HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - September 19, 1984WCODURE NC FMi Agenda item E- I -G - "Approve Wood l ake North, Unit No. I" was
LN IT ND. 1 introduced and Council was apprised that Carey Development
I1`11I JCID Co., Inc, the developer of %*)odlake North, [flit N;o. I , has
furnished the City with the necessary agreement, improvement
security and fees for the proposed subdivision. They have
also dedicated a site for a sanitary sewer lift station
outside the boundaries of this subdivision. This is a 73 -lot
subdivision located on West Lower SacrFmento Road on the
north side of Turner Road. Lots 1-28 are zoned R-2 and Lots
29-73 are zoned R -l.
2; FOX7T ENCFCAIGI- CouneII was further apprised that a request had been made for
MEM' FIR WIDENING a 2} foot encroachment for the widening of the sidewalk in
OF SIM1(W IN the subject area as a safety factor for those children who
SLRJBCI' AREA would use this area in walking to and from school.
MENI' FOR W I DEN I NG
OF SIDEWALK IN
SLRJDCT AREA
CRAMM
•�� q ••4
•
The following perLons addressed the Council regarding this
request:
a) Nh•. Don Smith, Principal of Woodbridge School
b) W. Bryce Carey, Carey Deve1olnient Company, Inc. 2041
Lincoln Road, Stockton, Gflifornia, the developer of
Hood1ake North, Unit No. 1.
c) Mr. Robert Spoor, Lodi District Chamber of Conmerce,
Highway fund Transportation Cmmi t tee.
d) hls. diary Joan Starr, Facility Planner, Lodi Unified
School District
A very lengthy discussion followed with questions being
directed to Staff and to those persons who had addressed the
Council regarding the matter.
On motion of Mayor Snider, Iiinchman second, Council voted,
that because of the uniqueness of the situation, to allow for
a 2; foot encroachment for the widening of the sidewalk in
the subject area. It was further determined that the City of
Lodi and the Lodi Unified School District should equally
divide the cost for this additional sidewalk installation.
On motion of Mayor Snider, Olson second, Council approved
the final map and subdivision agreement for Wbodlake North,
Unit No. 1. and directed the City Manager and City Clerk to
execute the subject documents on behalf of the City.
CITY OF LODI
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
T0: City Council
FROM: City Manager
DATE: September 14, 1984
SUBJECT: Woodlake North, Unit No. 1
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council approve the final map and subdivision
agreement for Woodlake North, Unit No. 1, and direct the City Manager and City
Clerk to sign the subdivision agreement and map on behalf of the City.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Carey Development Co., Inc., the developer of Wood -
lake North, Unit No. 1, has furnished Lhe City with the necessary agreement,
improvement sec-.,rity and fees for the proposed subdivision. They have also
dedicated a site for a sanitary sewer lift station outside the boundaries of
this subdivision. This is a 73 -lot subdivision located on West Lower Sacramento
Road on the north side of Turner Road. Lots 1-28 are zoned R-2 ar-1 Lots 29-73
are zoned R-1.
F"fa L. Ronsko
ubl is Works Director
JLR/SB/eeh
APPROVED:
HENRY A. GLAVES, City Manager
FILE k0.
IF, . 11 }Aft
flow *0
.,. '�' - ice_--,� r �w;.._y,:n.�S w'!.i""'� -y +,�;,•....�.���,..�.., _
�Sw7f �+` :�. _ ^': ..cam at, s' ' • •'': ;ki'.a.��
WOODLAKE NORTH
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
CITY OF LODI
84-2
JUNE, 1984
Prepared by:
Environmental Impact Planning Corporation
2830 "I" Street
Sacramento, California 95816
(916) 448-2311
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
II. SUMMARY
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Site Location
B. Project Characteristics
C. Required Approvals
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS
A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
B. Traffic
C. Soils, Geology and Drainage
D. Noise
E. Air Quality
F. Historic and Cultural Resources
G. Community Services
V. UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
VI. IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
VII. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT
AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
VIII. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
IX. GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS
X. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. "No -Project" Alternative
B. All -Residential Alternative
C. Redesigned Project Alternative
XI. EIR AUTHORS AND PERSONS CONSULTED
XII. COMMENTS AND REPONSES
APPENDICES
A. Initial Study
B. Woodlake North Agreement with LUSD
C. Typical Sound Levels
i
Page
1
2
8
8
8
13
14
In
22
32
ju
38
48
50
58
58
59
60
62
64
64
66
66
68
70
LIST OF FIGURES
I. Regional Location Map
2. Site Location
3. Site Plan
4. Surrounding Land Uses
5. Distribution of Project Traffic
6. Wind Flow in San Joaquin Valley Air Basin
LIST OF TABLES
1. Proposed Uses
2. Existing Traffic Volumes
3. Traffic Level of Service Definitions
4. Project Trip Generation
5. Existing and Projected Traffic Flow Conditions
6. Ambient Air Quality Standards
7. Air Quality in the San Joaquin County Air Pollution
Control District 1980-1982
8. Roadside Carbon Monoxide Concentrations Along Turner Roed
9. Regional Pollutant Emissions
10. Loss of Farm Land in Lodi
11. Price Estimates for Future Subdivisions
ii
Page
9
10
11
16
29
39
12
24
25
26
27
41
43
45
47
60
65
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a focused Environmental Impact Report (EiR) prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970. The report has been focused,
pursuant to Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, on those issues identifled as
potentially signVicant in the City of Lodi's Initial Study of the proposed project. The
Initial Study is att.sched as Appendix A.
The project sponsor, Carey Development, a Stockton corporation, Is requesting approval
of the City of Lodi for the development of 32 acres for single- and multiple -family
residential units and commercial uses. The single-family residences would serve the upper
Income end of the housing market ($150,000 +).
The report Is intended to enable City of Lodi officials and the public to evaluate the
environmental effects of the proposed project, to examine and institute measures for
mitigating those effects determined to be significant, and to consider alternatives to the
project as proposed. It is not the function of the EIR to recommend approval er rejection
of the project.
1
I.I. SUMMARY
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 32 -acre project site is comprised of two parcels located in the northwest corner of
the City of Lodi. It is bordered on the east by Lower Sacramento Road, on the south by
Turner Road, and on the north and west by the City/County border. Annexed to the City
In August 1981, the site is currently in agricultural production.
The proposed project, known as Woodlake North, would consist of 80 single-family
residences, approximately 160 apartment units and 4 acres (abe;ut 40,000-60,090 square
feet) of neighborhood commercial development. The project would be developed in phases
over a two- to three-year period.
Several approvals would be required from the City of Lodi in order to develop the project:
a general plan amendment, rezoning, Conditional Use permit, approval of the tentative
subdivision map and certification of the EIR. These approvals are explained In Section
III.0 of this document.
B. LAND USE AND AGRICULTURAL LAND CONVERSION
The 32 -acre site has been cultivated with a variety of crops including beans, tomatoes,
corn and pumpkins. At the time of this writing it was planted with barley. A small
fruitstand is the only building on the site. To the west of the property is the 56 -acre
Towne Ranch which has been producing grapes since the ranch was first established 100
years ago. In cultivating the grapes, on the Towne Ranch, chemicals are applied by both
ground application and aerial spraying. To the north of the project is the historic
Woodbridge School; northwest of the site is an historic cemetery. East of the site is land
owned by General Mills. The General Mills plant is one of Lodi's major employers.
Approximately one quarter mile north of the site is the unincorporated community of
Woodbridge. Generally, land uses to the north, east and south of the project are
N
R. Summary
developed or planned for urban uses. Most County lands west of . the site are in
agricultural use.
Measure A, the Greenbelt Initiative, is discussed in detail in Section IV.A of this
document. Because the proposed project site was annexed to the City prior to passage of
Measure A, it does not fall within ttie Greenbelt area, and development is not subject to a
vote of the people. Its proximity ti the Towne Ranch (which is in the Greenbelt), though,,
necessitates an adequate buffer or mitigation zone.
Development of Woodlake North would result in the loss of 32 acres of prime agricultural
land. This is considered an unavoidable and irreversible impact. Urbanization of the site
may also affect the continued agricultural use of adjacent parcels in terms of modifi-
cation of normal farming practices such as crop dusting.
Creating adequate buffer zones between the project and agricultural operations would
alleviate most potential conflicts. The newly aligned road will physically separate the
property from the Towne Ranch. The subdivision will be enclosed by a . solid but
decorative wall. Front and backyard setbacks required by the City zoning ordinance will
be adhered to. It is recommended that the County and developer include fences and
hedges or trees as part of the landscaping of the newly aligned road.
Althcugh pesticide and herbicide usage is controlled by state and federal regulations,
conflicts between the residential community and adjacent farms may arise. Proper
application of chemicals, Including correct equipment and awareness of optimum weather
conditions (i.e., windless days) would help mitigate potential impacts. This issue is
addressed more fully in Section IV.A of this document.
C. TRAFFIC
Local access to/from the site is available on Turner Road, Lilac Street and Lower
Sacramento Road. Traffic volumes are well within the capacities of the specific street
segments.
The project wo-Od involve the abandonment of Lilac Street through the site. A new street
would be constructed along the site's westerly boundary and an east -west street (along the
site's northerly boundary) would link Chestnut with Lilac Street and Lower Sacramento
Road.
3
II. Summary
The primary effects of project traffic would be increased turning movements and
potential vehicle conflicts at intersections and retail commercial driveways. It Is felt
that road improvements planned by the City and County, such as the extension of
Chestnut Street and widening of Lower Sacramento Road, would increase the capacity of
the street network to absorb traffic generated by Woodlake North and cumulative
development.
D. SOILS, GEOLOGY AND DRAINAGE
The entire site is underlain by Hanford sandy loam, considered to be a prime agricultural
soil. it is rated good for construction purposes as well.
The nearest potentially active faults or,- in the Rio Vista -Montezuma area, 22 to 32 miles
west of Lodi. Lodi Is in Seismic 'Gone 3, which requires the strictest design factors to
resist lateral forces. Adherence to the recommended lateral force requirements of the
Structural Engineers Association would reduce the likelihood of damage or injury due to
seismically Induced groundshaking.
Development of Woodlake North would create impermeable surfaces like roads, walkways,
patios and structures. The City storm drainage system has been designed to accommodate
Increased runoff resulting from the project.
Erosion during the construction period can be kept to a minimurr by excavating mainly In
dry weather and planting groundcover as quickly as possible.
E. NOISE
The project would result in significant short-term noise impacts due to construction
activities. This noise would be audible and could be irritating to residences south of
Turner Road and inside the school, if the windows were open. Closing the windows would
minimize this impact. Because the noise levels on the portions of the site adjacent to
Turner Road and Lower Sacramento Road exceed certain levels, Title 25 would require a
noise analysis. Mitigation measures could Include decreasing the number and size of
windows facing these roads and locating bedrooms as far as possible from the road
frontages.
4
11. Summary
F. AIR QUALITY
The climate in the project area is characterized by hot dry summers and cool wet winters.
The most serious air pollution problem in this area is due to elevated concentrations of
ozone; federal standards have been exceeded at times.
The proposed project would cause small differences between the existing and future one -
and eight-hour worst-case CO concentrations.
No violations of CO standards are expected whether or not Woodlake North is built. No
measurable impact on regional air quality is expected, although project -generated traffic
would increase the general air pollutant burden in the region.
Construction activities would be a source of dust which might cause localized violations
of the air quality standard and increase dust fall and soiling in the project vicinity.
Wetting disturbed soil during construction activities could suppress dust emissions by
about 50%. The traff.e control measures identified in the transportation section of this
report would reduce traffic volumes or congestion and could result in slight improvements
in air quality.
G. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
No known cultural resources are within the project boundary; however, San Joaquin Valley
College, the town of Woodbridge and the Oddfellows Cemetery are all within one mile of
the project site. The town of Woodbridge and San Joaquin Valley College are California
Historic Landmarks. Adjacent to the proposed project, to the west, is a 70 -year old
farmhouse built by the Towne family. Implementation of the project may affect this
farmhouse, depending upon which alignment is chosen.
H. COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Police
The development of Woodlake North will mean the end of the present joint patrol
arrangement between the Lodi Police Department and San Joaquin County Sheriff's Office
covering the project area. The Department does not expect any adverse impacts on its
service due to the project.
5
II. Summary
2. Fire
The City of Lodi will provide fire protection to the project area; adequate service is
available to handle the project.
3. Schools
The project would add about 160 students to the Lodi School District. At present the
District is experiencing overcrowding. The developer of the project has entered Into an
agreement with the District to mitigate impacts caused by the addition of the project's
students. The agreement can be found in Appendix B of this EIR.
4. Water
The total water consumption for the Woodlake North project would be aproximately .10
mgd which will not significantly affect the City's current 4? mgd capacity. The developer
Is responsible for extension of all water mains serving the site.
5. Wastewater
The treatment plant has the capacity to absorb the flow that would be generated by the
project and the developer would pay for the installation of all connecting lines. Due to
the terrain, a lift station will be necessary to serve the project, which the developer
would pay for.
6. Solid Waste
Sanitary City Disposal would serve the project residents. Most of the refuse is trucked to
the Harney Lane Landfill. Though the City is currently searching for a new landfill site,
such a site would adequately serve the project.
7. Electricity
The developer would pay the cost of line extensions to the project. The proposed project
would have no Impact on electrical service but the existing 60 -kV line through the site
may be moved for aesthetic reasons. The developer would pay to have it moved.
6
II. Summary
H. ALTERNATIVES
1. No -Project Alternative
Under this alternative, the proposed project would not be approved by the City and would
not be built. None of the impacts associated with development would occur and the land
would continue to be used for crops.
2. All -Residential Alternative
As many as 223 dwelling units could be built under this alternative. Although it would not
require a General Plan amendment, rezoning would still be necessary. The snultiple-
family and commercial portions of the project would be eliminated. Fewer vehicle trips
would result and there would be a decrease in the number of school-age children.
3. Redesigned Project Alternative
This alternative would involve placing the commercial and multiple -family units on the
east side of the site rather than the west. This would put greater distance between
neighboring agricultural uses and the more densely developed parts of the project. Traffic
flow ma; also be reduced on the new alignment of Lilac Road.
0
7
111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. SITE LOCATION
The project site consists of two parcels totaling approximately 32 acres that form the
northwest corner of the City of Lodi. The site is bordered on the east by Lower
Sacramento Road, on the south by Turner Road, and on the north and west by the
City/County border. Lilac Road currently bisects the site running from the center of the
property on the north border diagonally to the southwest corner (see Figures 1 and 2). The
site is designated as assessor's parcel numbers 01523006 and 01523008 by the San Joaquin
County assessor.
The project site was annexed to the City of Lodi in August 1981, and currently is in
agricultural production. The only building on the site is a fruit stand used for seasonal
fruit sales.
The area east of the site, across Lower Sacramento Road, is an almond grove owned by
General Mills. South of the site, across Turner Road, is a condominium complex, a liquor
store and a vacant commercial lot. Immediately west of the site is a farm under
cultivation with grapes. North of the site is the Woodbridge School.
IL PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed project, known as "Woodlake North," would consist of 80 single-family
residences, approximately 160 apartment units and 4 acres (approximately 40,000-50,000
square feet) of neighborhood commercial development. The March 1984 tentative
subdivision map prepared by R.W. Siegfried and Associates, shown in Figure 3, would be
developed as shown in Table 1.
Ll
REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
7
SCALE
0 t0 20 40
MENTO
SITE
ON
0
p
•
MODESTO
d
wl
Y
m
•
eti � S
:.� $ � bdr t,.� gait Mrd /r7r er<' se Ji �rclt
\ «.Lwirtit
,oar _ ..---•- �� � f
c a
A
L�
• twwe ^� �1
rr•
3 � •
1-1
~"rte r�eetfrr
Y� V.
II
* If
.1;
4
%,
S
M.
"
v
-IL•
a_
a
t
t
o
v
1-1
~"rte r�eetfrr
Y� V.
II
TABLE 1
PROPOSED USES
Lot Number
Lots 1-32 -
Lots 33-80
Lot 81 (3.8 acres)
Lots 82 (3.85 acres)
and 83 (4.56 acres)
Parcel "A"
III. Project Description
Proposed Use and Zonin
Single-family residential. Zoning
designation R-2, minimum of 5,000
square feet per lot.
Single-family residential. Zoning
designation R-1, minimum 6,500
square feet per lot.
Zoning designation C -S, commer-
cial (shopping center)
Zoning designation R -GA, garden
apartments (20 units per acre)
Landscaped area serving as an
entrance to the proje,.!t.
The project will be developed in several phases over a two- to three-year perioc'.
Generally, all of the lots east of Lilac Road would be developed first. The portion of
Lilac Road that currently traverses the project site would be vacated and Chestnut Street
would be extended along the western boundary of the site to connect with Lower
Sacramento Ros+d. (This extension of Chestnut Street is referred to as Eilers Lane in
Figure 3.) The proposed new road alignment would straddle the City/County line. After
Lilac Road is relocated, the westerly portion of the site will be developed.
The City of Lodi anticipates that the project applicant would bear the cost of the portion
of the new road that lies within the City. The portion within the County will p►•obably not
be fully considered until the adjacent parcel is developed beyond its existing use. A
specific plan for the alignment of the street has not been adopted so the specific
alignment has not been precisely determined. Within the subdivision, two new roads would
be constructed by the project applicant to provide access to the project (see Figure 3).
12
III. Project Description
C. APPROVALS REQUIRED
In order to develop the site as proposed, the applicant must receive a Variety of approvals
from the City of Lodi. First, since the project is currently designated in the General Plan
as low density residential, a general plan amendment would be necessary to develop the
apartments and commercial facilities. Second, rezoning from the current designation of
U -H (unclassified agricultural holding zone) would be necessary. Third, a Conditional Use
Permit would be required for the commercial development even after it is rezoned to C -J.
Finally, the tentative subdivision map must be approved. This EIR must be certified by
the City prior to granting any of these approvals.
In addition to these City of Lodi approvals, San Joaquin County must participate in the
Lilac Road relocation and therefore would be considered a "responsible agency" as defined
In Section 15381 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
This EIR has been prepared with sufficient specificity to be used by decision makers for
all of the above approvals.
13
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETT[NG, IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS
A. LAND USE AND AGRICULTURAL LAND CONVERSION
1. Setting
a. General
The 32 -acre site is located at the extreme northwest corner of the City of Lodi and was
annexed to the City in August 1981. The site consists of agricultural land currently
planted with barley. During the 1983 growing season the land was fallow, but prior to that
time had been used ,for growing various vegetables including beans, tomatoes, corn and
pumpkins.1 Soil on the site is Hanford sandy loam, considered to be prime agricultural
soil. On the eastern side of the site is a small fruitstand used seasonally for the sale of
vegetables, some of which have been grown on the site in the past. The fruitstand is the
only building occupying the site.
The project is bounded on the west by the 56 -acre Towne Ranch owned continuously by
the Towne family for approximately 100 years. Fifty-two acres of the ranch are planted
with ;okay grapes and have been producing grapes since the ranch was first established.
The grapes are sold both for the fresh market and for wineries, where they are used in
making brandy.
