaluation, a report shall be prepared documenting the
rnethods and results of the research, and recommendations for additional mitigation. In accordance with the
City's General Plan Urban Design and Cultural Resources Element, the City shall consult the California
Archeological Inventory, Central California Information Center, at Stanislaus State University, for
recommended mitigation measures.
XV. RECREATION
tivmmary of Recreation Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The proposed project would include the construction of 65 single-family homes, which would generate
approximately 146 people. There are no public parks or tot lots proposed within the development; however
all of the proposed residences would include private open space within rear yards. The City's General Plan
includes a goal for 8 acres of parks per 1,000 residents and 3.9 acres of parks per 1,000residents (excluding
detention basins and school parks). "
a) Wouldthe project increase the use cf neighborhood or regional parks or other recreationfacilities such
that substantialphysical deterioration of thefacility would occur or be accelerated?
The proposed project does not contain any public recreation elements. Private open space would be provided
within individual yards. There are three recreational facilities within a mile of the project site, including the
Samuel D, Salas Park, Century Park and English Oaks Park," The closest park is Samuel Sa(as Park, which is
approximately 1,300 feet (0.24 miles) from the project site.
The proposed project would include the construction of 65 single-family homes, which would generate
approximately 146 people. The General Plan contains a policy requiring a parks -to -population ratio of 3.9 -to -
1,000 (excluding school parks and detention basins). The proposed project does not include public open
space; park impact fees would be assessed upon issuance of building permits. The projected increase in
population as a result of this project would not result in increase demand for parks and recreation services
such that substantial deterioration of parks would occur or be accelerated.
b) Would theproject include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
The project does not include the construction or require the expansion of recreational facilities.
36 t Odi City of, 1991 , op. cit.
" Lodi, City of, 2005. Community Development, Mapguide. Website: httaJlmmmidejofiov.
42
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Mitigation Measures
Initial Study Checklist
The proposed project would not result in any significant recreation impacts; no mitigation measures are
required.
XVI. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Summary or Agricultural Resource Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section is based on information from the California Resources Agency California Land Conservation
Act (Williamson Act) Program and the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) of the
California Resources Agency. The most recent FMMP information available for San Joaquin County is from
2004.
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the mapspreparedpursuant to Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program cf the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural uses?
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Maps prepared by the Department of Conservation designate the
subject site as urban built-up land, which is not a category of farmland importance.38 However, the project
site consists of three parcels, one of which is dedicated to the agricultural uses of a cherry tree orchard and
commercial flower garden. The General Plan designates the entire project site for residential land uses and
development has occurred around the site, such that the project site has become an "in -fill" residential
project. To mitigate the development of this agricultural site, the applicant is subject to mitigation fees
established in the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan. Mitigation Measure
LU -1 requires compliance with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.
b) Wouldtheproject conflict with existing zoningfor agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Though there is active agricultural land use on the project site, the site is currently zo"d for development of
medium density land uses. The property is not under Williamson Act contract. The proposed project includes
a zone change from Medium Density to Planned Development. The project would be consistent with the
proposed zoning designation.
c) Wouldtheproject involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion cf Farmland to non-agricultural uses?
The proposed project is surrounded by residential development, with the exception of properties south of
Harney Lane, which are agricultural lands located in the County. The proposed project would not change the
environment such that the existing agricultural uses would be converted. The fanning rights of the property
owners to the south, across Harney Lane would be protected because the applicant is subject to compliance
with the City's Right -to -Farm Ordinance."
39 Lodi, City of, 1991. Municipal Code Chapter 8.18: Notification of Agricultural operations Effecting Other PxoperLy.
43
City o f Lodi Community Development Department
Mitieation Measures
Initial Study Checklist
The proposed project would not result in any significant agricultural impacts; no mitigation measures are
required.
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Summary of Mandatory Findings
a) Does theproject have thepotential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlifepopulation to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate aplant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the majorperiods of California history or
prehistory?
The proposed project consists of the construction of 65 new residential units on the 7.92 acres in the
southwest portion of the City of Lodi. The subject site is designated for residential development and is
currently surrounded by residential land uses to the north, east and west. The project site is developed with
two single-family homes and an agricultural use (cherry orchard and commercial flower garden) and there is
no evidence of wildlife on-site. The project would not potentially degrade the quality oftheenvironment or
substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species. The proposed project would not eliminate
important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory.
b) Does theproject have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects ofaproject are considerable when in
connection with the effects ofpost projects, the effects aeother currentprojects, and the effects ofprobable
future projects) ?
The construction of 65 new single-family homes and related infrastructure improvements will increase the
residential population in the existing neighborhood, as anticipated by the City's General Plan. Cumulatively
considerable impacts associated with increased traffic on Highway 99 and to the overall water supply would
be mitigated to less -than -significant levels with the implementation of the mitigation measures provided
above, in Sections IV and VI. The proposed project is located in a residential area and the inclusion of the
mitigation measures mentioned above will reduce potentially significant impacts that would become
cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past, current and reasonably
foreseeable future projects.
cj Does theproject have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
The proposed project consists of construction of a new residential development and would not have
environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly.