In cultivating the grapes on the Towne Rnneh, chemicals are applied both by ground
application and aerial spraying. The primary aerial application is sulphur, used for mildew
control, which is applied for approximately six weeks in May and June. Generally the
aerial spraying is done every ten days during that period in the early morning when there
is little wind to carry the chemicals away. However, when there is wind, some chemicals
may drift easterly toward the site of the proposed project.2
On the east side of the Towne Ranch, adjacent to the protect site, is an old farmhouse, a
smaller residence and several outbuildings (a complete description of the old house is
14
IV.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
found in Section F of this chapter). A wire fence separates the farm from the project
site. The property line between the farm and the project site is the City/County border.
Another grape ranch lies northwest of the project site, north of the Towne Ranch.
Also on the project site's northern boundary is the historic Woodbridge School and school
yard. The school is currently serving as a hybrid facility for both elementary grades (K-6)
and middle school (grades 7 and 8). The school serves elementary students from
Woodbridge and middle school students from the Lodi Unified School District.
Northwest of the site is an historic cemetery maintained by the Oddfellows. (Roth the
Woodbridge School and the Cemetery are described in greater detail in Section F of this
Chapter.)
East of the project site across lower Sacramento Road is land owned by General Mills that
is zoned for industrial uses but is currently in agricultural use as an almond grove.
Traversing this parcel is a railroad siding serving the neighboring General Mills plant,
located southeast of the project site. The plant employs 718 persons, maidng it one of
Lodi's major employers, and produces cereals and food mixes.3
South of the project site, across Turner Road, is a condominium complex, a liquor store
and a vacant commercially zoned lot.
The project site lies approximately one quarter of a mile south of the unincorporated
community of Woodbridge. Woodbridge is one of the oldest communities in San Joaquin
County. Although some of the original buildings still stand, the community consists
primarily of lower- and moderate -income households, including a substantial number of
manufactured houses. However, various parcels in the Woodbridge area are being
proposed for residential development. These are discussed in more detail in Chapter VIII,
Cumulative Impacts.
Generally, land uses to the north, east and south ,f the project site are developed or
planned for urbanization. However, mos: County lands west of the project site are in
agricultural use, primarily producing grapes. The attRched land use map (Figure 4) clearly
indicates the prominence of agriculture west of the p. oject site.
15
SURROUNDING LAND USES
s. W
PROTECT SITE I on m I
IRRIGATICNN DITCH gglgassis
AGRICULTURE
CEMETERY
E
COMJ%tERCIAL
EDUCATIONAL m
RESIDENTIAL�EDIUM DENSITY El
E7-71
itECREATIO.,4
RETAIL -COWOEFICIAL El
CONSERVATION
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL Ea
5OURCt; 11P CCHtPOKATX3N
FEET MMMMC---Lmmmmmn�
0 No
600 12M
...... . . . . . .
............ . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
X
..........•
. .
. . . . . ...... —
ti��:tit��
X..
X
. .. ........ ..
... ...... . .
FRUIT STA%D
Ic.. .... . ....
Zl'ORCHARD,
—4 -+'
. ........ OWNED BY
CANERAL
A
RM F
MILLS/
..............
16
N.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
b. Applicable Plans and Regulations
The project site currently has a General Plan designation of low density residential4 and a
zoning designation of U -H,5 an unclassified holding zone used for recently annexed land
prior to development being proposed.
in order to develop the site as proposed, a General Plan amendment would be necessary to
allow the multiple -family and commercial development. Further, rezoning from the
current U -H would be required as indicated in Table 1.
Much of the Lodi area has historically been used for agricultural purposes. In recent
years, urban us, -3 have displaced some agricultural uses. As a result of this trend, on
August 25, 1981 the voters of the City of Lodi nas,ed Measure "A", an initiative ordinance
to limit future expansion of the City. The initiative, known as the "Greenbelt" initiative,
amended the City's General Plan by removing the Planned Urban Growth Area from the
Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Urban Growth area now includes only those
areas that were within the City limits at the time of passage of the initiative. The
ordinance noo requires that any addition to the Urban Growth area, i.e. annexations,
requires an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. These annexation -
related amendments to the General Plan require approval by the voters.6
Because the proposed project site was annexed to the City prior to the passage of
Measure A, it does not fall within the Greenbelt area, and development does not require a
vote of the people. However, since the proposed project is adjacent to the Towne Ranch,
which is in the Greenbelt, various provisions of Measure A do apply to the proposed
project; specifically, paragraphs 3 and 7 of the measure apply. Paragraph 3 states:
"To affect the policy of the City of Lodi to protect land in the Greenbelt area, non-
agricultural development in the City of Lodi which lies adjacent to the Greenbelt
area shall be permitted only after a finding by the City Council that such non-
agricultural development will not interfere with the continued productive use of
agricultural land in the Greenbelt or that an adequate buffer or mitigation zone
exists to insure continued productive use of agricultural land in the Greenbelt."
Paragraph 3 states:
"Water, sewer and electrical facilities shall not be expanded or extended until the
City Council makes the finding that a proposed expansion or extension is consistent
with the goals, policies and land use designations of the General Plan and this
ordinance."
17
W.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
2. Impacts
The development of Woodlake North will result in the loss of 32 acres of prime
agricultural land. Development of the site with residential and commercial uses will
terminate further use of the property for agricultural purposes. The existing crops will be
removed and the land covered with streets, houses and other urban improvements.
In addition to the loss of the project site from agricultural use, Lilac Road will be
relocated to the westerly boundary of the property. Depending upon the specific
alignment of the new road, either the road or the adjacent right-of-way may impact
portions of the neighboring Towne Ranch. If the new road were to take a direct alignment
north of Lower Sacramento Road, the house and other buildings on the Towne Ranch
would be affected.
Urbanization of the project site may also affect the continued agricultural use of adjacent
parcels. The presence of a residential development may require modification of normal
farming practices on adjacent agricultural lands. The use of, and particularly the aerial
application of, certain controlled pesticides and herbicides may be restricted on areas
adjacent to residential developments. Cultivation and harvesting operations may result in
complaints from urban residents concerning noise and dust. Agricultural operations
adjacent to urbanized areas may also be subject to an increased amount of trespassing and
vandalism, particularly from the increase of school-age children.
In addition to conflicts between the proposed project and the grape -growing areas to the
west, there may be similar impacts on the orchard to the east of the property. However,
since the orchard is zoned industrial and may eventually be developed by General MiRs !or
industrial use, any impacts are likely to be temporary. If and when the General Mi1Ls
property is converted to industrial uses, the agricultural/residential conflicts would end.
Since the General Mills land is restricted by a 75 -foot buffer on the side facing the
proposed project, when that land is developed there may still be 75 feet of fruit trees
buffering future industrial uses from the proposed project. That would avoid any
residential/industrial land use conflict.
No land use conflict is anticipated on the south side of the proposed project.
m
IV.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
To the north of the site, conflicts with the Woodbridge School could be mitigated by a
wall around the project.
Parcel "A", indicated on the Tentative Map is an entrance median. The City of Lodi's
policy Is not to accept the responsibility for maintenance of such a median. In addition, it
does not appear feasible for a homeowners association to be established for only this one
small maintenance item.
3. Mitigations
If the Woodlake North project is approved and constructed, the 32 acres of prime
agricultural land will be removed from further agricultural use. There is no practical way
to mitigate this loss. Once cleared and developed, it is unlikely that the land will ever be
returned to agricultural use.
With regard to impacts on neighboring agricultural land, the key to successfully mitigating
potential impacts is to create adequate buffer zones between the proposed project and
continued agricultural operations.
Although the size of an adequate buffer zone is subject to some debate, a retired
representative of the California Farm Bureau Federation recently testified that merely
installing a fence between agricultural and urban uses was inadequate.7 Rather, there
should be at least a 20 -foot setback and preferably a living barrier (trees or a hedge) in
addition to a fence.
With regard to trespassing on agricultural land, the proposed project may offer adequate
buffering due to its inherent features and location. First, the newly aligned road will
physically separate the property from the Towne Ranch on the west with an 80 -toot wide
right-of-way. Second, the de ieloper is proposing an enclosed subdivision with decorative
walls facing the streets. Such an enclosure would encourage inward rather than outward
human activity, further reducing disturbance to neighboring land. Third, front or
backyard setbacks required by the City Zoning Ordinance would assure an additional 10-20
foot separation. Fourth, in addition to the above buffering, it is recommended that the
County and the developer include fences and hedges or trees as a part of the landscaping
of the newly aligned road. Thus the residences and commercial activity on the project
site would be approximately 100 feet from the Towne Ranch.
19
C'
W.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
Such a combination of buffers would be sufficient to protect the agricultural operations
from project Impacts.8 Although the above described buffering should reduce trespass
and nuisance problems, Intrusions of pesticides and herbicides are more difficult to
mitigate. Pesticides, herbicides or other chemicals are controlled by state and federal
regulations.
All restricted chemicals, those with the potential to cause health or environmental
problems, require a San Joaquin County Agricultural Department permit for use. The
Agricultural Department determines the suitability of the chemical based on the location
of the field, the types of crops in and around the field and the land uses In the area.9
Acecrding to the San Joaquin County Agricultural Department, there are no definite
distances required between the fields being treated and adjacent residences. Permits for
application of restricted chemicals are issued based on the particular characteristics and
restrictions of the chemical and the judgement of the agricultural commissioner. The key
factor In the safe use of any chemical Is proper application. This includes using the
proper method of application, using the correct equipment, checking for favorable
weather conditions and using proper care. 10
In situations where a particular chemical or application method Is felt to be unsuitable,
there Is usually an acceptable alternative. The presence of homes would not automatical-
ly mean that a farmer could not use chemicals. It would only mean that he would have to
take particular care in their application and In certain cases might have to use an
alternate chemical or methcd of application. 11
Although there would be increased traffic adjacent to the agricultural land, this would not
appear to adversely affect grape production in other areas of Lodi.
An additional feature that may reduce potential impacts of aerial spraying is that the
buildings on the Towne Ranch are on the east side of the property and already form a
separation between vineyards and proposed project site.
Although it would not mitiga'.e the above impacts, future residents of the project should
be put on notice of the existence of adjacent agricultural activities. This can be
accomplished by including covenants, conditions and restrictions (CCNRs) in the deeds.
20
1Henry Eilers, telephone conversation, March 13, 1984.
2Jim Gerard, Gerard & Gerard Realtors, Lodi, telephone conversation, March 9, 1984_
3The Lodi Community Development Department, Lodi Data Bank: A Statistical Profile,
December 1983.
4City of Lodi General Plan, Land Use Map.
5City of Lodi Zoning Ordinance.
6City of Lodi, Noma Ranch Final EIR, December 1983.
?Testimony of Mr. Joseph Janelli, California Farm Bureau Federation, Retired, presented
to the Lodi City Council in a hearing on the Tandy -Johnson project.
BJohn Ledbetter, Owner of Veno Farms and special consultant to the City of Lodi on
agricultural issues, telephone conversation, March 20, 1984.
9City of Lodi, Noma Ranch Final EIR, December 1983.
10 [bid.
11Ibid.
21
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
B. TRAFFIC
1. Setting
a. Street Network
The project site is located on the north side of Turner Road between the southerly and
northerly legs of Lower Sacramento Road.
The project's single-family residences would have access on Lower Sacramento Road
(east) while the apartment units would be served by new streets through the site. The
projects proposed local retail area would be at the northeast corner of Lower
Sacramento/Turner. As shown on Figure 3, the project would involve the abandonment of
Lilac Street through the site. A new street (Chestnut Street) would be constructed along
the site's westerly boundary and an east -west street (along the site's northerly boundary)
would link Chestnut with Lilac Street and Lower Sacramento Road. Chestnut Street
would eventually extend northerly across the canal to link with the existing Chestnut
Street alignment.)
Local access to/from the site is available cn Turner Road, Lilac Street and Lower
Sacramento Road. Lilac is a two-lane street extending northerly through the Woodbridge
area. Lower Sacramento Road is an important north -south traffic carrier along the
westerly edge of Lodi. South of Turner, Lower Sacramento is two lanes wide with
frontage roads adjacent to development. North of Turner, Lower Sacramento Road is a
two-lane rural -type road. Turner Road is two lanes wide in the project area, widening to
four lanes near Mills Avenue. The local street intersections are controlled by stop signs
with four --way stop controls at Turner/Lower Sacramento (south) and stop sign control for
the Lower Sacramento (north) approach at Turner.
Regional access would be primarily available via Turner Road's interchanges with Highway
99 to the east and I-5 to the west. Access to Highway 99 could also occur from
Woodbridge Road (via Lower Sacramento Road north of the site). Approximat(ly two
miles south of the site, State Route 12 provides east -west access between the Lodi and
Delta areas.
22
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
b. Traffic Volumes and Flow Conditions
Traffic volume data has been obtained from City counts conducted during 1981-1982.2 As
shown in Table 2, the volumes are well within the capacities of the specific street
segments.3 Traffic flows are stable (service level C or better) and congestion is minimal
(service level definitions are listed in Table 3).
The existing traffic volumes also suggest that the stop sign controls are currently
appropriate for the various intersections in the project area.4 At the Lower
Sacramento/Turner/Lilac intersection, volumes are about 55-60% of the minimum level
needed to warrant a traffic signal. At Lower Sacramento (east)/Turner, volumes are 60-
65% of the minimum level for signal warrants.
2. Impacts
a. Project Trip Generation/Distribution
The project's daily and peak -hour trip generation have been calculated on the basis of
research conducted by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 5,6 As shown in Table 4, the project would
generate about 5,760 daily vehicle trips; about 585 of these trips would occur during the
p.m. peak hour (typically the heaviest hour of traffic flow within the 4:00-6:00 p.m.
period). It is recognized that traffic to/from the project's reteil commercial component
would not represent all new travel on the street network. The neighborhood commercial
area could serve the typical day -today shopping needs of project residents as well as
other residents in the area. Because these trips are now occurring on the street network
(to/from existing retail areas), the project would merely divert a portion of these trips.
Although it would be tenuous to identify a specific diversion factor, it is estimated that
50% of the neighborhood commercial traffic would be diverted from existing shopping
trips.
The distribution of project traffic would reflect the various travel purposes associated
with the project components. The residential development's travel would include
commute trips, shopping trips, personal business trips and trips to/from schools and
recreational facilities. The most recent census statistics indicate that over 60% of Lodi
residents work :n the Lodi area. It is estimated that over 90% of other residential trips
23
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
TABLE 2
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND FLOW CONDITIONS
Source: City of Lodi, Traffic Volume tiiap, 1981-1982.
24
Daily
Service
Street Segment
Volume
Level
Turner Road
West of Lower Sacramento (south)
3,000
A
Between Lower Sacramento segments
5,000
A -B
Mills to Ham
8,000
A
Lower Sacramento Road
North of Turner
6,000
B
South of Turner
5,000
A -B
Lodi to Tokay
8,000
B -C
Lilac Street
North of Turner
4,000
A
Source: City of Lodi, Traffic Volume tiiap, 1981-1982.
24
Level of Service
TABLE 3
TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
FOR ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Interpretations
A Describes a condition of free flow, with low volumes and
high speeds. Traffic density is low, with speeds controlled
by driver desires, speed limits, and physical roadway con-
ditions. There is little or no restriction in moneuverability
due to the presence of other vehicles, and drivers can
maintain their desired speeds with little or no delay.
B Is in the zone of stable flow, with operating speeds
beginning to be restricted somewhat by traffic conditions.
Drivers still have reasonable freedom to select their speed
and lane of operation. Reductions in speed are not un-
reasonable, with a low probability of traffic flow being
restricted. The lower limit (lowest speed, highest volume)
of this level of service has been associated with service
volumes used in the design of rural highways.
C Is still in the zone of stable f;ow, but speeds and maneuvera-
bility are more closely controlled by the higher volumes.
Most of the drivers are restricted in their freedom to select
their own speed, change lanes, or pass. A relatively
satisfactory, operating speed is still obtained, with service
volumes perhaps suitable for urban design practice.
D Approaches unstable flow, with tolerable operating speeds
being maintained though considerably affected by changes in
operating conditions. Fluctuations in volume and temporary
restrictions to flow may cause substantial drops in operating
speeds. Drivers have little freedom to moneuver, and
comfort and convenience are low, but conditions can be
tolerated for short periods of time.
E Cannot be described by speed alone, but represents
operations at even lower operating speeds than in level D,
with volumes at or near the capacity of the highway. Flow
is unstable, and there may be stoppages of momentary
duration.
F Describes forced flow operation at low speeds, where
volumes are below capacity. These conditions usuo'ly result
from queues of vehicles backing up from a restriction
downstream. Speeds are reduced substantially and stop-
pages may occur for short or long periods of time because of
the downstreet congestion. In the extreme, both speed and
volume can drop to zero.
Source: Highway Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Spec. Rpt. No. 87, 1965.
25
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traf f is
TABLE 4
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 1,2
Daily PM Peak -
Trip Daily PM Peak Hour
Land Use Rate Tr'tps Hour % Trips
80 single-family dwelling
units
160 apartment units
50,000 sq.ft. neighborhood
commercial
Gross totals
Net totals
10/unit
800 10% 80
6/unit 960 11%
105
80/1000 sq.ft. 4,000 10%
400
5,760
585
3,760
385
LITE, Trip Generation, 1979.
2Caltrans, 13th Progress Report on Trip Ends Generation, 1981.
3Assumes 50% of retail trips would represent new travel on the street network.
rM
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
TABLE 5
EXISTING AND PR%')JECTED TRAFFIC FLOW CONDITIONS
27
Traffic Volume and
Service Level
With
Street Segment
Existing
Project
Turner Road
West of Lower Sacramento (south)
3,000
(A)
3,300
(A)
Between Lower Sacramento segments
5,000
(A -B)
6,300
(B)
Mills to Ham
8,000
(A)
9,400
(A)
Lower Sacramento Road
North of Turner
6,000
(B)
6,900
(B)
South of Turner
5,000
(A -B)
6,100
(B)
Lodi to Tokay
81000
(B -C)
8' ao
(C)
Lilac Street
North of Turner
4,C00
(A)
N/A
Chestnut Street
North of Turner
N/A
4,700
(A)
Source: EIP Corporation
27
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
are within the Lodi area. The project's neighborhood commercial component would
probably generate net new trips from residential areas within 1/2 - 3/4 mile of the site.
Beyond this distance, other existing shopping areas would divert residential shopping trips.
With these factors, the project's trip distribution has been estimated and is outlined in
Figure 5.
b. Cumulative Traffic and Street Network Changes
In addition to the proposed project, additional development and circulation modifications
are planned for the Woodbridge area (t asically the area north of Turner and west of Lower
Sacramento Road).7
The Woodbridge area would have a total of about 1175 single-family dwelling units (not
Including the proposed project).8 These units would generate about 11,750 daily trips,
which would be added to the street network in the project area.
&q adopted by the San Joaquin County '1oard of Supervisors and Lodi City Council, the
Woodbridge Circulation Plan would Involve the extension of Chestnut Street southerly
along the westerly boundary of the site. Chestnut would be four lanes wide from
Mokelumne to Turner. Lower Sacramento Road would remain in Its current location but
would eventually be widened to four lanes. Although not addressed as a part of the
Woodbridge Circulation Plan, Turner Road would also be widened to four lanes.
c. Impacts on the Street Network Due to the Project
The proposed project's traffic has been added to the street network and service levels
recalculated in Table 5. As shown, the project would result in slight degradations In
traffic operation (by mRximum of one-half service level) but traffic flows would remain
stable (servIce level C or better).9
With the project traffic, volumes at Lower Sac-amento/Chestnut /Turner would be 65-70%
of the minimum levels for signalization.10 At Lower Sacramento (east)fIurner, the
volumes would essentially meet the minimum levels at which a signal could be justified .11
A signal installation, however, should be subject to a comprehensive analysis of actual
traffic volumes and accident characteristics.
W
DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECT TRAFFIC 51
COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL
AOT + AOT
TCiTAL ADT
S RAKE: EI►CORPORATION
FEET
0 300 "a 7700
W Li
W
OL
H
N
F�-
N
Z M
O�
=s
VI
°lul
I
of,tiYxx>d�IEx.t
O I SC, i. N n
cc
PROJECT SITE
11
x
� 1 t
rw� �t� rte
FA;U-I , x CtIERnl
�K�vSE 1 y+ MILLS
200 + 120
320
-NER
Ck)-MMEFCIAL dIGC.
O
NO
,F
VACANT UQt!e)K(, 0 k)MINIUMt
;t3Nt[)M )TtIRE {I CEN( -\t MMS 600 + 820
VLk,%i
1420
29
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
The project would focus traffic at four areas: two new intersections along Lower
Sacramento Road (east), the Lower Sacramento (east)/Turner intersection, and the Turner
Road frontage of the retail commercial parcel. At each location, turning movements
would result in an increased potential for vehicle conflicts and delay.
d. Impacts Due to Cumulative Development
The Woodbridge Circulation Plan projected that with cumulative Woodbridge development
and planned street connections, volumt.:c on Chestnut Street and Lower Sacramento Road
(east) would increase to 14,500 and 9,600 vehicles respectively. 12 Because these streets
and Turner Road will eventually be widened to four lanes, traffic flows would remain
stable. However, both intersections of Lower Sacramento Road with Turner Road would
warrant signalization.
3. Mitigation
The primary effects of project traffic would be increased turning movements and
potential vehicle conflicts at intersections and retail commercial driveways. To separate
turning and through vehicles and alleviate these conflicts, the following measures are
recommended:
• At Woodhaven/Lower Sacramento and Woodlake/Lower Sacramento, Lower
Sacramento should be widened or restriped to allow left -turn lanes on each of
these streets.
• At Lower Sacramento (east)/Turner, the intersection should be widened or
restriped to accommodate a left -turn lane and right -turn lane on Lower
Sacramento, a left -turn Iane and through --lane on eastbound Turner and a right -
turn lane and through -lane on westbound Turner. The widening at Lower
Sacramento (east)/Turner would mitigate turning movement conflicts as well as
reducing the need for signalization.
• Along the Retail Commercial parcel's Turner Road frontage, Turner should be
widened or restriped to provide a center two-way turn -lane. This lane should
extend to Lower Sacramento Road, providing a left -turn lane at the intersection.
With cumulative development, it is recognized that Lower Sacramento, Turner and
Chestnut would be widened to their ultimate width.
Kul
N.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
The mitigation measures discussed would be compatible with these ultimate improve-
ments.
1 Woodbridge Circulation Plan, adopted by San Joaquin County and City of Lodi in 1983.
2City of Lodi, Traffic Volume Map, 1981-1982.
3Institute of Transportation Engineers, Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook,
1976.
4Caltrans, Traffic Manual, 1979.
SITE, Trip Generation, 1979.
6Caltrans, 13th Progress Report on Trip Ends Generation, 1981.
7Woodbridge Circulation Plan, op. cit.
81bid.
9ITE, Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook, 1976.
10 Caltrans, Traffic Manual, 1979.
11Ibid.
12Woobrido Circulation Plan, op. cit.
H
31
IV.C. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Soils, Geology and Drainage
C. SOILS, GEOLOGY AND DRAINAGE
1. Setting
a. Soils
The entire site Is underlain by Hanford sandy loam (HY). The surface layer contains
grayish -brown, soft, granular material that grades downward to light grayish -brown,
massive soft, sandy loam. A weakly cemented hardpan occurs at about 60 inches below
the surface, but this would have little effect on crops. The soil is a flood plain deposit
developed on moderately coarse-grained alluvium of predominantly granitic origin.1
The Hy soil is prime agricultural soil. It has a Class I capability rating (assigned by the
Soil Conservation Service) indicating few or no limitations for agricultural purposes. The
Storie Index for Hy soil is 95 (of a possible 100 points) indicating it is particularly well
suited to general intensive farming. It is generally used in the production of vineyards,
orchards and other perenn-lai crops. Hanford sandy loam is one of the most highly desired
soils in the county.2
Hy soil Is also rated goad for construction purposes, having a bearing capacity of about
2,000 pounds per square foot, and no expansive characteristics. It will support most
structural building loads.3
b. Geology
The soil in the project area Is derived from the Modesto Formation, a geologically young
alluvial deposit that is part of 8,000 to 10,000 feet of lake and river sediments filling the
Great Valley. Underlying these sediments are about 60,000 reet of relatively undeformed
marine sedimentary rock. Although no faults appear on the surface in the vicinity of
Lodi, the structure of the bedrock indicates that ancient faults probably affected the
Great Valley Sequence.4
The nearest potentially active faults are In the Rio VIsta-Montezuma area, 22 to 32 miles
west of Lodi. The Stockton Fault (about 14 miles south) and the Isleton-Ryde Fault Zone
(about 14 miles west) are older, buried faults generally considered inactive. The n.�.arest
historically active faults, the most probable source of strong groundmotion, are in the San
Francisco Bay Area of the Coast Ranges. These faults include the San Andreas (about 70
32
IV.C. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Soils, Geology and Drainage
miles southwest), the Hayward (about 55 miles southwest), the Calaveras (about 45 miles
southwest), the Livermore (about 40 miles southwest), and the Antioch (about 30 miles
west southwest). The Midland Fault Zone (about 20 miles west) is buried and considered
mostly inactive although a Richter Magnitude 4+ earthquake was epicentered In the zone
within this century. 5,6
Lateral bedrock acceleration from a maximum expected earthquake along one of the
active faults would be about 30% of the speed of gravity (0.3g). Lodi is in seismic Zone 3,
as defined by the 1978 Uniform Building Code, which requires the strictest design factors
to resist these lateral forces. 7,8
e. Drainage
The project vicinity is virtually flat at about 40 feet above mean sea level (msl). The site
slopes very gently (about three feet per mile) to the southwest with no natural drainage
channels crossing it. The property does not lie within the 100 -year floodplain of the
Mokelumne River.9
The City operates a system of interconnecting storm drainage basins to provide temporary
storage for peak storm runoff. The runoff is stored until the water can be pumped in the
W.I.D. Canal or the Mokelumne River at controlled rates and locations. The Woodlake
North property is divided by the boundary between B -basin and E -basin. With the closure
of Lilac Street and extension of Chestnut Street, the entire project would be In 132 sub -
basin. 132 sub -basin serves about 460 acres between Lower Sacramento Road and Roper
Avenue with an interconnection line between Twin Oaks basin -park and the major outfall
structure at Lodi Lake Park. Basin -parks serve both a storm drainage function and a
recreational function. The parks are turfed and landscaped and contain baseball diamonds
and concession stands.
The project site is connected to Lodi Lake Park by a 24 -inch line along Turner Road
between Lower Sacramento Road and Rutledge Drive and a 42 -inch line from Rutledge
Drive to the park. The connection with Twin Oaks basin -park is a 42 -inch line along Allen
Drive. Thirty -inch and smaller lines would be extended from Turner Road to serve the
property.
33
IV.C. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Soils, Geology and Drainage
2. impacts
Development of the Woodlake North project would result in the loss of about 32 acres of
prime agricultural lapd. The property is currently ploughed for row crops, but the
Hanford sandy loam soil is also well suited for vineyards and orchards. Development of
the site would preclude its further agricultural use.
Urbanization of the project site could also affect the continued agricultural use of
adjacent parcels. The presence of a residential development may require modification of
normal farming practices on adjacent agricultural lands. The use of certain controlled
pesticides and herbicides may be restricted on areas adjacent to residential developments.
Cultivation and harvesting operations may result in complaints from urban residents
concerning noise and dust.
Development of the Woodlake North site would increase the erosion potential on the site
during the construction period. Erosion hazard is slight and could be kept low with a
minimum of erosion/sedimentation control measures.
People and structures on the site would be exposed to strong groundmotion during a major
earthquake on one of the faults in the nearby Coast Ranges. Peak horizontal ground
accelerations of about 0.3g world be equivalent to a Modified Mercalli Intensity of V.
During such an event, windows would be broken, plaster cracked and unstable objects
overturned. 'Nees, poles and other tall objects would be disturbed. Adherence to the
recommended lateral force requirements of the Structural Engineers Association of
California (embodied in the Uniform Building Code) would greatly reduce the likelihood of
damage or injury due to seismically induced groundshaking.
Developm-ant of the Woodlake North project site would create impermeable surfaces in
the form of roads, walks, patios and structures. These surfaces would effectively prevent
stormwater from percolating into the ground and would generate higher runoff values than
currently exist. Runoff values for sandy soils with less than 2% sl-ope range between 5%
and 10% of rainfall. These values rise to between 30% and 50% for single-family
dwellings, 6G% to 75% for multiple -family units and 50% to 70% for neighborhood
commercial development. The City storm drainage lines and facilities have been designed
to accommodate this increased runoff from the project area.10
34
IV.C. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Soils, Geology and Drainage
3. Mitigations
If Woodlake North is approved and constructed, 32 acres of prime agricultural soil will be
covered removing it from future agricultural purposes. There is no practical way to
mitigate the loss of this resource. Once cleared and developed with streets, houses and
apartments, it is unlikely that the land will ever return to agricultural use.
Erosion during the period of construction can be kept to a minimum by doing as much of
the excavation as possible. during the dry season. Maintaining undeveloped areas in
groundcover and revegetating developed areas as quickly as possible would also reduce
erosion potential. It is unlikely that a formal erosion/sedimentation control plan would be
necessary at this site.
1Soil Conservation Service (SCS), Soil Survey of Lodi Area, U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, 1937 and preliminary data sheets compiled by Paul Nazar, (SCIS), 1972.
2Kirby D. McClellan, Soil Conservationist, SCS, letter to EIP Corporation, March 1, 1984.
3City of Lodi Planning Department, Noma Ranch Final EIR, No. 83-2, December 1983,
page 3.
4California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), Sacramento Quadrangle - Map 1A,
1981, scale 1:250,000.
5CDMG, Fault Map of California, Geologic Data Map Series No. 1, 1975 scale 1: 750,000.
6CDMG, Earthquake Epicenter Map of California, Map Sheet 39, 1978, scale 1:1,000,000.
7CDMG, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California, Map
Sheet 23, 104, scale 1:2,500,000.
8City of Lodi Planning Department, op.cit., page 4.
9Richard Prima, Associate Engineer, City of Lodi, telephone communication, March 12,
1984.
10RichardPrima, op.cit.
IV.D. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Noise
D. NOISE
1. Setting
The proposed project would be subject to the standards contained in Title 25 of the
California Administrative Code which states that residences located in areas of Com-
munity Equivalent Noise Levels (CNEL) of 60 dba or greater are required to have an
acoustical analysis showing that the structure has been designed to limit noise to the
prescribed allowable revels.
Local guidelines would also apply. Areas exposed to less than day night average noise
levels (Ldn) of 60 dba are considered acceptable for residential development. Areas
exposed to Ldn 60-65 dba are conditionally acceptable if minor sound reduction measurer
are incorporated into the project design. Further details on noise within San Joaquin
County appear in the County Noise Element.I However, it should be noted that this
document is about i0 years old and some of its contents may be out of date.
A noise contour map provided by the City of Lodi staff2 indicates that Ldn noise levels
reach 65-70 dba at the perimeter of the site along Turner Road and Lower Sacramento.
The map does not indicate that railroad operations to the east and northeast of the site
would result in Ldn levels greater than 60 dba.
2. Impacts
The project would result in significant short-term noise impacts due to construction
activities. Peak noise levels generated during the noisiest construction operations, those
involving earthmoving and grading, would range from about 80-85 dba at 50 -foot distances
and about 74-79 dba at distances of 100 feet. Peak noise levels due to construction
activities on the southern edge of the site within residences south of Turner Road would
reach abouut 59-64 dba with windows open and about 49-54 dba with windows closed.
Peak noise levels inside the school due to construction activity on the northern edge of
the site would reach about 59-64 dba with windows open and about 49-54 dba with °
windows closed. In both cases noise would be audible with open windows and could be
irritating. With windows shut, impacts would be minimal. Appendix C lists typical sound
levels measured in industry and the environment.
36
IV.D. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Noise
Project operation would increase traffic volumes in the vicinity of the site. It is generally
agreed that perceptible increases in traffic noise occur when traffic volumes increase by
at least double. Based upon the traffic volumes predicted in Section B of this chapter, it
is expected that increases in traffic noise on adjacent streets due to project generated
traffic would not be perceptible. However, it should be noted that in combination with
traffic increases from other sources, audible impacts could occur.
3. Mitigation
Because the noise levels on the portions of the site adjacent to Turner Road and Lower
Sacramento exceed CNEL 60 dba, Title 25 would require that a noise analysis be
performed to identify measures which would result in a 15-20 dba noise reduction. Such
measures could include, but would not necessarily be limited to, the following:
• Minimize number and size of windows facing Turner and Lower Sacramento
• Shield sliding glass doors facing noise sources (if any) with solid balcony walls
• Avoid placing bedrooms facing Turner or Lower Sacramento
e Locate recreational areas with intervening structures to block noise transmission
from the adjacent streets.
1San Joaquin County Council of Governments, Noise Element, adopted July 23, 1974.
2Noise map provided by David S. Morimoto, Assistant Planner, Community Development
Department, Lodi, California.
37
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
. Air Quality
8 AIR QUALITY
1. Setting
The proposed project is located in the northern portion of San Joaquin County which Is the
northernmost county in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. The climate in the project area
is characterized by hot dry summers and cool wet winters. Mean annual rainfall is about
nine inches which falls mostly during storms between October and April. Average winter
maximum temperatures are in the high 50s; average summer maximum temperatures are
in the 90s.
The most serious air pollution problem in this area is due to elevated concentrations of
ozone, which have deleterious effects on human health and crop production. The problem
occurs largely from May to October when intense heat and sunlight promote the formation
of ozone from chemical reactions in the atmosphere involving reactive organic gases
(ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NO X). During this period temperatures frequently exceed
1001 F (the average daily maximum in July is 951F) and prevailing west and northwest
winds may bring pollutants from the more heavily populated Bay Area into San Joaquin
County. Ozone concentrations exceeding the federal standard of .12 parts per million
have occurred under these conditions.
It is generally assumed that pollutants in the project area are transported to the
southeast; air quality generally worsens to the south in the San Joaquin Valley. Figure 61
shows the general flow pattern. Winds at the project site are influenced by marine air
which flows through the coastal hills and valleys into the San Joaquin Valley; winds are
strongest in the afternoon and evening.
A second air quality problem in San Joaquin County occurs from October through January
when strong temperature inversions trap pollutants near the earth's surface. At such
times build-ups of carbon monoxide (CO) may violate the Federal eight-hour average CO
standard of nine parts per million. Violations generally occur in the evening due to the
combination of emissions from heavy vehicular traffic and stagnant atmospheric condi-
tions.
38
WIND FLOW IN SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY AIR BASIN
e
POPULATION SYMBOLS
10,000 TO 50.000 •
100.000 AND OVER
lWlta: VIP CORPUAATION
MILES
10 1t M N
39
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
A third air quality problem is violation of state and federal air quality standards for total
suspended particulates (TSP). This situation exists throughout the Central Valley. The
major sources of TSP are resuspended dust from spring winds and agricultural operat'ons
including burning.
A summary of applicable air quality standards appears in Table G. A summary of air
duality in San Joaquin County from 1980-1982 appears in Table 7.
San Joaquin County's air quality violates air quality standards for ozone, CO, and 'TSP.
The 1977 Amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act require non -attainment areas (areas
which will not be in compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by
1982), to prepare air quality pians (call��J nonattainment area plans or NAP), designed to
bring the areas into compliance by the end of 1987. 'ire SRn Joaquin Cownty Roard of
Supervisors was designated the lead planning agency for ozone and CO, while the
California State Air Resources Board was the lead agency for TSP planning.
The A,.r Quality Management Plan for San Joaquin County includes the following
strategies to attain compliance with the ozone and CO air quality standards: reducing
emissions from on -road motor vehicles; a Transportation Control Plan to encourage less -
polluting forms of transportation; emissions controls on stationary sources such as
industry, and businesses; and control of many other area sources such as off-road vehicles,
agricultural emissions and miscellaneous combustion processes.
2. Impacts
Construction activities would generate pollutants in the project vicinity. Trucks and
other motorized construction equipment would release exhaust during construction hours.
The quantities involved would not be likely to cause air quality violations in the
immediate vicinity of the project, nor would they be likely to produce measurable
increases in pollutant concentrations in surrounding areas. Earth moving and grading
operations would generate suspended particulates through the movement of earth and the
Passage of wind over exposed earth surfaces. Such activities would occur over the entire
period of community build -out. The resulting particulates would increase soiling
downwind, and could aggravate individuals with respiratory problems and annoy nearby
40
TABLE 6
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
m
California Standardsl
National Standards=
Coacentratlod
Method
Primary3's
Secondaryll'4
MethodT
Pollutant Averaging Time
Oxidantl0
1 hour
0.10 ppm3
Ultraviolet
—
—
—
(200 ug/m)
Photometry
Ozone
1 hour
—
—
0.12 ppm=
0235 ug/m)
Some as Primary
Standard
Ethylene
Chem lluminescence
Carbone Monoxide
6 hour
9.0 ppm
00 mg/m3)
Non -Dispersive
Infrared
Spectroscopy
10 mg/m3
0 fpm)
Same as Primary
Standards
Non -Dispersive
Infrared
Spectroscopy
(NDIR)(NUIR)
1 hour
20 ppm
(23 mg/m3)
40 mg/m3
(35 ppm)
Nitrogen Dioxide
annual Average
—
Cas Phs�s"q
Chemilumi-
100 ue/m3
(0.05 ppm)
Some as Primary
Cas Phase
Chemiluminescence
_
I hour
0.25 ppm3
110 /m )
ncsccnce
Standard
_
Sulur Dioxide
Annual Average
—
60 ug/m
---
(0.01 m)
24 hour
0.05 ppm
131 m3)9
365 ug/m
(0.14 m)
—
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
Pararosanliine
hour
—
—
1300 ug/m3
(0.5 m)
1 hour
0.5 ppm
—
—
1310 1 /m3
_
SuspendSuspenda
Particulate
AnnualGeometric
Mean
60 ug/m
lligh Volume
75 ug/m3
60 ug/m3
high Volume
Matter
Sampling
200 /m3
150 t /m3
Sampling
24 tour
100 /m
Sulfates
24 hour
25 ug/m3
Turbldimetric
Barium
Sulfate
Lead
30 day
Average
I.5 ug/m3
Atomic
Absorption
Calendar
—
_,
1.5 ug/ml
Same as Primary
Atamie
Quarter
Standnrd
Absorption
Hydrogen
3u1fMe
1 hour
0.03 ppb
(41 ug/m�
Cadmium Hydroxide-
STRaatnn
„_,
,..