44
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
F. SOURCES
Brady and Associates, Inc., 1994. Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. November, 16.
Brown and Caldwell, 2001. Urban Water Management Plan, City of Lodi, June.
CERES: State Historical Landmarks for San Joaquin County, 2005. Website:
www.ceres.ca.gov/peo area/counties/San Joaquin/landmarks.html
Lodi, City of, 1991. General Plan, June.
Lodi, General Plan Final EIR, 1991, April.
Lodi, City of, Municipal Code, revised through 2005.
Lodi, City of, 1991, Municipal Code, Chapter 15.38: Growth Management Plan for Residential Development.
Lodi, City of, 1991. Municipal Code, Chapter 8.18: Notice of Agricultural Operations Affecting Other
Property.
Lodi, City of, 2005. Parks and Recreation Department. Website: www,lodi.�ov/parks reclindex.htm,
November 14.
Lodi, City of, 2005. Community Development, Map Guide. Website: httn://mapauide.lodi.eov
Lodi Unified School District, 2005. Lodi Unified School District Boundary Maps. Website:
http://sites.lodiusd.net/schoolcity/ssb/Content.cfm
Sacs Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG), 2001. San Joaquin County's Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 1998. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality
Impacts. (Revised 2002)
State of California Department of Toxic Substance Control, 2005. DTSC's Hazardous Waste and Substance
Site List (Cortese List). Website: www.dtsc.ca.gov/database/Calsites/Cortese—List.cfrn?county--39
Communications
Brum, Vickie, 2005. Lodi Unified School District, Facilities Planning. Personal communication with LSA
Associates, Inc, November.
Dumas, Tom. 2005. Department of Transportation. Written communication to Mark Meimer, City of Lodi
Community Development Department, July 1.
Hoover, Linda, 2005. City of Lodi Fire Department. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc.
November.
45
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Meissner, Mark, 2005. City of Lodi Community Development Department. Personal communication with
LSA Associates, Inc. November.
Sandelin, Wally, 2005. City Engineer, Lodi Public Works Department. Personal communication with LSA
Associates, Inc. November.
Versteeg, Eric, 2005. City of Lodi Police Department. Personal communication with LSA Associates, Inc.
November.
46
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
G. MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT AND AGREED TO BY
THE PROJECT SPONSOR AND ALL SUBSEQUENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND
PERMITTEES
The following mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant impacts of the proposed project
to a "Less -Than -Significant" or "No Impact" level. These mitigation measures shall be made conditions of
approval for the project. For every mitigation measure, the Permittee will be responsible for implementation
actions, schedule, funding and compliance with performance standards, unless otherwise stated in the measure.
Mitigation Measure GEO-I : Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Geotechnical Investigation shall be
prepared for the project site. The project applicant shall incorporate any grading and site preparations as
recommended in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation.
Mitigation Measure HYD -1: As a condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the
project, the Public Works department shall verify that the Master Utility Plan for the site will comply with
the City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -2: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans, the project
engineer shall provide a hydraulic analysis to the Public Works Department for verification that
implementation of the proposed drainage plans would comply with the City's storm water requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD -3: The project shall include landscape areas, as shown titled "Revised 2005
Development Plan" prepared by Baumbach & Piazza, Inc., dated May, 2005, to allow for groundwater
recharge.
Mitigation Measure HYD -4; As a part of the compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) and associated fees would need to be submitted to
the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) providing notification and intent to
comply with the General Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity for this
project (copies of the N01 and fee payment shall be provided to the City). Prior to construction and site
grading, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for construction activities and
remediation on-site. The project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the construction and life of the project.
The SWPPP would act as the overall program document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential
water quality impacts associated with the implementation and operation of the propose project. The project
proponent shall prepare a SWPPP designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the
construction period of the project. The SWPPP must be maintained on-site and made available to City
inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs
designed to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include practices to minimize
the contact of construction materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e,g,, fuels, lubricants, paints,
solvents, adhesives) with stormwater. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas
that keep these materials out of the rain.
Mitigation Measure AIR -I: The following construction equipment mitigation measures are to be
implemented at construction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions:
, Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -fired equipment;
2. Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as recommended by the manufacturer
manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
47
City of Lodi Community Development Department
Initial Study Checklist
Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduceemissions associated with
idling emissions;
Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use to 7:00am
to 7:00pm; and
Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing
of construction activity during the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways.
Mitigation Measure AIR -2: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PMIQ Prohibitions ofthe SJVAPCD,
the following controls are required to be implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the
project.
All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being used on a daily basis forconstruction
purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant,
covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.
2. All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust
emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant,
;. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition
activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by
presoaking.
4. During the demolition of existing buildings, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during
demolition.
5. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit
visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches offreeboard space from the top of the container shall be
maintained.
6. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public
streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where
preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower
devices is expressly forbidden.)
7. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage
piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or
chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
8. Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the
site and at the end of each workday.
Site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Prevention measures
include requiring all trucks to drive over a bed of gravel to rid the tires of dirt and mud prior to exiting
the site.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-I: To mitigate its share of traffic impacts on City streets, the project
app I icant/deveioper shall be subject to traffic impact fees assessed by the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2: To mitigate its share of impacts on SR 99,the project applicant/developer shall
be subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis as stipulated in the soon -to -be -adopted regional traffic impact fees
established by the San Joaquin County Council of Governments.
48
City of Lodi Community Development Department Initial Study Checklist
Mitigation Measure BIO -1 : Consistent with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Cpai
Space Plan (SJMSCP), a SJMSCP biological survey must be completed and the appropriate fees shall be paid
prior to receiving building permits.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-I: To ensure that the project does not interfere with emergency evacuation plans,
grading and building plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Fire Department.
Mitigation Measure NOI-I: To minimize temporary construction noise impacts on surrounding residences,
construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., seven days a week.
Mitigation Measure N0I-2: To minimize long term noise impacts on future residents, a sound attenuation
study shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Said study shall provide measure
to reduce the potential outdoor noise to a level acceptable for residential units (below 60db) as stipulated in
the Noise Element of the General Plan. Measures may include sound attenuation walls, increased insulation
and insulated windows.
Mitigation Measure PUB -I : The project applicant/developer shall be subject to development impact fees for
fire and police services established by the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure PU13-2: The project appiicant/developer shall be subject to school impact fees
established by Lodi Unified School District.
Mitigation Measure AES -I : Plans submitted for building permits shall show architectural enhancements for
street side elevations of units 41-63. Architectural enhancements shall be similar to that provided on the front
elevations of said units including, but not limited to, decorative iron work, window banding, shutters, and
varying roof -lines. Said plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development
Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -2: Plans submitted for the masonry wall along Harney Lane (whether or not a sound
wal l is required) shall include decorative treatments such as cap stones and columns. Additionally, clinging
vines (on 3 -foot centers) and other landscaping shall be planted against to wall. Design of the wall shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -3: Outdoor lighting associated with the proposed development shall be designed
and located to minimize ambient light levels for any given application, consistent with public safety
standards. Lighting shall be placed in areas of pedestrian activity and at residential entrances, and shall be
minimized elsewhere. Ornamental, pedestrian scale lighting fixtures shall be utilized when possible. Lighting
fixtures shall be shielded and directed downward to minimize glare on neighboring properties.
Mitigation Measure CULT -1: If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered
during project construction activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be stopped and a qualified
archaeologist shall be contracted to evaluate the discoveries and make recommendations regarding their
potential significance and extent throughout the site. If such deposits cannot be avoided, they shall be
evaluated for their California and National Register eligibility. If the deposits are not eligible, additional
mitigation is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided or adverse project effects shall
be mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeologist's evaluation, a report shall be prepared documenting the
methods and results of the research, and recommendations for additional mitigation. In accordance with the
City's General Plan Urban Design and Cultural Resources Element, the City shall consult the California
Archeological Inventory, Central California Information Center, at Stanislaus State University, for
recommended mitigation measures.
49
r � -
loom
x
Kol
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-30
A RESOLUTIONOFTHE LODI CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING THE 2006 GROWTH
MANAGEMENTALLOCATION FOR THE
MILLER RANCH SUBDIVISION
BE IT RESOLVED that the Lodi City Council does hereby approve the 2006 Growth
Management Allocation for the Miller Ranch Subdivision as recommended by the Lodi Planning
Commission, as shown as follows:
Reauested Recommended
2006 Allocations 2006 Allocations
SUBDIVISION UNIT NUMBER AND TYPE
Miller Ranch 65 Medium -Density Residential 45 Medium -Density Residential
Growth Management Units Growth Management Unitsfor 2005
and 20 Medium -Density Residential
Growth Management units un -
Allocated from previousyears,.