--•
Vinyl Chloride
(Chloroethone)
24 hour
0.010 ppcy�
(26 ug/m
Tedlar Bag
Collection, Qaa
—
_
.--
Chromatogrnphy
m
A
N
TABLE '6
APPLICIAnLR ONLY IN THE LAKE TAIIOP AiR nASiNt
Carbon Monoxide
California Standnrdst
National Standards3
Pollutant
Averaging Time
Concentrations Method
Prlmary3,5
Secondary3,t
Matttod
Visibility
t observation
In sufficient amount to
Reducing
the prevailing visibility to less
Reducing
reduce the prevailing v1slblllty3
Particles
than 30 miles when the relative
Particles
--
to less than 10 miles when ilia
humidity Is less Chun 70%
relative humidity is lev than 70%
APPLICIAnLR ONLY IN THE LAKE TAIIOP AiR nASiNt
Carbon Monoxide
6 hour
6 ppm NQIR
(7 mg/ms)
---
—
--
Visibility
t observation
In sufficient amount to redue
Reducing
the prevailing visibility to less
.
Particles
than 30 miles when the relative
---
--
---
humidity Is less Chun 70%
I California standards, other than carbon monoxide, are values that are nest to be equaled or exceeded. Ilia carbon monoxide standards are not to be exceeded.
2Nalionnl standards, other titan ozone and those based on annual averages or annual geometric means, are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The osona
standard Is attained when the expected number oI days & calendar yuar with a maximum hourly average -concentration above the standard Is equal to or less
than one.
3Concentratlon expressed first In units in which It was promulgated. Equivalent units given In parentheses are based upon a refer?goe temperature of 250C and a
reference pressure of 760 mm of mercury. All measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference temperature of 35 C and it reference pressure of
760 mm of lig (1,013.2 millibar); ppm In this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas.
4Any equivalent procedure which can be shown to the satisfaction of the Air Resource [bard to give equivalent results at or near the level of the air quality
standard may he used.
SNatlonal Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safely, to protect the public health. Each state must attain ilio'
primary standards no later than three years after that state's Implementatlon plan Is altprovod by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
6Nationai Secondary Standards Tiic levels of air watlty necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.'
Filch state must attain the secondary standards within a "reasonable lime" after the implementation plan is approved by the EPA.
Rclareuce method as described by the EPA. An "equivalent method" of measurement may be used but must have a "consistent relationship to the refereltoe
method" and must be approved by the EPA.
$Prevailing vlsiblllty is donned as live greatest visibility which Is attalnod or sutrimssed around at least halt of the horiron circle, but not necessarily In
continuous sectors.
IAt locations whore the states standards for oxidant and/or suspended particulate matter are violated. National atandnrds apply eltowhere.
10I61eastred as ozone.
t
e%
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
TABLE 7
AIR QUALITY IN THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL DISTRICT 1980-1982
Number of Exceedances of Standards
1980 1981 1982
Ozone
number of hours exceeding
standard 11
5
30
number of days exeeding .
standard 6
4
15
Carbon Monoxide
8 -hour average 1
0
0
Particulates3 39
16
13
1Violations recorded in Lodi, Ripon, two locations in Stockton and Union Island in 1979;
Lodi and Stockton only in 1980 - 1982.
2Violations recorded in Stockton.
3Violations recorded in Stockton, although particulates are a valley -wide ^roblem.
Source: California Air Resources Board, California Air Quality Data, Annual
Summaries, 1980-1982.
43
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
residents. Violations of the particulate air quality standard could occur in the immediate
vicinity of the project; data and models with which to quantify these impacts are not
available. It should be noted, however, that because of the agricultural land uses in the
vicinity of the project site, it is likely that ambient particulate concentrations are already
relatively high.
The project would produce carbon monoxide mainly from motor vehicle exhaust emissions.
The potential impacts of these emissions were calculated using the air quality model of
the California Air Resources Board.1 It is a Gaussian line source model which was applied
to worst-case conditions of traffic and meteorology at the most heavily travel, -d and
congested intersections which would be impacted by the proposed project. Emission
factors provided by the California Air Resources Board for a temperature of 35OF were
used in the calculations.
The traffic input to the model was based upon the data contained in Section B of this
chapter. Peak hour traffic was assumed to be 10% of average daily total (ADT) and peak
eight-hour traffic was assumed to be 60% of ADT. Traffic speed was assumed to be 20
mph for the peak hour and 35 mph for the eight-hour average. The model also accounts
for roadway width: Lower Sacramento and Turner were assumed to remain two lanes wide.
Wind direction was selected to be parallel to the more heavily travelled road in each
intersection modeled. Wind speed was assumed to be two mph for all model runs.
Stability E was assumed for one-hour and stability D for eight-hour (stability is one
measure of the capacity of the atmosphere to disperse pollutants; D represents slightly
better dispersion than E).
The modeling results (Table 8) indicate that no violation of either the state one—hour
standard of 20 ppm or the federal or state eight-hour standards of nine ppm is anticipated
to occur or even be approached. As a result no significant local CO impact is predicted.
The most important pollutant at the regional scale is ozone, which is the product of
photochemical reac'ions in the atmosphere involving non -methane hydrocarbons (NMHC,
sometimes called reactive organic gases). Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and the reactions
require energy from the sun to proceed and may take several hours: as a result peak ozone
44
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
TABLE 8
ROADSIDE CARBON MONOXIDE
CONCENTRATIONS ALONG TURNER ROAD
(parts per million)
Future Future
Existing Without Project With Project
1 hr 8 hrs 1 hr 8 hrs 1 hr 8 hugs
Location
Turner, between
Lower Sacramento
segments 7 4- 5 2 5 2
Turner, between
Mills and Ham 8 4 5 3 5 .3
Background 6 3 4 2 4 2
Assumptions: Windspeed 2 mpP
Wind angle 22.5
Stability E for one hour, D for eight hours
Peak speed = 20 mph
Average link speed = 35 mph
Background = Half highest measured
CO value in Lodi in 1982
45
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
levels tend to occur downwind of the emissions. Although the mechanism for ozone
formation is extremely complex and not completely understood, it appears that ozone
concentrations in the San Joaquin Valley are most sensitive to changes in the amount of
hydrocarbon emissions.2 The proposed project would add about .02 t/d to the total burden
of 60.4 t/d, or about .03%. These quantities of NMHC would not produce a significant
(i.e., greater than .005 ppm with conventional monitoring equipment) increase in ozone
concentrations at any downwind Iocation, although the general downwind levels would be
marginally increased.
The increase in particulate concentrations shown in Table 9 should not noticeably affect
overall TSP levels in the region, since agricultural and natural sources are the major
sources of TSP pollution. The two remaining pollutants in Table 9, NO and SOX, are not
considered problematic on a regional scale. The project would, therefore, be consistent
with the regional air quality plan.
3. Mitigation
The following steps may be taken to reduce dust emissions during construction:
- watering exposed surfaces. (complete coverage twice daily can reduce emissions by
50%)3
- use of tarpaulins on loaded trucks
- minimization of the period during which soils are exposed
Since motor vehicle emission rates are regulated by state and federal agencies, the
available mitigation measures are restricted to reducing traffic volumes and congestion.
Measures to reduce VMT or improve flow are identified in the transportation section of
this report.
Kalifornia Air Resources Board, Research Division, Air Quality Modeling Section, Lecture
Noter for Workshop on Estimating Carbon Monoxide Concentrations for Ho; SFOts
Ana.ysis, Sacramento, California, May 1980.
2San Joaquin Planning Department, San Joaquin County, 1982 Air Quality Plan (AQMP),
Stockton, CA, 1982.
3U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidelines for Development of Control Strategy
in Areas with Fugitive Dust Problems, OAQPS 1.2-071, October 1977.
46
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Miitigations:
Air Quality
TABLE 9
REGIONAL POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
Tons Per Day
Non
Oxides
Methane
of Oxides
Project Hydro-
Nitro- of Particu-
Generated CO Carbons
gen Sulfur Tates VMT
1990 .3 .02
.02 .003 .03 12,800
Regional Emissions
1980 344.59 102.3 55.36 NA NA
Projected 1987 Regional
Emissions Without
Controls 302.07 91.46 49.03 NA NA
Projected 1987 Regional
Emissions With
Controls 253.57 60.4 NA NA NA
Source: San Joaquin Planning Department, San Joaquin County, 1982 Air Quality Plan,
(AQMP), Stockton, California, 1982.
47
IV.F. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Historic and Cultural Resources
F. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Setting
The Plains Miwok Indians inhabited the northern portion of the San Joaquin Valley. The
Miwok, as other California Indians, can be characterized as a hunting and gathering people
who lived a semi -sedentary village life. Indian sites in the Lodi area are usually found
along the banks of the Mokelumne River, just north of the project site.
In 1852, Jeremiah 11. Woods and Alexander McQueen established a ferry across the
Mokelumne River. As a result, a new road from Stockton to Sacramento was established
by way of this ferry which became known as Woods' Ferry. In 1858, Woods built a bridge
at the site of the ferry. From it the town, which was laid out in April 1859, took the
name of Woodbridge. The town of Woodbridge is a California Historic Landmark.
Woodbridcre and other towns such as Lakeford absorbea the river trade of the Mokelumne,
but later on the agricultural districts became dependent upon towns like Lodi which had
railway access. 2 -
In 1878, Albert Stokes Thomas deeded land north of the project site to the town of
Woodbridge. One year later on this site, Bishop Castle of the United Brethren Chtrch
dedicated the Woodbridge Seminary. This became the San Joaquin Valley College (1882-
1897), one of the first colleges in California. It was later used as Woods Grammer School
until 1922 when the building was dismantled. The site is a California Historic Landmark.3
East of the school is the Woodbridge Cemetery. As early as 1847, burials took place at
this site, however, the date of the formal founding of the cemetery is 1875. The
cemetery is maintained by the Oddfellows, Masonic Lodge.4
CP
Adjacent to the proposed project, to the west, is a 6 -bedroom farm house situated on a
2 1/4 -acre parcel of the Towne Ranch. It was built about 70 years ago by the Towne
family to replace an earlier structure which had been destroyed by fire. The Townes were
large agricultural land owners In the Lodi/Woodbridge area and have lived in the area for
about a century. The home has recently been purchased by a group who plan to convert
the Towne home into a restaurant/bed and breakfast enterprise.5
48
IV.F. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Historic and Cultural Resources
The Central California Information Center at California State College .at Stanislaus has
been provided the project description and maps depicting the project site. A search of the
State Office of Historic Preservation cultural records maintained at the Center indicated
that no known cultural resources are within the project site; however, three resources
mentioned above, San Joaquin Valley College, Woodbridge and the Oddfellows Cemetery
are all within one mile of the project site.6 The farm house on the Towne Ranch site is
not listed as a historic structure.
2. Impacts
Although there are no recorded archeological surveys of the site, it is doubtful that there
are any archeological sites on the property. The digging and plowing necessary to
cultivate the site would have destroyed any archeological material.
Implementation of the project may affect the old Towne family farm house depending
upon which alignment of Chestnut Street is chosen. The project would not directly affect
the California State Historical Landmarks.
3. Mitigation
Should any archeological artifacts be discovered during project excavation, the Central
California Information Office at Stanislaus State College and State Office of Historic
Preservation should be notified. Excavation which might damage the discovered artifact
would be suspended to allow determination of significance by a qualified archeologist.
Kalifornia Office of Historic Preservation, California Inventory of Historic Resources,
March 1976, page 164.
2Bancroft, Hubert Howe, The History of California, Vol. VI, 1848-1859, The History
Company, 1888.
3Debbie Martel, archivist, San Joaquin County Historical Museum, telephone conversa-
tion, ;viarch 20, 1984.
4Ibid.
5Jim Gerard, Gerard and Gerard Realty, telephone conversation, March 22, 1984.
6E. A. Greathouse, Assistant Coordinator, Central California Information Office,
California State College, Stanislaus letter, March 16, 1984.
49
iV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts be Mitigations:
Community Services
G. COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Police
a. Setting
The Lodi Police Department serves the area within Lodi City limits. The Department has
54 sworn officers, 40 patrol officers and 14 patrol cars. There is one central dispatch
station, and the City is divided into seven patrol areas (beats). The average response time
for the City is 2.9 minutes.
Currently the project site is not patrolled by the Lodi Police Department. It does not
respond to calls north of Turner Road or west of Lower Sacramento Road. Through an
Informal agreement, the San Joaquin Sheriff's Department patrols Lilac Road and west to
the County line.I This arrangement has been satisfactory to date because the property has
been agricultural land.
b. Impacts
The development of the Woodlake North project will mean the end of the present patrol
arrangement between the Lodi Police and San Joaquin Sheriff. The Lodi Police will be
expected to provide police service to the development as it is within City limits. The
Department has not indicated any adverse impact on its service due to the Woodlake
North project.2
c. Mitigation
None required.
2. Fire
a. Setting
The City of Lodi will provide fire protection to the project area. The Lodi Fire
Department provides service within City limits, an area of approximately 8.5 square miles
with a service population of 40,000. The Department has 48 firefighters with 42 on line.
It has four 1500 -gallon pumpers, one elevated platform truck, one ladder truck and one
equipment truck. This equipment is distributed between three stations. The station
closest to the project site is the 210 West Pine Street Station. Emergency response time
50
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts do Mitigations:
Community Services
to the project area is estimated to be 4 to 41 minutes. The City has a Class III ISO
rating.3
b. Impacts
The Department Chief has indicated that service to the proposed area Is riot a problem.
However, continued development in northwest Lodi could mean a lona .:r run and the
eventual addition of another fire station In that area.4
c. Mitigation
None required.
3. Schools
a. Setting
The Lodi Unified School District (LUSD) serves the City of Lodi and nearly all of northern
San Joaquin County, including portions of North Stockton. The School District has a
student population of 17,000, which is estimated to be growing by 4 to 7 percent per
year.
5
The LUSD does not have adequate classroom space and students are bussed throughout the
District. Lodi High School is on extended hours to handle the student overload. A
statement of impaction has been filed with the State of California and a tax of $200 per
bedroom is in effect in Lodi.6
b. Impact
According to School District estimates one student is added by each new single-family
home, and by every two multiple -family units.? Therefore, the Woodlake North project
can be expected to add 160 students to the Lodi School District. Lakewood Elementary,
Woodbridge Middle and Lodi High Schools would be most affected.
C. Mitigation
The developer of Woodlake North has entered into an agreement with the LUSD to
mitigate adverse impacts on the School District by the development of this property. This
51
IV.G Environmental SE•tting, Impacts h Mitigations:
Community Services
agreement was signed in June 1981. A text of this agreement can be found in Appendix B
of this document. The School District has no objection to the project as long as the fees
are paid.8
4. Water
a. Setting
The City of Lodi provides water to the area from a series of 18 wells drawing on 150 -7400 -
foot deep aquifers. The entire system has a capacity of 42 million gallons per day (mgd).
Current residential water use is not known. New wells are drilled using water utility
revenues as additional areas are developed. The developer is responsible for extension of
all water mains.9 Residential water use is not metered; commercial and industrial use is
metered and priced at a declining rate.10
The City of Lodi has an ongoing water monitoring and testing program for all its City well
sites. The program is designed to alert the City to the presence of any chemicals,
organisms or other potentially harmful materials that may be present in the water system.
Of particular concern has been the possible presence of the chemical DBCP, a chemienl
product that was used by farmers to control nematodes. AIthough the product has been
banned for a number of years, traces of the chemical are stili present in the soil and
underlying water tables. Trace levels have been detected in some of the City's wells,
however, the levels are below the State's "Action Level" of 1 p.p.b. If the DBCP level did
exceed 1 p.p.b., the City would either reduce or curtail pumping from the problem well in
accordance with State regulations. Testing done so far has not resulted in any DBCP
prolems in any of the wells in the area of Woodlake North.
In addition to the regular testing program, the City will begin a comprehensive water
testing program later this year to test for an entire spectrum of chemicals. This test will
be done to comply with recent State of California Health Department regulations.
b. Impacts
The City estimates that each acre of single-family development uses approximately 3.1
acre feet of water per year, and each acre of multiple-farr. ily development uses 4.2 acre
feet of water per year. 11 if Woodlake North used water at this level, the project's
52
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts & Mitigations:
Community Services
residential water consumption would be 97 acre feet of water per year, or on a daily basis,
.09 mgd.
Commercial development of the southwest corner of the site will have minimum water
needs. Ths small retail shopping area envisioned (40,000 sq.ft.) should use only
approximately 8.74 acre feet of water per year or .01 mgd. 12
The total water consumption for the Woodlake North project will be approximately 106
acre feet per year or .10 mgd. This level of water consumption will not significantly
affect the City's current 42 mgd capacity. 13 Water use will be heavier if the property is
developed as residential than if it remains in agricultural use. The California Department
of Water Resources estimates that alfalfa would use 3.4 acre-feet (AC) of applied water
per year, deciduous orchards 3 AC, vineyards 2A AC, truck gardening 1.8 AC, and barley -
- no applied water. (An acre-foot of water is the amount of water needed to cover one
acre of land with one foot of water, or 326,000 gallons.) The Woodlake North project is
estimated to use 106 AC per year. This is equivalent to 3.31 AC of water per acre.14
Consumption can be substantially reduced through water conservation and cut by as much
as half by metering the supply.
C. Mitigation
None required.
5. Wastewater
a. Setting
The City of Lodi Sanitary System handles wastewater within City limits, serving 35,000
residential and commercial customers. The City's White Slough Treatment Plant provides
primary and secondary treatment and has a capacity of 5.8 mgd. Current residential
wastewater flow Is not known. The developer pays for installation of all conne--ting lines
and a connection fee (treatment plant buy -in charge) for each unit developed. 15
b. impacts
Assuming that 75% of water consumption is carried away as wastewater, the Woodlake
North project can be expected to generate .425 mgd of wastewater. The treatment plant
has capacity to absorb the flow. But due to the nature of the terrain, a lift station will be
53
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts do Mitigations:
Community Services
necessary to serve the project and the surrounding area. 16
c. MItigation
The lift station will be located on the project site. The optimal location would be in the
southeast corner of the project's high density zone, with access to the street. The lift
station would be approximately 30 feet by 40 feet. A lift station in this location would be
able to serve property up to Canal or Academy Street. 17 The developer will pay for
Installation of the station. If it serves an area larger than his project, the City will
reimburse him in proportion to capacity used outside the project.