TOTAL 65 65
Dated: February 15,2006
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006-30 was passed and adopted by the City
Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held February 15, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS—Beckman, Hansen, Johnson, Mounce, and
Mayor Hitchcock
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS— None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS— None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS— None
KSTON
SUSAN J. BLA KSTON
City Clerk
2006-30
ORDINANCE NO.�
AN UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF LODI
AND THEREBY REZONING 349, 401 AND 415 EAST HARNEY LANE
(APN 062-290-38, 062-290-37 AND 062-290-14) FROM R -MD,
RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY, TO PD(38), PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 38, FOR THE MILLER RANCH
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, AND FURTHER APPROVING THE
ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. P.C. 06-04
approving the request of Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay Development for the Miller
Ranch Development Project at its meeting of January 25, 2006; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND -05-01) and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided
hereunder. Further, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the
information contained in said Negative Declaration and MMRP with respect to the
project identified in their Resolution No. P.C. 06-02, and recommended approval at their
meeting of January 25, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi recommended approval
of the request of Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay Development for the award of 65
Medium Density Growth Management Allocation Units (GM -05-003) subject to
conditions set forth in Resolution P.C. 06-04; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi recommends approval
of the request of Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay Developmentfor a one change (Z-05-
04) from Residential, Multiple -Family to Planned Development and the Associated
Development Plan (file Z-05-04) to the City Council of the City of Lodi, subject to the
following mitigation measures and conditions of approval:
All mitigation measures for the project identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND -05-01)
are hereby incorporated into this recommendation of approval:
Mitiaation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a
Geotechnical Investigation shall be prepared for the project site. The project
applicant shall incorporate any grading and site preparations as recommended in
the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation.
Mitiaation Measure HYD -1: As a condition of approval of the final grading and
drainage plans for the project, the Public Works department shall verify that the
Master Utility Plan for the site will comply with the City's storm water requirements.
Mitiaation Measure HYD -2: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage
plans, the project engineer shall provide a hydraulic analysis to the Public Works
Department for verification that implementation of the proposed drainage plans
would comply with the City's storm water requirements.
Mitiaation Measure HYD -3: The project shall include landscape areas, as shown
titled "Revised 2005 Development Plan" prepared by Baumbach & Piazza, Inc.,
dated May, 2005, to allow for groundwater recharge.
Mitiaation Measure HYD -4: As a part of the compliance with National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) and
associated fees would need to be submitted to the Central Valley Regional Water
Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) providing notification and intent to comply with
the General Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction
Activity for this project (copies of the NOI and fee payment shall be provided to the
City). Prior to construction and site grading, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) is required for construction activities and remediation on-site. The
project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the
construction and life of the project. The SWPPP would act as the overall program
document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential water quality impacts
associated with the implementation and operation of the propose project. The
project proponent shall prepare a SWPPP designed to reduce potential impacts to
surface water quality through the construction period of the project. The SWPPP
must be maintained on-site and made available to City inspectors and/or RWQCB
staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs designed
to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include
practices to minimize the contact of construction materials, equipment, and
maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhesives) with
stormwater. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas
that keep these materials out of the rain.
Mitigation Measure AIR -1: The following construction equipment mitigation
measures are to be implemented at construction sites to reduce construction
exhaust emissions:
1. Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil
fuel -fired equipment;
�. Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as
recommended by the manufacturer manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
3. Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to
reduce emissions associated with idling emissions;
4. Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of
equipment in use to 7:00am to 7:OOpm; and
5. Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant
concentrations; this may include ceasing of construction activity during the
peak-hourof vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways.
Mitiaation Measure AIR -2: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM,o
Prohibitions of the SJVAPCD, the following controls are required to be
implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the project.
All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being used on a
daily basis for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust
N
emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp
or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.
2. All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be
effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical
stabilizer/suppressant.
3. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut
and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive
dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking.
4. During the demolition of existing buildings, all exterior surfaces of the
building shall be wetted during demolition.
s. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or
effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of
freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained.
6. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud
or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of
dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or
accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of
blower devices is expressly forbidden.)
7. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the
surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of
fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or chemical
stabilizer/suppressant.
s. Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends
50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday.
9, Site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and
trackout Prevention measures include requiring all trucks to drive over a
bed of gravel to rid the tires of dirt and mud prior to exiting the site.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1: To mitigate its share of traffic impacts on City streets,
the project applicant/developer shall be subject to traffic impact fees assessed by
the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2: To mitigate its share of impacts on SR -99. the project
applicant/developer shall be subject to fees on a "Fair Share" basis as stipulated in
the soon -to -be -adopted regional traffic impactfees established by the San Joaquin
County Council of Governments.
Mitigation Measure BIO -1: Consistent with the San Joaquin Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), a SJMSCP biological survey must
be completed and the appropriate fees shall be paid prior to receiving building
permits.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: To ensure that the project does not interfere with
emergency evacuation plans, grading and building plans shall be subject to review
and approval by the Fire Department.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: To minimize temporary construction noise impacts on
surrounding residences, construction hours shall be limited to 7;00 a.m. to 7:00
p.m., seven days a week.
3
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: To minimize long-term noise impacts on future
residents, a sound attenuation study shall be submitted for review and approval by
the Planning Division. Said study shall provide measure to reduce the potential
outdoor noise to a level acceptable for residential units (below 60db) as stipulated
in the Noise Element of the General Plan. Measures may include sound
attenuation walls, increased insulation and insulated windows.
Mitigation Measure PUB -1: The project applicantldeveloper shall be subject to
development impact fees for fire and police services established by the City of
Lodi.
Mitigation Measure PUB -2: The project applicantldeveloper shall be subject to
school impact fees established by Lodi Unified School District.
Mitigation Measure AES -1: Plans submitted for building permits shall show
architectural enhancements for street side elevations of units 41-63. Architectural
enhancements shall be similar to that provided on the front elevations of said units
including, but not limited to, decorative iron work, window banding, shutters, and
varying roof -lines. Said plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the
Community Development Director.
Mitiaation Measure AES -2: Plans submitted for the masonry wall along Harney
Lane (whether or not a sound wall is required) shall include decorative treatments
such as cap stones and columns. Additionally, clinging vines (on 3 -foot centers)
and other landscaping shall be planted against to wall. Design of the wall shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director.
Mitigation Measure AES -3: Outdoor lighting associated with the proposed
development shall be designed and located to minimize ambient light levels for any
given application, consistent with public safety standards. Lighting shall be placed
in areas of pedestrian activity and at residential entrances, and shall be minimized
elsewhere. Ornamental, pedestrian scale lighting fixtures shall be utilized when
possible. Lighting fixtures shall be shielded and directed downward to minimize
glare on neighboring properties.
Mitigation Measure CULT -I: If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during project construction activities, all work within 50
feet of the discovery shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist shall be
contracted to evaluate the discoveries and make recommendations regarding their
potential significance and extent throughout the site. If such deposits cannot be
avoided, they shall be evaluated for their California and National Register eligibility.
If the deposits are not eligible, additional mitigation is not necessary. If the
deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided or adverse project effects shall be
mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeologist's evaluation, a report shall be
prepared documenting the methods and results of the research, and
recommendations for additional mitigation. In accordance with the City's General
Plan Urban Design and Cultural Resources Element, the City shall consult the
California Archeological Inventory, Central California Information Center, at
Stanislaus State University, for recommended mitigation measures.
2. Prior to the development of the Miller Ranch Development project, the
applicantldeveloper shall file for a tentative subdivision map. Review and approval
4
of the tentative subdivision map is a discretionary action and additional conditions
of approval maybe placed on the project at that time.
3• All applicable state statutes, and local ordinances, including all applicable Building
and Fire Code requirementsfor hazardous materials shall apply to the project.
4. Prior to submittal of building permits, the applicant shall submit construction
elevations, perspective elevations, precise landscape and irrigation plans, as well
as building materials for the review and approval of the Community Development
Director. Said plans shall indicate that all corner lots shall have architectural
treatments on both street facing elevations.
5. Prior to submittal of building permits, the applicant shall submit a walls and fencing
plan. Said plan shall show all proposed walls and fencing. Fencing visible to the
public right of way shall be constructed of treated wood or alternative material to
prevent premature deterioration. Furthermore, all fencing within the project site
shall be designed with steel posts, or a functional equivalent, to prevent premature
deterioration and collapse.
6. The proposed public lanes shall incorporate stamped concrete, pavers or an
equivalent subject to approval by the Public Works Department and Community
Development Department.
7. The proposed project shall be subject to the San Joaquin County Air Pollution
Control District Rules.
8. The proposed project should incorporate as many energy conserving and emission
reducing features as possible, as outlined in correspondence from San Joaquin
County Air Pollution Control District, dated January 13, 2006 and kept on file in the
Community Development Department.
9. Prior to submittal of any further plan check or within 90 days of the approval of this
project, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall sign a notarized affidavit stating
that "I(we), , the owner(s) or the owner's representative have read,
understand, and agree to the conditions approving GM 05-003." Immediately
following this statement will appear a signature block for the owner or the owner's
representative which shall be signed. Signature blocks for the City Community
Development Director and City Engineer shall also appear on this page. The
affidavit shall be approved by the City prior to any improvement plan or final map
submittal.
5
10. As shown on the development plan, submitted by Baumbach and Piazza and
dated May 2005, and as further described in correspondence from the project
applicant, the proposed development shall be subject to the development criteria
described in the following table:
Standard
Proposed Project
Minimum lot size
Minimum lot width
2,625-sq.ft.
50 feet
Building Height
2 stories not to exceed 35
feet
Front Setback
7 feet and 6 inches to 12
feet
Side Setback
4 feet
Street side setback
4 feet
Rear Setback
8 feet
Spaces
2 covered spaces r unit
_Parking
Lot Coverage
50%
11. Subsequent Staff review of above required plans, elevations, fencing, walks, public
lane surfaces, etc., shall require payment of fees at the hourly rate of City staff
conducting said review.
12. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the full cost of outside planning consultant
fees payable by the City for work performed for review analysis and preparation of
reports on behalf of the project.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Lodi City Council hereby approves the Mitigated Negative
Declaration (ND -05-01) and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) as identified in Planning Commission Resolution No.