6. Solid Waste
a. Setting
Solid waste disposal is provided in the project area by Sanitary City Disposal, a private
franchise collector. Sanitary City Disposal services the area within Lodi City limits and
has more than 14,000 customers. Collection is made by truck on a weekly basis for
residential customers and more frequently for commercial clients. 18 Refuse is taken to a
transfer station in Lodi where approximately 25% is reclaimed. The remainder is.trueked
to Harney Lane disposal sit.!,'a Class I1-2 landfill. The Harney Lane Landfill is estimated
to have 1-1/2 to 2 years of capacity left. It is scheduled to close in 1986. An EIR is
underway on the Harney Lane Replacement Site. 19
b. Impacts
The franchise operator estimates an average of 39 lbs. of solid waste is generated per unit
per week. 20 Therefore the 240 proposed units would create approximately 243 tons of
refuse a year. This will not have a significant effect on the remaining capacity of the
current Harney Lane Landfill.
The sanitary service is a mandatory service that operates on a user fee basis. Though the
Woodlake North development would require additional manpower and service equipment,
this is part of a normal growth pattern and the cost of capital improvements would be
repaid by user fees. No negative Impact would result. 21
c. Mitigation
None required.
54
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts & Mitigations:
Community Services
7. Electricity
a. Setting
The City of Lodi owns and operates the local electrical distribution system. It is a
member of the Northern California Power Agency from which it receives power, and also
buys power from a number of other sources.
A 60-Kv lIne currently runs through the project site. The developer pays all costs of line
extension for service. 22
b. Impact
The proposed project will have no impact on electrical service and is readily served. The
existing 60-Kv line through the site may be moved for esthetic reasons to the periphery of
the site though the developer must pay for the relocation. 23
c. Mitigation
None required.
8. G as
Pacific Gas and Electric Company will provide service. 24
9. Telephone
Pacific Bell will provide service. 25
10. Television Cable
Lodi Cablevision will provide service. 26
1Linda Sunday, Administrative Assistant, Lodi Police Department, telephone conversa-
tion, March 7, 1984.
2Ibid.
3Dan MacLeod, Chief, Lodi Fire Department, telephone conversation, March 2, 1984.
4Ibid.
55
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts do Mitigations:
Community Services
5Mamie Starr, Facilities Planner, Lodi Unified School District, telephone conversation,
March 2, 1984.
6City of Lodi, Development Information, November 1982.
7Mamie Starr, op. cit.
aMamie Starr, op. cit.
9City of Lodi, op. cit.
10RichardPrima, Associate Engineer, City of Lodi, telephone conversation, March 2, 1984.
11City of Lodi, op. cit.
12Estimatebased on water consumption of retail stores; 400-450 gallons per 25 -foot
frontage. (The Design of Small Water Systems by J.A. Salvato, Jr., in Public Works, May
1960.)
13Richard Prima, op. cit.
14State of California, Department of Water Resources, Vegetative Water Use in
California, 1974, page 44.
15RichardPrima, op. cit.
16RichardPrima, op. cit.
17 Richard Prima, op. cit.
18HarryMarzolf, Sanitary City Disposal, telephone conversation, March 14, 1984.
19TomHorton, Solid Waste Manager, San Joaquin Co. Public Works, telephone
conversation, March 20, 1984.
20Cityof Lodi, Noma Ranch, op. cit.
21 David Vaccarezza, President, Sanitary City Disposal, telephone conversation, March 16,
1984.
22HansHanson, Electrical Engineer, City of Lodi, telephoae conversation, March 2, 1984.
231bid.
56
IV.G Environmental Setting, impacts & Mitigations:
Community Services
24OscarCox, Marketing Representative, PG&E, telephone conversation, March 16, 1984.
25NancyDeets, Design Engineer, Pacific Bell, telephone conversation, March 16, 1984.
26DeannaEnright, General Manager, Lodi Cablevision, telephone conversation, March 16,
1984.
57
V. UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The loss of prime agricultural land would be an unavoidable impact. Once the land is
developed with homes, apartments, streets and stores there is little likelihood that it
would ever be used for agricultural purposes.
VI. IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The toss of agricultural land is also considered to be an irreversible change. It is unlikely
that the land, once developed, would ever be used again for agricultural purposes.
58
VQ. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT
AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTMTY
Development of the site woula have a long-term effect of depleting the supply of prime
agricultural land In the Lodi area. This is both a project -specific and cumulative impact.
59
VIII. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The proposed project will contribute to a cumulative loss of prime agricultural lana that
has occurred in the past several years. Table 10 shows the projects that did or will
contribute to this loss.
Project
Lake Shore Village
Lobaugh Meadows
Kennedy Ranch
Tandy Johnson Ranch
Noma Ranch
Woodlake North
Total
TABLE 10
LOSS OF FARM LAND IN LODI
Approximate
Acres
98 acres
92 acres
88 acres
43 acres
20 acres
32 acres
371 acres
Status
Approved
Approved
Approved
Application Pending
Approved
Application Pending
Source: City of Lodi, Tandy -Johnson EIR, 1984, and EIP Corporation.
All land in and around the City of Lodi is designated as prime agricultural land. Thus
every development must utilize agricultural land. Most future residential, commercial
and industrial development will require the urbanization of agricultural land.
A second cumulative environmental impact is the Increased traffic in and around the
community of Woodbridge. Although the proposed project lies within the City of Lodi, it
is adjacent to Woodbridge, where numerous new residential developments have been built
or are proposed.
60
Vill. Cumulative Impacts
According to the San Joaquin County General Plan, the Woodbridge community is
projected to have an additional 1,176 dwelling unit (not including the proposed project) by
the year 1995.1 The San Joaquin Planning Department has either approved or is currently
considering subdivision maps for 616 of those units.2
This cumulative development including the proposed project could result in as many as
17,510 additional daily vehicle trips on local roads with an attendant increase in an
pollution.
The final cumulative impact is the contribution the project will make to increased student
population on the already overcrowded Lodi Unified School District. This Increase In
school-age children places a strain on the District's ability to provide classroom space,
particularly In light of the fiscal problems facing the District.
Currently developers in the Lodi area have been entering into agreements with the School
District to provide funding that will eventu-illy help alleviate the school impacts.
1San Joaquin County General Plan, Land Use Element, April 13, 1976.
2Peggy Keranen, San Joaquin County Planning Department, telephone conversation,
March 9, 1984.
61
IR. GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS
The development of Woodlake North would introduce new urban uses to the northwest
corner of Lodi. These new uses may accelerate the rate at which the surrounding area's
commercially and Industrially zoned properties are developed.
With regard to inducing the conversion of the Towne Ranch and other agricultural land,
often the introduction of urban uses adjacent to agricultural uses results In a rippling
effect, in which lands not subject to immediate development have gone idle or risen in
price beyond levels that agricultural profits can support. The Introduction of conversion
may create uncertainty among farmers as to whether they will be able to continue to
operate In the future. This uncertainty Is often manifested in postponement of capital
and equipment investments needed to continue farming in the long run.
This uncertainty about the future viability of agriculture has been labeled the "imperman-
ence syndrome."
With regard to the Woodlake North Project, two conflicting factors have a bearing on
whether further agricultural land will be converted to urban uses.
The Greenbelt Initiative, Measure A, which was designed to prevent the loss of
agricultural land, is the first factor. Since the Towne Ranch and some other agricultural
properties west of the project site are in the Greenbelt, a vote of the electorate would be
required prior to annexation by the City.
In November 1983, Sunwest ii4, a residential project, went before the voters under this
"Greenbelt" process. The project was soundly defeated. If this is any indication of the
future, there may be little or no growth within the City limits once existing projects are
62
IX. Growth -Inducing Impacts
completed. Since most of the undeveloped land in the area of the proposed project is not
in the City limits, the voters will ultimately determine whether any additional growth will
occur.
1
Despite the deterrent effect Measure A may have on futher conversions of agricultural
land, some of the property adjacent to the proposed project is, in fact, planned for
residential under the San Joac � in County General Plan, due to its proximity to the
community of Woodbridge. i ch land were annexed to the Woodbridge Sanitation
District, which provides sewer services to Woodbridge, these areas could be developed
without annexation by the City of Lodi. Though the Woodbridge Sanitation District is
currently reluctant to annex agricultural land, such annexations could occur in the
future.2
1City of Lodi, Tandy- Johnson EIR, 1984.
2Peggy Keranen, San Joaquin County Planning Dept., telephone conversation, March 9,
1984.
R. ALTERNATIVES
A. NO -PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Under • this alternative the proposed project would not be approved by the City and
therefore would not be built. This would enable the land to continue to be used for
agricultural purposes and would eliminate the other adverse impacts that might result
from the project.
While the alternative would eliminate the environmental Impacts, it could have an adverse
effect on the provision of housing for current and future upper-income families in Lodi.
According to recent studies, most of the subdivisions recently proposed In Lodi will serve
lower- and moderate -income households with very few upper-income housing units.1
Table 11 shows a breakdown of proposed housing prices. Prices shown are est mates since
the units are not yet built and market and economic conditions may change the price.
Of the 230 units estimated to cost more than $120,000, only about 20 units are estimated
to sell for more than $150,000. Thus, the no -project alternative may interfere with the
City's ability to provide housing for upper-income families.
As for the proposed multiple -family units, there are currently over 1,000 unbuilt multiple -
family units in subdivisions with either a final or tentative map. Over 600 of these units
are located in Lobaugh Meadows, although the final number of units in I.obaugh Meadows
may be less. The remainder are scattered In a dozen or so projects of various sizes, and
range in price from moderate to very expensive. Since this number includes both
apartment and condominium units, it is difficult to compare prices. It does appear,
however, that when these units are completed there will be units available at all price
ranges.
64
TABLE 11
PRICE ESTIMATES FOR FUTURE SUBDIVISIONS
Over $120,000
(Category A)
$85,000 - $119,999
(Category B)
Less than $85,000
(Category C)
Category A
No. Lots
Lobaugh Meadows
153
Lakeshore Village
268
No. 1,2,3,5,& 6
57
Rivergate-Mokelumne
16
Sunwest No. 3
2
Aaron Terrace
2
230
Category B
Lodi Park West (portion)
175
Mokelumne Village
78
Lakeshore Village 3 do 4
10
Burlington Manor
2
Homestead Manor
3
Pinewood
268
Category C
1
Turner Road Estates
59
Beckman Ranch #5
55
Lakeshore Village No. 4
75
Lodi Parkwest (portion)
175
Burgandy Village
32
Pinewood
9
English Oaks #7
1
406
Source: City of Lodi, Tandy -Johnson EIR, 1984.
65
X. Alternatives
The 1,000+ units represent a 5+ year supply of multiple -family units based on a 10 -year
average of 180 units per year.2
Thus, the no -project alternative may not affect the supply of multiple -family units in the
near future.
B. ALL -RESIDENTIAL ALTERNATIVE
Another alternative would be to develop the property in conformance with the existing
general plan designation of low density residential. This would permit both R-1 and R-2
zoning and would therefore eliminate the multiple -family and commercial portions of the
project. No general plan amendment would be necessary.
Under this alternative, there could be as many as 223 units if the entire site were
developed under R-2 zoning (the most dense single-family residential zone).
Although this alternative would not require a general plan amendment, it would still
require rezoning from U -H to R-1 or R-2, or a combination of the two.
Although the number of dwelling units is only slightly less than the proposed project (223
rather than 240), the elimination of commercial areas would result In fewer vehicle trips.
There would also be a slight decrease in the number of school-age children.
This alternative would not reduce the impact of the loss of agricultural land. "Ihether the
land Is developed with ail single-family lots or a mix of single-family, multiple -family and
commercial uses, the land will still be removed from agricultural use.
C. REDESIGNED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
A third alternative would be to design the subdivision so that the commercial and
multiple -family units were on the east side of the site rather than the west.
The primary advantage of this alternative would be to locate the most densely developed
areas as far as possible from the agricultural land to minimize trespass and nuisance
problems.
66
X. alternatives
Relocating the commercial development from the southwest corner of the site to the
southeast corner may also reduce the traffic flow on the new alignment of Lilac Read and
direct It instead to Lower Sacramento Road. On a localized basis, the, intersactiori at the
southeast corner would become a busier Intersection with a possible need for earlier
signalization.
ICity of Lodi, Tandy -Johnson FIR, 1984.
2Ibid.
67
XI. EIR AUTHORS AND PERSONS CONSULTED
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PLANNING CORPORATION
Prineipai-in-Charge
Project Manager
Prof ect Team
George Nickelson
Rick Pollack
Douglas Svensson
Gorge Burwasser
Kristie Postel
Don Dean
Lisa Lefholz
Alexis Jetter
Michael Dunham
Gabriel Lasa
Damon Gay
B. PROJECT SP014SOR
Doug Donaldson
Ron Bass
Transportation Engineer
Senior Scientist
Planner/Economist
Geologist
Geographer/Historian
Planner
Graphics
Technical Editor
Publications Manager
Production
Word Processing
A. Bryce Carey, President
Carey Development
5405 North Pershing Avenue
Suite C-3
Stockton, California 95207
C. PERSONS CONSULTED
City of Lodi
David Morimoto
Assistant Planner, Community Development Department
Dan MacLeod
Chief, Fire Department
Linda Sunday
Administrative Assistant, Police Department
Richard Prima
Associate Engineer
Hans Hanson
Electrical Engineer
Other
Mamie Starr
Facilities Planner, Lodi Unified School District
Kirby D. McClellan
Soil Conservationist, Soil Conservation Service
David Vacearezza
President, Sanitary City Disposal
Harry Marzolf
Sanitary City Disposal
Oscar Cox
Nancy Deets
Deanna Enright
John Kono
Jim Geraid
Jim Yost
Peggy Keranen
Henry Eilers
John Ledbetter
Tom Horton
YI. E1R Authors and Persons Consulted
Marketing Representative, PG&E
Design Engineer, Pacific Bell
General Manager, Lodi Cablevision
California Department of Water Resources
Gerard and Gerard Realtors
R. W. Siegfried & Associates
San Joaquin County Planning Department
Former Owner, project site
Veno Farms
Solid Waste Manager, SanJoaquinCounty Public Works
69
X11. COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
RESPONSE TO CO%C-tENTS
1) Comments from Lodi Unified School District
The Lodi Unified School District was concerned about the width of the side-
walk along Lower Sacramento Road. The sidewalk would be used by students
walking between Woodbridge School and the residential areas south and east
of the school. They felt that a wider than normal sidewalk (10' instead of
5') would reduce the possibility of students walking across the resident's
frontyards instead of the sidewalk.
Response - Increasing the width of the sidwalk from 5' to 10' is possible,
however, this would require either some additional street right
of way or narrowing the paved roadway. The current right of way
width would provide for a 5' siden.:alk plus 211' of additional land between the
back of sidewalk and the right of way line. This additional 2�' is the area
where streetlights, fire hydrants and similar public utilites are located.
This area usually becomes incorporated into the adjacent resident's frontyard.
One option would be to utilize this 211' as part of the sidewalk instead of
leaving it to become part of the resident's frontyard. This would create a
7Y sidewalk instead of a standard 5' sidewalk. This option would not require
any additional right of way dedication or affect the width of the street
section.
2) Comments from San Joaquin County Planning Department
One of the comments from the County concerned Lots 1 - 5 of the subdivision.
These lots are in the northeast corner of the project and front on Lower
Sacramento Road and rear to the school playground. They were primarily
concerned about having residential lots fronting on a major street like
Lower Sacramento Road. In order to eliminate this problem, they proposed a
land exchange between the L.U.S.D. and the developer to put the 5 lots on
Lilac Street instead of Lower Sacramento Road.
Response - Moving the lots from Lower Sacramento Road to Lilac Street
would be beneficial to the traffic circulation. Lots
fronting on Lower Sacramento Road would have driveways on
a major street. This would increase the-.ossible conflicts between
residents entering and exiting their property and passing traffic. Moving
the lots to Lilac Street would,however, require an agreement between the
L.U.S.D. to accomplish a trade of property.
VE
XII. Responses and Comments
Another possible alternative that has been mentioned is the elimination of
Lots 1 through 5, with the land being purchased by the L.U.S.D. The District
has expressed some interest in acquiring additional land for the Woodbridge
School playground. Acquiring Lots l through 5 would give them an add motional
0.8 acres and would square off their property.
Purchase of the property by the L.U.S.D. would eliminate the traffic problem
of lots fronting on Lower Sacramento Road. It would also reduce possible
conflicts between residents and students walking along Lower Sacramento Road.
If the 5 lots are eliminated, the remaining lots on Lower Sacramento Road,
except for the two corner lots, would be back-up lots. This would place a
fence along the back of these lots, separating them from the sidewalk
along Lower Sacramento Road. This would eliminate problems of students
walking across or littering homeowner's frontyards.
Here again, this alternative would be subject to an agreement being
worked out between the L.U.S.D. and the developer. It is not known
if the L.U.S.D. has the funds to purchase the property or if the
developer would be willing to sell this land.
71
AV
__
rV loth N �fl achool &*M
FACILITIES and PLANNING. 1316 W. LOCKEFORD ST.. LODI. CA. 96240 (209) 389-7411 .4664)=
June 11. 1984
James B. Schroeder
Community Develooment Director
City of Lodi
221 W. Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240
RE: Woodlake North Tentative Subdivision
Dear Jim:
Please be advised that the District has been in touch with Carey
Development regarding the possible acquisition of lots 1-4 and a
portion of the present lot 5. Mr. Carey has expressed a willingness
to discuss the matter with us; however, it has not yet come before
our Board and there is no specific plan proposed at this time.
As you know, it has also been brought to my attention, that the
large numbers of students walking along Lower Sacramento Road in the
morning and afternoon warrants a close look at a wider than
usual sidewalk (ie. 10 feet). The need for a wider sidewalk has
also been brought to the attention of the District by the Chamber
of Commerce Committee which has been working with the Highway Patrol,
County, City, District and school for over a year on the improvement
of traffic and pedistrian safety ground the school.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I will keep you informed
of our discussions with Carey Development.
inc#rely, ,
Mary Joan Starr, AICD
Faci v Planner
MJS/pc
cc: Carey :'evelopment
11 R.W. Siegfried and Associates
Henry Eilers
JUN 131984 r
1
DEVIWF:? X
CFi bF.:'!j:J1
72
FACILITIES and PLANNING. 915 W. LOCKEFORD ST.. LODI. CA. 9524012091 3667411 •4060363
MEMORANDUM
May 23, 1984
TO: David Morimoto, Planner, City of /Lodi
FROM: Mamie Starr, Facility Planner
/ P
RE: Woodlake North Environmental Impact Report/ Development Plan
The Principal of Woodbridge School has brought to my attention a potential
safety problem and possible source of aggravation. The following should
probably be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report for the
information of the Developer and community and for consideration in the
final design of the subdivision.