P.C. 06-02.
Section 2. The City Council hereby approves the request of Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of
Tokay Development for the award of 65 Medium Density Growth
Management Allocation Units (GM -05-003) subject to the conditions set
forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. P.C. 06-02.
Section 3. The Lodi City Council hereby approves the request of Jeffrey Kirst on
behalf of Tokay Development for a zone change (Z-05-04) from
Residential, Multiple -Family to Planned Development and the Associated
Development Plan (2-05-04) subject to the mitigation measures and
conditions set forth above as numbers 1 through 12, inclusive.
Section 4. The Official District Map of the City of Lodi adopted by Title 17 of the Lodi
Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows, subject to the mitigation
measures and conditions set forth above as numbers 1 through 12,
inclusive:
7.92 acres located at 349, 401 AND 415 East
Harney Lane (APN 062-290-38, 37, AND 14) are
hereby rezoned from R -MD, Residential Medium
6
Density to PD(38), Planned Development Number
38, as shown on Exhibit A attached, which is on
file in the office of the City Clerk.
Section 5. - No Mandatory Duty of Care. This ordinance is not intended to and shall not
be construed or given effect in a manner which imposes upon the City, or any officer or
employee thereof, a mandatory duty of care towards persons or property within the City
or outside of the City so as to provide a basis of civil liability for damages, except as
otherwise imposed by law.
Section 6 - Severability. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to
any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other
provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid
provision or application. To this end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable.
The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance irrespective
of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.
Section 7. The alterations, changes, and amendments of said Official District Map of
the City of Lodi herein set forth have been approved by the City Planning Commission
and by the City Council of this City after public hearings held in conformance with
provisions of Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code and the laws of the State of California
applicable thereto.
Section 8. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed
insofar as such conflict may exist.
Section 9. This ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News -Sentinel," a
daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall
be in force and take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval.
Attest:
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
City Clerk
Approved this day of , 2006.
SUSAN HITCHCOCK
Mayor
III
State of California
County of San Joaquin, ss.
I, Susan J. Blackston, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No.
— was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held
February 15, 2006, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular
meeting of said Council held , 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS -
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS -
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS -
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS -
further certify that Ordinance No. was approved and signed by the Mayor on the
date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law.
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
JANICE D. MAGDICH
Deputy City Attorney
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Joaquin
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident
of the County aforesaid I am over the age of
eighteen years and not a party to or interested
in the above entitled matter. I am the principal
clerk of the printer of the Lodi News -Sentinel, a
newspaper ofge:aezal circulation, printed and
published daily except Sundays and holidays, in
the CLiy of Lodi, California, County of San Joagaizl
and which newspaper had been ai ;judict~tted a
newspaper of generalcimDlation by the Superior
Court, Department 3,ofthe County af3an Joaquin,
State of California, under the date of May 26th,
1953• Case Number 65990; that the notice Of which
the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not
sinaller than non-paxeil) has been published in
each regular and entire issue of said newspaper
and not in,any supplement thereto on the following
datesto—wit',
February 4th
all in the year 2oo6,
I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjuMl
that the foregoing is true and (,,o.77; cct.
Dated at Jodi, Califon vm� this 4th day of
bell ry 2006.
._�-...r.. .`-).1. .................
Lhis space is for the County Clerks Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
otice. of Public Fbmdrfg
NOTICE OFPUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE I$ HEREBY GIVEN that
on Wednesday, February 15,
20% at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or
as anon thereafter as the matter
may be heard, the City Council
will conduct o pub4le.hearing at
the Came& Forum, 305 West
Pine Street, Lodi, td consider the
following matter:
a) award 65 medium density
growth management allocation
units; a zone change tram resi-
dential mufti pie family to piarlrted
development and the essoclated
geveloprnerlt plan' and adoption
f a Md'gated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting
P ram for 65 single-family
dwelling units on the north side of
Homey Lane between Panzani
Way and Meiby Drive. (File
Numbers: ND -05-01, GM -05.03,
Z4)5-04; Jeffrey Klrst on behalf of
Tokay Development, applicant)
Information regarding this item
may be obtained in the office of
Gommuril Dowelopment 221
west Pine Street, Lodi, California.
All interested persons are invited
to present their views and Corry
�qment-on this matter. Written
CltyoCl�erk at earSy4 methprioriio the
close of the hearing scheduled
herein, and oral statements may
be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject mat-
ter in court, you may be limited to
raising only Itfose issues you or
someone else raised at the public
hearing described in this notice or
in written correspondence deliv-
ered to the City Clerk, 221 West
Pine Street. at or prior to the
close of me punric hearing.
By Order of the Lodi City Council:
Susan J. Blaekston
Cily Clerk
Dated: February 1, 2006
Approved as to form:
D. Stephen Schwaba Lie r
City Attorney
February4, 2006 - 05511327
Lodi Newe-Sentli ...
Connecting r
You Tb You
To niece a laoei nafim or chisel.
Signature 1 5511327
Please immediately confirm receipt
cf this fax by calling 333-6702
CITY OF LODI
P. 0.130X 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS
SUBJECT SPECIAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR February 15,2006 to award
65 medium density growth management allocation units; a zone change from residential
multiple -family to planned development and the associated development plan; and
adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for 65 single-family dwelling units on the north side of Harney Lane between
Panzani Way and Mel by Drive. (File Numbers: ND -05-01, GM 05-03, 2-05-04; Jeffrey Kirst on
behalf of Tokay Development, applicant).
PUBLISH DATE: February4,2006
TEAR SHEETS WANTED: Three (3) please
SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: SUSAN BLACKSTON, CITY CLERK
City of Lodi
P.O. Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-1910
DATED Thursday February2,2006
ORDERED BY:
JENNIFER M. PERRIN, CMC
DEP Y CITY G R
&Rkk.CHAPMAN
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
fonw\advins.dm
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
CITY CLERK
JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR, CMC
DEPUTYCITYCLERK
• CITY OF LODI
Carnegie Forum
305 West Pine Street, Lodi
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Date: February 15, 2006
Time: 7:00 p.m.
For information regarding this notice please contact:
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
Telephone: (209) 333-6702
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, February 15,2006 at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum,
305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following matter:
a) award 65 medium density growth management allocation units; a zone change from residential
multiple-familyto planned development and the associated development plan; and adoption of a Mitigated
Negative Declarationand Mitigation Monitoringand Reporting Programfor 65 single-family dwelling units on
the north side of Harney Lane between Panzani Way and Melby Drive. (File Numbers: ND -05-01, GM -05-03,
2-05-04; Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay Development, applicant)
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of Community Development, 221 West Pine
Street, Lodi, California. All interested persons are invited to presenttheir views and comments on this
matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the close of the hearing
scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
Ifyou challengethe subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City
Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the close of the public hearing.
By Order of the Lodi City Council:
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
Dated: February7,2006
D. Stephen Schwabauer
City Attorney
CLERK\PVBHEARW0TkCE"0TCD0.000 2RI05
OF p
CC,
F014
DECLARATION OF POSTING
PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 15,2006 award 65 medium density growth
management allocation units; a zone changefrom residential multiple-familyto
planned development and the associated development plan; and adoption of a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
for 65 single-family dwelling units on the north side of Harney Lane between
Panzani Way and Melby Drive. (File Number: ND -05-01, GM -05-03, Z-05-04;
Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay Development, applicant).
On Friday February 3,2006, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a Notice of Public
Hearing to award 65 medium density growth management allocation units; a zone change from
residential multiple-familyto planned developmentand the associated development plan; and
adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for
65 single-familydwelling units on the north side of Hamey Lane between Panzani Way and Melby
Drive. (File Numbers: ND -05-01, GM -05-03, Z-05-04; Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay
Development, applicant).
Lodi Public Library
Lodi City Clerk's Office
Lodi City Hall Lobby
Lodi Carnegie Forum
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on February 3, 2006, at Lodi, California.
JENNIFER M. PERRIN, CMC
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
DANA R. WAPMAN
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
N:1Administration\CLERK\Forms\DECPOST.DOC
ORDERED BY
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
QTY CLERK
JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR, CMC
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
DECLARATION OF MAILING
PUBLIC HEARING FOR February 15,2006 to award 65 medium density growth
management allocation units; a zone change from residential multiple -family to planned
development and the associated development plan; and adoption of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for 65 single-family
dwelling units on the north side of Harney Lane between Panzani Way and Melby Drive.
(File Numbers: ND -05-01, GM -05-03, Z-05-04; Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay
Development, applicant).
On February 3, 2006, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited in the
United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, to award 65 medium
density growth management allocation units; a zone change from residential multiple family to
planned development and the associated development plan: and adoption of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for 65 single family
dwelling units on the north side of Harney Lane between Panzani Way and Melby Drive. (File
Numbers: ND -05-01, GM -05-03,2-05-04; Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of Tokay Development,
applicant)
There is a regular daily communication by mail between the City of Lodi, California, and the
places to which said envelopes were addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjurythat the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on February 3, 2006, at Lodi, California.
ORDERED BY:
JENNIFERM. PERRIN, CMC
DE UTY CITY CLERK
X(�o ""
DANA R. CHAPMAN
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
Forms1deemaAdm
ORDERED BY;
SUSAN BLACKSTON
CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI
JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR, CMC
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
ND -05-01, Z--05-02, GM -05-003 —Miller Ranch
06257005;JUAR.EZ, VERONICA;309 DRIFTWOOD
DR;LODI;CA;95240;309;;DRIFTWOOD;DR
06257006;CEJA, Ir3NACIO;2$32 MELBY DR;LODz;i3A;95240;2532;;MELBY;DR.