The majority of the school's seventh and eighth grade students walk along
Lower Sacramento Road to and from Turner Road in the mid-afternoon
and early morning. For the safety of the students, they are "strongly
encouraged" to use Lower Sacramento Road and not the railroad right-
of-way through the Mills' orchard. The City has provided and maintained
a paved walkway on the east side of the street for this purpose. The
installation.of sidewalks on the west side will certainly improve the
safety of this route to and frum school; however, it means that several
hundred students will be walking in front of, next to, and behind the
homes two times each day. It appears that an extra wide sidewalk (along
Lower Sacramento Road) ie., 10 feet, is warranted. Experience has also
shown that a narrower walk results in more foot traffic to
private property, much to the chagrin of the residents. The residents
whose homes front or side on Lower Sacramento Road will still be faced
with higher levels of noise, and perhaps additional trash and some
student trespass onto yards during the two times of the day during the school
year.
During those times of the day when school is in session there will be
increased noise as a result of student activities on the field.
This, as well as other situations, ie., stray balls into the backyards,
etc. might be a source of aggravation to those residents whose homes
back the school property.
School personnel will make every effort to see that student activities
are not a problem to the residents of Woodlake North; however, a
a school is a school.
MJS/pc
cc: Don Smith, Principal Woodbridge School
73
MAY 2 31991
0 C'I: '.JF1.1rr
DEVELOPMENT
DEFik :EDIT
FACILITIES and PLANNING, 815 W. LOCKEFORD ST.. LODI, CA. 95240 (2091389.7411 •466.0353
MEMORANDUM
May 18, 1984
TO: David Morimoto, Planner City of Lodi
FROM: Mary Joan Starr, Facility Planner
///
RE: Woodlake North Environmental Impact Report
I have reviewed the Enrironmental Impact Report and thought I should bring
the following corrections to your attention:
1. Page 15 -Woodbridge was built as a K-6 school; however
it is used presently as a 7-8 Middle School serving
students from portions of the City of Lodi, Woodbridge
and limited rural areas.
2. page 51 -Both Lodi and Tokay High Schools will be on extended
day schedules in the 84-85 school year due to student
everload.
The Declaration of Impaction is filed annually with the Cities
of Lodi and Stockton, and San Joaquin County. The District's
Application for school construction funding under the
Leroy F. Greene Lease Purchase Program is filed annually with
the State of California.
As an additional note - the District is filing an application with the
State Allocation Board requesting funds for major renovation of Woodbridge
School, which is now the District's oldest conforming school in use.
I've sent the Environmental Impact Report to Don Smith, the Woodbridge
Principal,for his review and information. I've asked him to make any
comments directly to you.
If you have anything else - just call me. Thanks for the review copy.
MJS/pc
cc: Don Smith, Principal Woodbridge
74
411 AY 2 1198.,
C ....
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING INSPECTION
1810 E. HAZELTON AVE.. STOCKTON. CA 95205 CHET DAVISSON
PLANNING PHONE: 209/944-3722 binder
BUILDING PHONE: 209/944.3701 May 17, 1984 JERRY HERZICK
Depty winder
LOU THMAS
a0�h Director
City of Lodi
City Hall
Lodi, CA 95240
Subject: Draft EIR Woodlake North
Gentlemen:
The following comments are made concerning the draft environ-
mental impact report for the City of Lodi - Woodlake North:
1. Page 28, Section b, Cumulative Traffic and Netwerk Changes;
it should be noted that the San Joaquin Public Works Department
has prepared a draft specific plan for the Woodbridge Circulation
Plan. This plan is to be set for hearing by the Lodi City
Council and the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors.
2, On page 11, Site Plan; although the width of the minor
collectors in the Woodbridge Circulation Plan has not been set,
it appears:
A. The proposed Woodhaven Lane is the width of a local
street.
B. Lilac Street may be proposed as a 72' wide minor
collector with bikeways.
3. On page 64, Section X, Alternatives; we suggest that lots 1
through 5 of the tentative subdivision be moved to front along
Lilac Street. This could be accomplished by a land trade with
the Lodi Unified School District. The benefits of this alter-
native are twofold:
A. Access could be restricted along the eastern boundary of
the Woodlake north project and the major collector Lower
Sacramento Road, and
B. Lots 1 through 5 would front along a minor collector and
lessen the traffic danger of individual access along
Lower Sacramento Road.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR. If
you have any questions concerning the comments, please contact
Jim Van Buren or myself at the above address.
HER:JVB:bc
75
Sincer ,
Har Rid,".e
Chief, Current Planning
PACIFIC CCAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
J_P') 11:43 �'' 4040 WEST LANE • P. O. 13OX 9.30 • STOCKTON. CALIFORNIA 95201 • 1209) 466.2261
May 4, 1984
File: 401
Draft EIR
Woodlake North, Lodi
City of Lodi
Department of Public Works
221 W. Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240
Gentlemen:
We have completed our review of the Draft Environmental Impact
Report for the proposed Woodlake North Subdivision, Lodi.
PGandE has no objections to the report or project provided that
any relocation or rearrangement of our facilities required by
this project be at the expense or the developer.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project.
Sincerely,
4WC'1/0�sic
R. W. Houston
Division Land Supervisor
MSanJulian:mc
76
Iq
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR. GEORGE C*UKMEIIAN. Gowfrw
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH y.
1100 TENTH STREET rc }
SACRAMENTO. CA 95811
June 4, 1984
Mr. David Morimoto
City of Lodi
221 West Pine Street
Lodi, ra, 95240
7
(916/445-0613)
Subject: SCH#84031306, Woodlake North Draft LIR
Dear Mr. Morimoto:
The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named enviromental document to
selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and ncoe of
the state agencies have om ments.
This letter certifies only that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse
review requirements for draft environmental documentso, pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (EIR Guidelines, Section 15205). Where
applicable, this should not be construed as a waiver of any jurisdictional
authority or title interests of the State of California.
The project may still require approval frau state agencies with permit
authority or jurisdiction by law. If so, the state agencies will have to use
the environmental document in their decision-mak-ing. Please contact them im-
mediately after the document is finalized with a copy of the final document,
the Notice of Determination, adopted mitigation measures, and any statements
of overriding considerations.
Once the document is adopted (Negative Declaration) or certified (final EIR)
and if a decision is made to approve the project, a Notice of Determination
must be filed with the County Clerk. If the project requires discretionary
approval frau any state agency, the Notice of Determination na:s't also be filed
with the Secretary for Resources (EIR Guidelines, Section 15094(b)).
Sincerely,
John B. Ghanian
Gi
Chief Deputy Director
77
JUN 05 1994
c•:.::_�':::r.
i'EIGr'� �JiT
7t;:,?"'"�''�,.'~°`.'�5'h.,�','J"F.--
-.
APPENDIX A
INITIAL STUDY
APPENDIX A
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To Be Completed By Lead Agency)
I. Bockgrouml
1. Name of Proponent ---Carpy Dpvpinnmpnt rnr,pa n_y
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent
5405 North Pershing Avenue, Suite C-3
Stockton, California 95207 (209) 478-9283
3. Dote of Checklist Submitted
4. Agency Requiring Checklist City of Lodi
S. Name of Proposal, if applicable Woodlake North
11. Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.)
Ye!, May No
I. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes
in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction
or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sonds, or changes in siltation, deposition or
erosion which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?
309
X
X
2.
3.
g. Exposure of people or property to geolo-
gic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally?
Woter. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course of di-
rection of water movements, in either
marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage pat-
terns, or the rate and amount of surface
runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water- in
cny water body?
e. Discharge into surfoce waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality, in-
cluding but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or with-
drowols, or through interception of on
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for public water
supp lies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water re-
lated hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
310
Yes M be No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
El
X
X
X
X
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, gross, crops, and aquatic
plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into
an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop?
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
o. Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into
an area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals? -
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe no?se levels?
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce
new light or glore?
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub-
stantial alteration of the present or planned
land use of on area?
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources?
311
2 !-7saa,
YesMira be No
X
X
X
X
X
X
b. Substontial depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
o. A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to,'oil, pesticides, chemicals or
rodiation) in the event of an accident or
upset conditions?
b. Possible interference with an emergenu-y
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate of the
humor papulation of an area?
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing hous-
ing, or create a demand for additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking? -
c. Substantial impact upon existing tronspor-
tation systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circuio-
tion or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
14. Public Services. Will the p roposa 1 have on
effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the
following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
312
Yes Maybe No
Q
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roods?
f. Other governmental services?
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon exist-
ing sources of energy, or require the
development of new sources of energy^
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazoid (excluding mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards?
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the
obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to
the public, or will the proposal result in the
creation of on aesthetically offensive site open
to public view?
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an
impact upon the quality or quantity nf existing
recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic orchoeologiccl site?
313
Yes MNo
X
X
X
_ X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Yes Maybe No
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical :
or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or
historic building, structure, or object? X
c. Does the proposal have the potential to
cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? X
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious X
or sacred uses within the potential impact
area?
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
o. 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 wild-
life population to drop below self sus-
taining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory? X
b. Does the project have the potential to
achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals? (A short-
term impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive
period of time while long-term impacts
will endure well into the future.) X
c. Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited, '.ut cumulatively con-
siderable? (A project may irrpoct on two
or more separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small, but
where the effect of the total of those X
impacts on the environment is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which w*,ll cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
111. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation
IV. Determination
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
314
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case
because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
1 find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environ-
ment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
February 27, 1984 Ron Bass, Environmental Impact Planning
ate Signature
Corporation
For City of Lodi
(Note: This is only a suggested form. Public agencies are free to devise their own
format for initial studies.)
315
INTIAL STUDY
E%PLANATION OF ALL "YES" AND "MAYBE"
!�.
Soil covering will be disrupted and compacted in order to develop the site _
with housing, stores and roads.
Id.
Prime agricultural soil will be covered with urban uses.
2a.
The introduction of new urban land uses may increase traffic and thereby
increase mobile source air emissions.
3b.
The urbanization of the site will increase the impervious surface area,
altering drainage patterns and increase the rate and amount of runoff.
3e.
Storm drainage systems that empty into Lake Lodi will increase in flow.
3h.
Change from agricultural to urban uses may alter water usage.
4a.
The ability of the site to support continued crop growth will be eliminated.
4d.
Urbanization of the site will result in a permanent loss of 32 acres of
agricultural land.
6a.
Noise from more traffic and human activity may increase.
6b.
Future residents of the project may be exposed to railroad noise and noise
from farm harvesting equipment.
7.
Additional street lighting may be added to the project as well as lighting
from commercial parking lots.
8.
The project will convert the site from its current agricultural use to
residential and commercial uses.
9b.
she proposed project will cover prime agricultural soil, a nonrenewable
natural resource.
11.
Additional urban growth will be introduced resulting in a corresponding
increase of population.
12.
The project will add 80 additional single-family residences and approx-
imately 160 multiple -family units to the City of Lodi.
13a.
New residential and commercial uses may introduce substantial traffic
increases In the project area, primarily from automobiles.
13b.
Parking lots will be added for the multiple -family rc:;;dences and the
commercial areas.
13c.
In addition to increases in traffic, the relocation of Lilac Road will alter
traffic patterns in the area.
13d. See 13c.
13f. The increase in traffic resulting from the project will likely result in a
corresponding increase in the likelihood of traffic accidents.
14a,b,c. Increased urbanization may result in new demands for fire protection,
police services and schools. All three of these Issues will be addressed in
the El R.
16a. The electric line servicing the City of Lodi that crosses the project site
may have to be relocated.
16c. The project may change the amount of water used on the site.
16d. New sewer lines and a lift station may need to be Installed.
16e. The project may increase runoff and will add to the flows in the City's
storm drainage systems.
16f. The project may increase amounts of solid waste disposal handled by the
City.
17b. The proximity of the proposed project to adjacent fields where agricultural
pesticides and herbicides are used may expose people to health risks.
20a,b. The project may affect historic buildings surrounding the site although
none are located on the site itself.
21a. The project will eliminate prime agricultural land from production.
21c. Traffic, loss of agricultural land and overcrowding of the schools are
cumulative impacts on the City of Lodi.
APPENDIX B
WOODLAKE NORTHAUSD ArREEMENT
' Lodi Unified School District 4 4 k Q 3
815 West Lockefo: .treet
Lodi, California 9.j240
AGREEMENT
:4er LL
[J_
This AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ;(p71l day M1
of 0 1981, by and between HENRY G. FILERS,
(herei0a► ter, EILERS") , and LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT OF
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, a Political. Subdivision of the State of
California, (hereinafter, "LODI UNIFIED").
W I T N E S S E T H:
The parties hereto acknowledge and mutually agree that:
1. The purpose of this Agreement is to mitigate the ad-
verse environmental impacts upon Lodi Unified caused by any
future development of the hereinafter described real property.
2. In the event the said property is developed wholly
or partially into residential units, it will cause increased
enrollment in the District, compounding the current problems
faced by Lodi Unified in providing facilities for students.
3. Eilers desires to alleviate the impact upon Lodi
Unified of an anticipated increase in enrollment, if any.
4. The real property, the subject of this Agreement,
is more particularly described as:
That certain real property situate in the
County of San Joaquin, State of California,
described as follows:
The Southwest quarter of the Southeast Quarter
(SW 1/4 of SE 1/4) of Section Thirty-four
(34), Township Four (4) North, Range Six (6)
East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian. 1.
EXCEPT such portion thereof conveyed by Grant
Deed dated June 1, 1955, to woods School Dis-
trict of San Joaquin County, recorded .lune 6,
1955, in Volume 1756, Page 421, Official Re-
cords of San Joaquin County, Document No.
23282.
5. Lodi Unified has no objection to a real estate pro-
ject, provided that Eilers, or his assignee, makes a reason-
able and appropriate contribution to mitigate the impact that
-1-
the project may have on Lodi Unified, assuming the project
contains residential units.
6. Eilers, or his assignee, shall make such reasonable
and appropriate contribution by:
(a) Depositing with Lodi Unified an amount equal to,
and in lieu of, any sums prescribed to be deposited for such a
residential development by Lodi City Ordinance number 1149,
Chapter 19A of the Lodi City Code, commonly referred to as the
".School Facilities Dedication Ordinance."
(1) It is understood by the parties hereto that
the fee schedule, under the provisions of said Ordinance, is
set by the City Council periodically by resolution.
(2) The rate of fees applicable to this Agree-
ment shall be the rate in effect on the date payment becomes
due under the terms of this Agreement.
(3) . In no event shall the fees exceed two per-
cent (2e) of the actual construction cost of Eilers, or his
assignee.
(4) In the event that said Ordinance is de
clarek unconstitutional by any court of law having jurisdic-
tion over the City of Lodi, the applicable rate of fees shall
be the last rate set by the Lodi City Council prior to the
effective date of the court's ruling. Said declaration of
unconstitutionality shall have no force or effect upon Lodi
Unified's ability or right to collect the fees set by this
Agreement.
(5) Said fees shall h-: due and deposited with
Lodi Unified at such time as Eilers, or his asignee, shall
be in a position to receive from the City of Lodi, residen-
tial building permits necessary for the construction of such
portion of the development as Eilers, or his assignee, is
then currently planning to develop.
(6) Upon receipt of the fees provided for by
this Agreement, Lodi Unified shall notify the City of Lodi
of its receipt thereof and request that Eilers, or his as-
signee, be exempt from any fee imposed upon the same resi-
dential units by Lodi City Ordinance number 1149, Chapter
19A o'L the Lodi City Code.
(7) In the event that the City of Lc:di should
-2-
r
0 1 U .s
SL
V.#
collect any fees under said Ordinance, upon residential units
for which Eilers, or his assignee, has already paid a fee un-
der this Agreement, Lodi Unified shall reimburse Eilers, or
his assignee, for any duplication of payment based upon the
same residential units, and in no event shall Lodi Unified
collect the fee both under the Ordinance and this Agreement.
7. In the event that school facilities are constructed
with proceeds from the sale of bonds and/or by levy of a
special override tax by Lodi Unified eliminating the student
housing shortage caused by said project prior to completion
of said project, Eilers, or his asignee, shall be released
from his obligation under this Agreement, and shall be re-
funded all unexpended moneys then on deposit with Lodi Uni-
fied.
B. There is currently a "County Task Force Dealing With
School Housing Shortage" which is working to find a solution
to the aforementioned shortage of facilities for students in
the Lodi Unified School District. In order that this Agree-
ment will not hinder the efforts of said Task Force, in the
event that the "Task Force" should conclude that a fee is an
appropriate vehicle to remedy the aforementioned shortage of
facilities, and the City Council of Lodi should approve of,
and assess such a fee within six months of the execution of
this Agreement, Eilers, or his assignee, shall abide by said
fee and Ordinance, and this Agreement shall become null and
void and of no further effect.
9. In the event Eilers, or his assignee, should breach
any term of this Agreement, Lodi Unified reserves the right
to notify the City of said breach and request that the City
withdraw its approval of the residential portion of any pro-
ject and refrain from issuing any further approvals until
Eilers, or his assignee, agrees to remedy the breach or
otherwise mitigate the impact of the Fr-.Ject or, Lodi Unified• s
overcrowded classroom conditions. Loci Unified's reserved
right under this paragraph shall be in addition to, and shall
in no way preclude, its right to pursue other lawful remedies
for breach of this Agreement.
10. So long as Eilers, or his assignee, performs under
the terms of this Agreement, Lodi Unified will not oppose
efforts to gain approval from, any public agencv or enr.i.ty
of any aspect of a future development. amcr-wil d De Ie ted
11. Lodi Unified may record a copy o: this Agreement
in the Official Records of San Joaquin County. From and
-3-
:z iStU44
after the date of such recording, the obligation :o pay any
fee under this Agreement shall constitute a lien on the
title to each residential unit contained in any final de-
velopment, until such time as the lien is extinguished by -
payment of the appropriate fee. Lodi Unified shall execute
appropriate releases for each residential unit upon receipt
of fees pursuant to this Agreement.
12. In the event any portion of the Agreement shall be
found or declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, the remaining terms and conditions hereof not ex-
pressly declared invalid shall remain in full force and ef-
fect. A legislative or judicial amendment or declaration
altering or eliminating the authority corferred upon the
City of Lodi_ by the provisions of Government Co3e Section
55970, et seq., or otherwise declaring the School Facilities
Dedication Ordinance to be invalid shall not affect the
rights and obligations created by this Agreement, except as
specifically provided hereinbefore.
13. In the event that either party to this Agreement re-
sorts to litigation to enforce the terms and conditions
hereof, or to seek declaratory relief, or to collect damages
for breach hereof, the prevailing party in such litigation
shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees.
14. All notices and payments to be given or made under
this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered
either personally or by first-class U.S. mail, postage pre-
paid to the following persons at the locations specified:
FOR THE DISTRICT
Director of Facilities b Planning
Lodi Unified School District
815 West Lockeford Street
Lodi, California 95240
FOR EIL-ERS, OR HIS ASSIGNEE
Henry G. Eilers
c/o Litts, Mullen, Perovich, Sullivan & Newton
Attorneys at Law
P. O. Box 517
Lodi, California 95241
15. TERM. This Agreement shall be effective the date
first above written and shall terminate upon completion of
the construction of the final residential unit, if any, in
the project, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.
zt
.:t 81044L.g,31
15. MODIFICATION. This Agreement contains each and
every term an3 condition agreed to by the parties and may
not be amended except by mutual written agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into
this Agreement the day and year first written above.
H my G. Eilers
-herein ove Called "FILERS"-
LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT OF
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, a Political
Subdivision of the State of
California,
By Za C 111 ty
Planner
By , Superintendt
-H anabov al e -d "LODI UNIFIED"-
-5-
A. 810k449I
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
( SS.
COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN)
On thisf _ day of �.iAs�e 1981, before me,
the undersigns a Notary Public in anT for the County of
San Joaquin, State of California, residing therein, duly com-
missioned and sworn, personally appeared HENRY G. EILERS,
known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed
the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I
fixed my official seal the
first above written.
.... OPFICC �, SEAkL r
HOTI�RYMf ; N` SCA U OR 14A
SAH �CAOUH CoUtiTY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
( SS.
COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN)
have hereunto set and and af-
day and year i i .ertificate
�„i . -- NOTARYN,.UBLIC
in nd for the State of Caliia,
with principal office in themy
of San Joaquin.
My Commission Expires:
On this &TJ7 day of 1, t, , , 1981, before me,
the undersigns a Notary Public in andmor the County of
San Joaquin, State of California, residin therein, duly cour-
t
missioned and sworn, personally appeared tch,.�
�:
to-
t: i_ known to me to be the
�'._ of the entity described in and that
execdted the within instrument, and also known to me to he
the personswho execu=ed the within instrument on behalf of
the entity therein named, and acknowledged to me that such
entity executed the within instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and af-
fixed my cfficial seal in the County of San Joaquin the day
and year in this Certificate first above written.
FFo
OFFICau s ...— ...r.BAfBARA 3. MINTON , NOTARY PUBLIC
►MAl" PU@L1C—cuuroNu in and for sAid County and State.
himipw On.c i M Son lo.pu... C "
go
�C'�-t�`.su..f" My Commission Expires: c3 j
-6-
31701= THE BOARD OF ,RUSTEES OF THE LOD: UNIFIED SCHt.... DISTRICT 01 THE COUNTY
OF SAN JOAQUIN, STATF. OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION NO. 81-24
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF ACRIE-Y? FOR ALLEVIATING THE SNVIRONMYVTAL
IKPACT ON DISTRICT CAUSED BY THE EILERS AMMEXATION.
WHEREAS. the Board of Trustees has d#,.:er=Laed that the construction of
residences on the Eilers property will exacerbate an existing student housing
shortage in the District; and
VHFREAS, the developer P—MY G. EILERS, desires to alleviate the housing
cawed by thu pusxibte dev-slotnuant; and
VHXUA3. the District considers the saLC Agrgeocnt to be to no way contrary
to the efforts of the "County task Force Dea.tng with Scn001 Housing Shortage";
NOW. TIMREFORZ. BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of 'trustees hereby authorise
the SUFERINTZ:;.EltT OF THE LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. ELLERTH E. LUM.N. to
execute on behalf of the District, that certain agreement. a copy of which Is
attached hereto. upon the following teras and conditions;
1. Developer shall deposit with District an amount equal to end in lieu
of any stars prescribed for such residential development by the Lodi City
Ordinance Ao. 1149. Chapter 19A of the Lodi City Code.
2. District. shall. upon receipt of the euas, notify the City of Lodi
of its receipt thereof and shall request that Developer Je exempt from the
requirement of Ordinance Not 1149, and be al!owed to acquire building permits
in the project phase for Lfiich full payment has t•enn made.
1E IT MTHr2 RtSOLVED rhat the Facility Planner :e hereby authorised to
notify the City of Lodi of the Agreement.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June 1951. by the following
vote of the Board of Trustees. to wit;
ATZ3i ANN JOHNSTON, CtORGE ABRAHAMSON. JO" VATSULA. ROBERT %ALL
NOE3t LAUREL VISENOR, SONNIT MZYER
ABSENT: HERBERT BUCK. JR.
/ OK4 VA JLA, rreeident ~�
ATTEST:
LAUR`L WISENOR. ^.Ierk of the 3oard
of Trustees of the Lodi UnI.'teA
School District
APPENDIX C
TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS
. ,.., ....,r....,......__._..._.....r..�.�.:w•�wN.a7..a..�1,...r..,-�.�.�r'+F�.....,,•..,,..m,-.eyc.,,.r�..<v. ..— ..,. A.... _..
A -WEIGHTED SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL. IN DEDCIBLES
1140 �
130 I ) THRESHOLD OF PAIN
CIVIL DEFENSE SIREN (100')
120
JET TAKEOF (200')
110
RIVETING MACHINE ROCK MUSIC BAND
100 PILEDRIVER (501
DIESEL BUS (15') AMBULANCE SIREN (100')
9O BOILER ROOM
BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT P91NTING PRESS PLANT
TRAIN PASSBY (10')
80 GARBAGE DISPOSAL IN HOME (31
PNEUMATIC DRILL (50') INSIDE SPORTS CAR (50 MPH)
SF MUNI LIGHT RAIL VEHICLE (35') 70
FREIGHT CARS (10(1')
VACUUM CLEANER (10') 60
SPEECH (11
AUTO TRAFFIC NEAR FREEWAY 50
LARGE TRANSFORMER (200')
AVERAGE RESIDENCE 40
E rtl
SOFT WHISPER (51
RUSTLING LEAVES
10
THRESHOLD OF HEARING
0
DATA PROCESSING CENTER
DEPARTMENT STORE
PRIVATE BUSINESS OFFICE
LIGHT 1 nAFFIC ( 100')
T' PICAL MINIMUM NIGHTTIME
LEVELS -RESIDENTIAL AREAS
RECORDING STUDIO
MOSQUITO (3')
(100') -DISTANCE IN FEET BETWEEN SOURCE AND LISTENER
TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS
MEASURED IN TyE ENVIRONMENT AND INDUSTRY
VA 1111 a. I I I ro I il�' I z;m tot*'Il ( 19 �i il'i 4i I
E 1, tll I - , I M -'AN , US � 9 RV m
Ejrl-.bUrlo.,c
V3,
Z R
Rt
Vk
J. ;F, t C 'J'*,
,7.
WOODLAKE NORTH
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
CITY OF LODI
April, 1984
Prepared by:
Environmental Impact Planning Corporation
2830 "1" Street
Sacramento, California 95816
(916) 448-2311
LAST DATE TO COMMENT
MAY 2 41984
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
II. SUMMARY
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Site Location
B. Project Characteristics
C. Required Approvals
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS
A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
B. Traffic
C. Soils, Geology and Drainage
D. Noise
E. Air Quality
F. Historic and Cultural Resources
G. Community Services
V. UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
VI. IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
VII. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT
AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG -TERN[ PRODUCTIVITY
VIII. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
IX. GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS
X. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. "No -Project" Alternative
B. All -Residential Alternative
C. Redesigned Project Alternative
XI. EIR AUTHORS AND PERSONS CONSULTED
APPENDICES
A. Initial Study
B. Woodiake North Agreement with LUSD
C. Typical Sound Levels
i
Page
1
2
8
8
8
13
14
14
22
32
36
38
48
50
58
58
59
60
62
64
64
66
66
68
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1. Regional Location Map 9
2. SIte Location 10
3. Site Plan 11
4. Sutrounding Land Uses 16
5. Distribution of Project Traffic 29
6. Wind F!ow in San Joaquin Valley Air Basin 39
LIST OF TABLES
1.
Proposed Uses
12
2.
Existing Traffic Volumes
24
3.
Traffic Level of Service Definitions
25
4.
Project Trip Generation
26
5.
Existing and Projected Traffic Flow Conditions
27
6.
Ambient Air Duality otandards
41
7.
Air Quality in the San Joaquin County Air Pollution
43
Control District 1930-1982
8.
Roadside Carbon Monoxide Concentrations Along Turner Road
45
9.
Regional Pollutant Emissions
47
10.
Loss of Farm Land in Lodi
60
11.
Price Estimates for Future Subdivisions
65
ii
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970. The report has been focused,
pursuant to Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, on those issues identified as
potentially significant in the City of Lodi's Initial Study of the proposed project. The
Initial Study Is attached as Appendix A.
The project sponsor, Carey Development, a Stockton corporation, is requesting approval
of the City of Lodi for the development of 32 acres for single- and multiple -family
residential units and commercial uses. The single-family residences would serve the upper
Income end of the housing market ($150,000 +).
The report Is intended to enable City of Lodi officials and the public to evaluate the
environmental effects of the proposed project, to examine and institute measures for
mitigating those effects determined to be significant, and to consider alternatives to the
project as proposed. It is not the function of the EIR to recommend approval or rejection
of the project.
I
II. SUMMARY
A. PROJECT -DESCRIPTION
The 32 -acre project site is comprised of two parcels located in the northwest corner of
the City of Lodi. It is bordered on the east by Lower Sacramento Road, on the south by
Turner Road, and on the north and west by the City/County border. Annexed to the City
in August 1981, the site is currently in agricultural production.
The proposed project, known as Woodlake North, would consist of 80 single-family
residences, approximately 160 apartment units and 4 acres (about 40,000-50,000 square
feet) of neighborhood commercial development. The project would be developed in phases
over a two- to three-year period.
Several approvals would be required from the City of Lodi in order to develop the project:
n general plan amendment, rezoning, Conditional Use permit, approval of the tentative
subdivision map and certification of the EIR. These approvals are explained In Section
III.0 of this document.
B. LAND USE AND AGRICULTURAL LAND CONVERSION
The 32 -acre site has been cultivated with a variety of crops including beans, tomatoes,
corn and pumpkins. At the time of this writing it was planted with barley. A small
fruitstand is the only building on the site. To the west of the property is the 56 -acre
Towne Ranch which has been producing grapes since the ranch was first established 100
years ago. In cultivating the grapes on the Towne Ranch, chemicals are applied by both
ground appl?cation and aerial spraying. To the north of the project is the historic
Woodbridge School; northwest of the site is an historic cemetery. East of the site is land
owned by General :Mills. The General Mills plant is one of Lodi's major employers.
Approximately one quarter mile north of the site is the unincorporate•1 community of
Woodbridge. Generally, land uses to the north, east and south of tie project are
2
Ii. Sum mary
developed or planned for urban uses. Most County lands west of the site are in
agricultural use.
Measure A, the Greenbelt Initiative, is discussed in detail in Section IV.A of this
document. Because the proposed project site was annexed to the City prior to passage of
Measure A, it does not fall withip. the Greenbelt area, and development is not subject to a
vote of the people. Its proximity to the Towne Ranch (which is in the Greenbelt), though,
ne?ss,.tates an adequate buffer or mitigation z -e.
Development of Woodlake North would result i . the toss of 32 acres of prime agricultural
land. This is considered an unavoidable and irr !versible impact. Urban=zation of the site
may also affect the continued agricultural us � of adjacent parcels in terms of modifi-
cation of normal farming practices such as crop dusting.
C:•eating adequate buffer zones between the project and agricultural operations would
alleviate most potential conflicts. The newly aligned road will physically separate the
property from the Towne Ranch. The subdivision will be enclosed by a solid but
decorative wall. Front and backyard setbacks required by the (Ity zoning: ordinance will
be adhered to. It is recomm; nded that the County and dev,.Ioper include fences and
hedges or trees as part of the landscaping of the newly signed r3ad.
Although pesticide and herbicide usage is controlled by state and federal regulations,
conflicts between the residential community and adjacent farms niay arise. Proper
application of chemicals, including correct equipment and awareness of optimum weather
conditions (i.e., windless days) would help mitigate potential impacts. This issue is
addressed more fully in Section IV.A of this document.
C. TRAFFIC
Local access to/from the site is available on Turner Road, Lilac Street and Lower
Sacramento Road. Traffic volumes are well within the capacities of the specific street
segments.
The project would involve the abandonment of Lilac Street through the site. A new street
would be constructed along the site's westerly boundary and an east -west street (along the
site's northerly boundary) would link Chestnut with Lilac Street and Lower Sacramento
Road.
3
14-
IM
p
v
M
U. Summary
The primary effects of project traffic would be increased turning movements and
potential vehicle conflicts at intersections and retail commercial driveways. it is felt
that road improvements planned by the City and County, such as the extension of
Chestnut Street and widening of Lcwer Sacramento Road, would increase the capacity of
the street network to absorb traffic generated by Woodlake North and cumulative
development.
D. SOILS, GEOLOGY AND DRAINAGE
The entire site is underlain by Hanford sandy loam, considered to be a prime agricultural
soil. It is rated good for construction purposes as well.
The nearest potentially active faults are in the Rio Vista -Montezuma area, 22 to 32 miles
west of Lodi. Lodi is in Seismic Zone 3, which requires the strictest design factors to
resist lateral forces. Adherence to the recommended lateral force requirements of the
Structural Engineers Association would reduce the likelihood of damage or injury due to
seismically induced groundshaking.
Development of Woodlake North would create impermeable surfaces like roads, walkways,
patios and structures. The City store, drainage ::,stem has been designed to accommodate
Increased runoff resulting from the project.
Erosion during the construction; period can be kept to a minimum by excavating mainly in
dry weather and planting groundcover as quickly as possible.
E. NOISE
A he project would result in �dgnlficu: t short-term noise impacts due to construction
activities. Phis noise would be audible and could be irritating to residences south of
Turns: Road and inside the school, if the windows were open. Closing the windows would
minimize this impact. Because the noise levels on the portions of the site adjacent to
Turner Road and Lower Sacramento Road exceed certain levels, Title 25 would require a
noise analysis. Mitigation measures could include decreasing the number and size of
windows facing these roads and locating bedrooms as fat as possible from the road
frontages.
4
P. AIR QUALITY
11. Summary
w
The climate in the project area is characterized by hot dry summers and cool Net winters.
The most serious air pollution problem in this area is due to elevated concentrations of
ozone; federal standards have been exceeded at times.
The proposed project would cause small differences between the existing and future one -
and eight-hour worst-case CO concentrations.
No violations of CO standards are expected whether or not Woodlake North is built. No
measurable impact on regional air quality is expected, although project -generated traffic
would increase the general air pollutant burden in the region.
Construction activities would be a source of dust which might cause localized violations
of the air quality standard and increase dust fall and soiling in the prc;act vicinity.
Wetting disturbed soil during construction activities could suppress dust emissions -by
about 50%. The traffic control measures identified in the transportation section of this
report would reduce traffic volumes or congestion and could result in slight improvements
In air quality.
G. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
No known cultural resources are within the project boundary; however, San Joaquin Valley
College, the town of Woodbridge and the Oddfellows Cemetery are all within one mile of
the project site. The town of Woodbridge and San Joaquin Valley College are California
Historic Landmarks. Adjacent to the proposed project, to the west, is a 70 -year old
farmhouse built by the Towne family. implementation of the project may affect this
farmhouse, depending upon which alignment is chosen.
H. COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Police
The development of Woodlake North will mean the end of the present joint patrol
arrangement between the Lodi Police Department and San Joaquin County Sheriffs Office
covering the project area. The Department does not expect any adverse impacts on its
service due to the project.
5
11. Summary
2. Fire
The City of Lodi will provide fire protection to the project area; adequate service is
available to handle the project.
3. Schools
The project would add about 160 students to the Lodi School District. At present the
District is experiencing overcrowding. The developer of the project has entered into an
agreement with the District to mitigate impacts caused by the addition of the project's
students. The agreement can be found in Appendix B of this EIR.
4. Water
The total water consumption for the Woodlake North project would be aproximately .10
mgd which will not significantly affect the City's current 42 mgd capacity. The developer
Is responsible for extension of all water mains serving the site.
5. Wastewater
The treatment plant has the capacity to absorb the flow that would be generated by the
project and the developer would pay for the installation of all connecting lines. Due to
the terrain, a lift station will be necessary to serve the project, which the developer
would pay for.
6. Solid Waste
Sanitary City Disposal would serve the project residents. Most of the refuse is trucked to
the Harney Lane Landfill. Though the City is currently searching for a new landfill site,
such a site would adequately serve the project.
7. Electricitv
The developer would pay the cost of line extensions to the project. The proposed project
would have no impact on electrical service but the existing 60 -kV line through the site
may be moved for aesthetic reasons. The developer would pay to have it moved.
6
11. Summary
H. ALTERNATIVES
I. No -Project Alternative
Under this alternative, the proposed project would not be approved by the City and would
not be built. None of the impacts associated with development would occur and the land
r
would continue to be used for crops.
2. All -Residential Alternative
As many as 223 dwelling units could be built under this alternative. Although it would not
require a General Plan amendment, rezoning would still be necessary. The multiple -
family and commercial portions of the protect would be eliminated. Fewer vehicle trips
would result and there would be a decrease in the number of school-age children.
3. Redesigned Project Alternative
This alternative would involve placing the commercial and multiple -family units on the
east side of the site rather than the west. This would put greater. distance between
neighboring agricultural uses and the more densely developed parts of the project. Traffic
flow may also be reduced on the new alignment of Lilac Road.
7
1II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. SITE LOCATION
The project site consists of two parcels totaling approximately 32 acres that form the
northwest corner of the City of Lodi. The site is bordered on the east by Lower
Sacramento Road, on the :,outh by Turner Road, and on the north and west by the
City/County border. Lilac Road currently bisects the site running from the center of the
property on the north border diagonally to the southwest corner (see Figures 1 and 2). The
site is designated as assessor's parcel numbers 01523006 and 01523008 by the San Joaquin
County assessor.
The project site was annexed to the City of Lodi in August 1981, and currently is in
agricultural production. The only building on the site is a fruit stand used for seasonal
fruit sales.
The area east of the site, across Lower Sacramento Road, Is an almond grove owned by
General Mills. South of the site, across Turner Road, is a condominium complex, a liquor
store and a vacant commercial lot. Immediately west of the site is a farm under
cultivation with grapes. North of the site is the Woodbridge School.
B. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed project, known as "Woodlake North," would consist of 80 single-family
residences, approximately 160 apartment units and 4 acres (approximately 40,000-50,000
square feet) of neighborhood commercial development. The March 1984 tentative
subdivision map prepared by R.W. Siegfried and Associates, shown in Figure 3, would be
developed as shown in Table 1.
8
REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
9
SC1�AlE
0 10 20 b
MENTO
SITE
ON
C -i
0
MOVESTO C3
co
0
LA
SITE PLAN 31
Pa"ECT SITE 1 = m a
SOVRCl.R.W. SOGFRIM ♦ ASSOCIATES
FEE7 J
• 1M Ia0 J•0
11
R�1 o Rar�oFRa�� rnF w
1
1
I �
'
is
t4 F�
w
71t F.
\ '
t , WOODHAVEN LANE
L
—
(�jYY�,■
�,7
bo
r
!� t
Jra"
i
r�a>''
1 �
-2
I✓ ..
c
WOODLAKE CT.
W
; :...c
•
!s �e pc
.�
tt. i it4 u
LQ L
-7-1
-u
Iz
i
na
'
�
f
• >•t
J
/
I
/ a
W
WOOOLAKE
'
x
TaNf C•
J
If,
�.y
•
n f
so +`
}•No-•
4
•!