06257007;LEONARD, LESTER W TR ETAL;2526 MELBY
DR;LODI;CA;95240;2526;;MELBY;DR
06257008; CRYSTAL ENTERPRISES LTD PTP;PO BOX
1259;WOODBRIDGE;CA;95258;2520;;MELBY;DR
0625701Q;LAMAS, FIDENCIO & AURORA;310 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI7CA;952407310;;CULBERTSON;DR
06257011;PARK PLACE DEVELOPMENT LLC ;PO BOX 1598 ;LODI ;CA;95241;2541;
;MELBY ;DR
0625701';CROSS, MORAY C & AMY I;291 MARINER
CT;LODI;CA;95240;291;;MARINER;CT
06257020;SOUSA, ROQUE P & DORA M TR; 295 MARINER
CT;LODI;CA;95240;295;;MARINER;CT
06257021; CRYSTAL ENTERPRISES LTD PTP;PO BOX
1259;WOODBRIDGE;CA;95258;298;;CULBERTSON;DR
06257022;MEDEIROS, RICHARD & JILL S;294 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;294;;CULBERTSON;DR
06265023; KHAN, MUBARAK & R-4P4IZA; 510 TUSCOLANA
WAY;LODI;CA;95240;510;;TUSCOLANA;WY
06265024;PARVIN, DARIN E ETAL;504 TUSCOLANA
WAY;LODI;CA;95240;504;;TUSCOLANA;WY
062651325; KB HOME NORTH BAY INC; 2420 DEL PASO RD
#200;SACRAMENTO;CA;95834;444;;VIA MARCO;LN
06265031;VIJUN, BALWINDER K;449 TUSCOLANA WAY; LODI;CA; 95242;449;;VIA
MARCO ;LN
06257009; WILLIAMS, THERESA V TR; 1728 LE BEC
CT;LODI;CA;95240;316;;CULBERTSON;DR
05813009; BRADLEY, ERMA F TR ETAL;310 KENSINGTON
WAY;LODI;CA;95242;4044;E;HARNEY;LN
05813010;STOCKAR, PATRICK F & SANDRA H; PO BOX
673;VICTOR;CA;95253;4300;E;HARNEY;LN
ND -05-01, Z-05-02, GM -05-003 —Miller Ranch
APN;OWNER;ADDRESS;CITY;STATE;ZIP;SITUSNUM;SITUSDIR;SITUSSTNAME;SITUSTYP
E
06229014; MILLER, DONALD W & NANCY C TRi4071 E HARNEY
LN;LODI;CA;95240;415;E;HARNEY;LN
06229026; TH.AYER., WALTER & JOARTNE M;325 E HARNEY
LN;LODI;CA;95240;325;E;HARNEY;LN
06256038; SEXTON, KEVIN J & STACY 8;2428 BLUEJAY
WAY;LODI;CA;95240;2428;;BLUEJAY;WY
06256039;JQNES, BRAD H & TERI 5;388 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;388;;CULBERTSON;DR
06256040;ARCOS, SERAFIN;360 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;380;;CULBERTSON;DR
062S6041;MCKNIGHT, MICHAEL E;370 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;370;;CULBERTSON;DR
06256042;GOMEZ, FERNANDO & ALMA LETICIA;364 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;364;;CULBERTSON;DR
062S6043;BUTLER, STEVE 8;358 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;358;;CULBERTSON;DR
06256044;I{ARRIS, STEPHEN C;352 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;352;;CULBERTSON;DR
06256045;BRAN, ADAN CIGA1RROA;346 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;346;;CULBERTSON;DR
06256046;ALVAR.EZ, FRANK A & ANDREA M;340 CULBERTSON
DR;LODI;CA;95240;340;;CULBERTSON;DR
06256048;MUHLBEIER, TIM F & KATHY E TR.;4279 SCOTTSDALE
RD;LODI;CA;95240;328;;CULBERTSON;DR
06256049;BECHTHOLD, DUANE TR;17577 N
KENNISON;LODI;CA;95240;322;;CULBERTSON;DR
06257001;CHUGHTAI, AFTAB & FAR.HAT ETAL,2564 MELBY
DR;L0DI;CA;95240;2564;;MELBY;DR
06257002 ;WARREN, FRANK L & MA1{INE;2SS8 MELBY
DR;L0DI;CA;95240;2558;;MELBY;DR
06257003;SINIGAGLIA, GREGORY A ETAI,;314 DRIFTWOOD
DR;LODI;CA;95240;314;;DRIFTW00D;DR
06257004;LAWLEY, RODNEY & PENNY CUST;2058 PETERSBURG
WAY;LODI;CA;95242;315;;DRIFTWOOD;DR