LJ
E N
i!
i4 y p
--- r-
---- -----
-- TURNER RD.-
- ---
--- — -� -- -
1
I
11
TABLE 1
PROPOSED USES
Lot Number
Lots 1-32
Lots 33-80
Lot 81 (3.8 acres)
Lots 82 (3.85 acres)
and 83 (4.56 acres)
Parcel "A"
I1I. Project Description
ProDosed Use and Zonin
Single-family residential. Zoning
designation R-2, minimum of 5,000
square feet per lot.
Single-family residential. Zoning
designation R-1, minimum 6,500
square feet per lot.
Zoning designation C -S, commer-
cial (shopping center)
Zoning designation R -GA, garden
apartments (20 units per acre)
Landscaped area serving as an
entrance to the project.
The project will be developed in several phases over a two- to three-year period.
Generally, all of the lots east of Lilac Road would be developed first. The portion of
Lilac Road tha: currently traverses the project site would be vacated and Chestnut Street
would be extended along the western boundary of the site to connect with Lower
Sacramento Road. (This extension of Chestnut Street is referred to as Eilers Lane in
Figure 3.) The proposed new road alignment would straddle the City/County line. After
Lilac Road is relocated, the westerly portion of the site will be developed.
The City of Lodi anticipates that the p:,)ject applicant would bear the cost of the portion
of the new road that lies within the Cit;. The portion within the County will probably not
be fully considered until the adjacent parcel is developed beyond its existing use. A
specific plan for the alignment of the street has not been adopted so the specific
alignment has not been precisely determined. Within the subdivision, two new roads would
be constructed by the project applicant to provide access to the project (see Figure 3).
12
111. Project Description
C. APPROVALS REQUIRED
In order to develop the site as proposed, the applicant must receive a variety of approvals
from the City if Lodi. First, since the project is currently designated in the General Plan
as low density residential, a general plan amendment would be necessary to develop the r
apartments and commercial facilities. Second, rezoning from the current designation of
U -H (unclassified agricultural holding zone) would be necessary. Third, a Conditional Use
Permit would be required for the commercial development even after it is rezoned to C -J.
Finally, the tentative subdivision map must be approved. This EIR must be certified by ._
the City prior to granting any of these approvals.
In addition to these City of Lodi approvals, San Joaquin County must participate in the
Lilac Road relocation and therefore would be considered a "responsible agency" as defined
in Section 15381 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
This EIR has been prepared with sufficient specificity to be used by decision makers for
all of the above approvals.
13
IV. E2MRON.MENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS
A. LAND USE AND AGRICULTURAL LAND CONVERSION
1. Setting
a. General
The 32 -acre site is located at the extreme northwest corner of the City of Lodi and was
annexed to the City in August 1981. The site consists of agricultural land currently
planted with barley. During the 1983 growing season the land was fallow, but prior to that
time had been used for growing various vegetables including beans, tomatoes, corn and
pumpkins.1 Soil on the site is Hanford sandy loam, considered to be prime agricultural
soil. On the eastern side of the site is a small fruitstand used seasonally for the sale of
vegetables, some of which have been grown on the site in the past. Tlie fruitstand is the
only building occupying the site.
The project is bounded on the west by the 56 -acre Towne Ranch owned continuously by
the Towne family for approximately 100 years. Fifty-two acres of the ranch are planted
with tokay grapes and have been producing grapes since the ranch was first established.
The grapes are sold both for the fresh market and for wineries, where they are used in
making brandy.
In cultivating the grapes on the Towne Ranch, chemicals are applied both by ground
application and aerial spraying. The primary aerial application is sulphur, used for mildew
control, which is applied for approximately six weeks in May and June. Generally the
aerial spraying is done every ten days during that period in the early morning when there
is little wind to carry the chemicals awAy. However, when there is wind, some ,chemicals
may drift easterly toward the site of the proposed project.2
On the east side of the Towne Ranch, adjacent to the project site, is an old farm%ouse, a
smaller residence and several outbuildings (a complete description of the old house is
a
14
IV.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
found in Section F of this chapter). A wire fence separates the farm from the project
site. The property line between the farm and the project site is the City/County border.
Anothe - grape ranch lies northw ^st of the project site, north of the Towne Ranch.
Also on the project site's northern boundary is the historic Woodbridge School and school
yard. The school is currently serving as a hybrid facility for both elementary grades (K-6)
and middle school (grades 7 and 8). The school serves elementary students from
Woodbridge and middle school students from the Lodi Unified School District.
Northwest of the site is an historic cemetery maintained by the Oddfellows. (Both the
Woodbridge School ane.' the Cemetery are described in greater detail in Section F of this
Chapter.)
East of the project site acro. -,s lower Sacramento Road is land owned by General Mills that
is zoned for industrial uses vut is currently in agricultural use as an almond grove.
Traversing this parcel is a ra. road siding serving the neighboring General Mills plant,
located southeast of the project site. The plant employs 718 persons, making it one of
Lodi's major employers, and produ,es cereals and food mixes.3
South of the project site, across Tu-ner Road, is a condominium complex, a liquor store
and a vacant commercially zoned lot..
The project site lies approximately one quarter of a mile south of the unincorporated
community of Woodbridge. Woodbridge is one of the oldest communities in San Joaquin
County. Although some of the original buildings still stand, the community consists
primarily of lower- and moderate -income households, including a substantial number of
manufactured houses. However, variov- parcels in the Woodbridge area are being
proposed for residential development. These are discussed in more detail in Chapter VIII,
Cumulative Impacts.
Generally, land uses to the north, east and south of the project site are developed or
planned for urbanization. However, most County lands west of the project site are in
agricultural use, primarily producing grapes. The attached Viand use map (Figure 4) clearly
indicates the prominence of agriculture west of the project site.
15
SURROUNDING LAND USES
H
PROOCT SITE I COMMERCIAL EDUCAT'VONAL
IRRIGATION DITCH RESI'DE%7IALAIEDIL%i DENSITY Li RECREATION
AGRICULTURE RETAIL -COMMERCIAL El CONSERVATION
CUMVERY GENERAL INDUSTRIAL SOURCE. EIPCC4tF'ORATK-,.N
Fr- r
..... ........
..........
T
.... .... ......
, >
r F7
X.
...........
... .......
�kw
........ . ..
M
IX
m 41,
4
R a
A
-.0 t- A �w
N',
Z I ta
Q
2
%
A., .. ...... N
ac
m
r
wqp
rRL;IT STAND
J-_
ORCHARD
OWNED BY
GENERAL
MILLS,
a
R ROAD
16
IV. A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
b. Applicable Plans and Regulations
The project site currently has a General Plan designation of low density residential and a
zoning designation of U-11,5 an unclassified holding zone used for recently annexed land
prior to development being proposed.
In order to develop the site as proposed, a General Plan amendment would be necessary to
allow the multiple -family and commercial development. Further, rezoning from the
current U -H would be required as indicated in Table 1.
Much of the Lodi area has historically been used for agricultural purposes. In recent
years, urban uses have displaced some agricultural uses. As a result of this trend, on
August 25, 1981 the voters of the City of Lodi passed Measure "A", an initiative ordinance
to limit future expansion of the City. The initiative, known as the "Greenbelt" initiative,
amended the City's General Plan by removing the Planned Urban Growth Area from the
Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Urban Growth area now includes only those
areas that were within the City limits at the time of passage of the initiative. The
ordinance now requires that any addition to the Urban Growth area, i.e. annexations,
requires an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. These annexation --
related amendments to the General Plan require approval by the voters.6
Because the proposed project site was annexed to the City prior to the passage of
Measure A, it does not fall within the Greenbelt area, and development does not require a
vote of the people. However, since the proposed project is adjacent to the Towne Ptanch,
which is in the Greenbelt, various provisions of Measure A do apply to the proposed
project; specifically, paragraphs 3 and 7 of the measure apply. Paragraph 3 states:
"To affect the policy of the City of Lodi to protect land in the Greenbelt area, non-
agricultural development in the City of Lodi which lies adjacent to the Greenbelt
area shall be permitted only after a finding by the City Council that such non-
agricultural development will not interfere with the continued productive use of
agricultural land in the Greenbelt or that an adequate buffer or mitigation zone
exists to insure continued productive use of agricultural land in the Greenbelt."
Paragraph 3 states:
"Water, sewer and electrical facilities shall not be expanded or extended until the
City Council makes the finding that a proposed expansion or extension is consistent
with the goals, policies and land use designations of the General Plan and this
ordinance."
17
W.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
2. Impacts
The development of Woodlake North will result in the loss of 32 acres of prime
agricultural land. Development of the site with residential and commercial uses will
terminate further use of the property for agricultural purposes. The existing crops will be
removed and the land covered with streets, houses and other urban improvements.
In addition to the loss of the project site from agricultural use, Lilac Road will be
relocated to the wegtcrly boundary of the property. Depending upon the specific
alignment of the new road, either the road or the adjacent right-of-way may impact
portions of the neighboring Towne Ranch. If the new road were to take a direct alignment
north of Lower Sacramento Road, the house and other buildings on the Towne Ranch
would be affected.
Urbanization of the project site may also affect the continued agricultural use of adjacent
parcels. The presence of a residential development may require modification of normal
farming practices on adjacent agricultural lands. The use of, and particularly the aerial
application of, certain controlled pesticides and herbicides may be restricted on areas
adjacent to residential developments. Cultivation and harvesting operations may result in
complaints from urban residents concerning noise and dust. Agricultural operations
adjacent to urbanized areas may also be subject to an increased amount of trespassing and
vandalism, particularly from the increase of school-age children.
In addition to conflicts between the proposed project and the grape -growing areas to the
west, there may be similar impacts on the orchard to the east of the property.. However,
since the orchard is zoned industrial and may eventually be developed by General Mills for
industrial use, any impacts are likely to be temporary. If and when the General Mills
property is converted to industrial uses, the agricultural/residential conflicts would end.
Since the General Mills land is restricted by a 75 -foot buffer on the side facing the
proposed project, when that land is developed there may still be 75 feet of fruit trees
buffering future industrial uses from the proposed project. That would avoid any
residential/industrial land use conflict.
No land use conflict is anticipated on the south side of the proposed project.
RM
IV.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
To the north of the site, conflicts with the Woodbridge School could be mitigated by a
wall around the project.
Parcel "A", indicated on the Tentative Map is an entrance median. The City of Lodi's
policy is not to accept the responsibility for maintenance of such a median. In addition, it
does not appear feasible for a homeowners association to be established for only this one
small maintenance item.
3. Mitigations
If the Woodlake North project is approved and constructed, the 32 acres of prime
agricultural land will be removed from further agricultural use. There is no practical way
to mitigate this loss. Once cleared and developed, it is unlikely that the land will ever be
returned to agricultural use.
With regard to impacts on neighboring agricultural land, the key to successfully mitigating
potential Impacts is to create adequate buffer zones between the proposed project and
continued agricultural operations.
Although the size of an adequate buffer zone is subject to some debate, a retired
representative of the California Farm Bureau Federation recently testified that merely
installing a fence between agricultural and urban uses was Inadequate.7 Rather, there
should be at Ieast a 20 -foot setback and preferably a living barrier (trees or a hedge) In
addition to a fence.
With regard to trespassing on agricultural land, the proposed project may offer adequate
buffering due to its inherent features and location. First, the newly aligned road will
physically separate the property from the Towne Ranch on the west with an 80 -foot wide
right-of-way. Second, the developer is proposing an enclosed subdivision with decorative
walls facing the streets. Such an enclosure would encourage inward rather than outward
human activity, further reducing disturbance to neighboring land. Third, front or
backyard setbacks required by the City Zoning Ordinance would assure an additional 10-20
foot separation. Fourth, in addition to the above buffering, it is recommended that the
County and the developer include fences and hedges or trees as a part of the landscaping
of the newsy aligned road. Thus the residences and commercial activity on the project
site would be approximately 100 feet from the Towne Ranch.
19
W.A. Land Use and Agricultural Land Conversion
Such a combination of buffers would be sufficient to protect the agricultural operations
from project Impacts.8 Although the above described buffering should reduce trespass
and nuisance problems, intrusions of pesticides and herbicides are more difficult to
mitigate. Pesticides, herbicides or other chemicals are controlled by state and federal
regulations.
All restricted chemicals, those with the potential to cause health or environrnental
problems, require a San Joaquin County Agricultural Department permit for use. The
Agricultural Department determines the suitability of the chemical based on the location
of the field, the types of crops in and around the field and the land uses in the area.9
According to the San Joaquin County Agricultural Department, there are no definite
distances required between the fields being treated and adjacent residences. Permits for
application of restricted chemicals are issued based on the particular characteristics and
restrictions of the chemical and the judgement of the agricultural commissioner. The key
factor in the safe use of any chemical is proper application. This incudes using the
proper method of application, using the correct equipment, checking for favorable
weather conditions and using proper care.10
In situations where a particular chemical or application method Is felt to be unsuitable,
there is usually an acceptable alternative. The presence of homes would not automatical-
ly mean that a farmer could not use chemicals. It would only mean that he would have to
take particular care in their application and in certain cases might have to use an
alternate chemical or method of application.I l
Although there would be increased traffic adjacent to the agricultural land, this would not
appear to adversely affect grape production in other areas of Lodi.
An additional feature that may reduce potential impacts of aerial spraying is that the
buildings on the Towne Ranch are on the east side of the property and already form a
separation between vineyards and proposed project site.
Although it would not mitigate the above impacts, future residents of the project should
be put on notice of the existence of adjacent agricultural a. 'Ivities. This can be
accomplished by including covenants, conditions and restrictions (CCNRs) In the deeds.
20
1Henry E:;ers, telephone conversation, March 13, 1984.
2Jim Gerard, Gerard be Gerard Realtors, Lodi, telephone conversation, March 9, 1984.
3The Lodi Community Development Department, Lodi Data Bank: A Statistical Profile.
December 1983.
4City of Lodi General Plan, Land Use Map.
5City of Lodi Zoning Ordinance.
6City of Lodi, Noma Ranch Final EIR, December 1983.
7Testimony of Mr. Joseph Janelli, California Farm Bureau Federation, Retired, presented
to the Lodi City Council in a hearing on the Tandy -Johnson project.
8John Ledbetter, Owner of Veno Farms and special consultant to the City of Lodi on
agricultural issues, telephone conversation, March 20, 1984.
9City of Lodi, Noma Ranch Final EIR, December 1983.
10Ibid.
11Ibid.
21
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigat:ions:.
Traffic
B. TRAFFIC
I. Setting
a. Street Network
The project site is located on the north side of Turner Road between the southerly and
northerly legs of Lower Sacramento Road.
The project's single-family residences would have access on Lower Sacramento Road
(east) while the apartment units would be served by new streets through the site. The
projects proposed local retail area would be at the northeast corner of Lower
Sacramento/Turner. As shown on Figure 3, the project would involve the abandonment of
Lilac Street through the site. A new street (Chest -,it Street) would be constructed along
the site's westerly boundary and an east -west street (Gong the site's northerly boundary)
would link Chestnut with Lilac Street and Lower Sacramento Road. Chestnut Street
would eventually extend northerly across the canal to link with the existing Chestnut
Street alignment.)
Local access to/from the site is available on Turner Road, Lilac Street and Lower
Sacramento Road. Lilac is a two-lane street extending northerly through the Woodbridge
area. Lower Sacramento Road is an important north -south traffic carrier along the
westerly edge of Lodi. South of Turner, Lower Sacramento is two lanes wide with
frontage roads adjacent to development. North of Turner, Lower Sacramento Road is a
two-lane rural -type road. Turner Road is two lanes wide in the project area, widening to
four lanes near Mills Avenue. The local street intersections are controlled by stop signs
with four-way stop controls at Turner/Lower Sacramento (south) and stop sign control for
the Lower Sacramento (north) approach at Turner.
Regional access would be primarily available via Turner Road's interchanges with Highway
99 to the east and I-5 to the west. Access to Highway 99 could also occur from
Woodbridge Road (via Lower Sacramento Road north of the site). Approximately two
miles south of the site, State Route 12 provides east -west access between the Lodi and
Delta areas.
22
W.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigktions:
Traffic
b. Traffic Volumes and Flow Conditions
Traffic volume data has been obtained from City counts conducted during 1981-1982.2 As
shown in Table 2, the volumes are well within the capacities of the specific street
segments.3 Traffic flows are stable (service level C or better) and congestion is minimal
(service level refinitions are listed in Table 3).
The existing traffic volumes also suggest that the stop sign controls are currently
appropriate for the various intersections in the project area.4 At the Lower
Sacramento/Turner/Lilac intersection, volumes are about 55-60% of the minimum level
needed to warrant a traffic signal. At Lower Sacramento (east)/Turner, volumes are 60-
65% of the minimum level for signal warrants.
2. Impacts
s. Project Trip Generation/Distribution
The project's daily and peak -hour trip generation have been calculated on the basis of
research conducted by the Institute of Transportation Engineers OTE) and the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 5,6 As shown in Table 4, the project would
generate about 5,760 daily vehicle trips; about 585 of these trips would occur during the
p.m. peak hour (typically the heaviest hour of traffic flow within the 4:00-6:00 p.m.
period). It is recognized that traffic to/from the project's retail commercial component
would not represent all new travel on the street network. The neighborhood commercial
area could serve the typical day-to-day shopping needs of project residents as well as
other residents in the area. Because these trips are now occurring on the street network
(to/from existing retail areas), the project would merely divert a portion of these trips.
Although it would be tenuous to identify a specific diversion factor, it is estimated that
50% of the neighborhood commercial traffic would be diverted from existing shopping
trips.
The distribution of project traffic would reflect the various travel purposes associated
with the project components. The residential development's travel would include
commute trips, shopping trips, personal business trips and trips to/from schools and
recreational facilities. The most recent census statistics indicate that over 60% of Lodi
residents work in the Lodi area. It is estimated that over 90% of other residential trips
23
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
TABLE 2
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND FLOW CONDITIONS
Source: City of Lodi, Traffic VOILIMC Map, 1931-1982.
24
Daily
Service
Street Segment
Volume
Level
Turner Road
West of Lower Sacramento (south)
3,000
A
Between Lower Sacramento segments
5,000
A -B
Mills to Ham
8,000
A
Lower Sacramento Road
North of Turner
6,000
B
South of Turner
5,000
A -B
Lodi to Tokay
8,000
B -C
Lilac Street
North of Turner
4,000
A
Source: City of Lodi, Traffic VOILIMC Map, 1931-1982.
24
Level of Service
TABLE 3
TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
FOR ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Interpretations
A Describes a condition of free flow, with low volumes and
high speeds. Traffic density is low, with speeds controlled
by driver desires, speed limits, and physical roadway con-
ditions. There is little or no restriction in maneuverability
due to the presence of other vehicles, and drivers can
maintain their desired speeds with little or no delay.
B Is in the zone of stable flow, with operating speeds
beginning to be restricted somewhat by traffic conditions.
Drivers still have reasonable freedom to select their speed
and lone of operation. Reductions in speed are not un-
reasonable, with a low probability of traffic flow being
restricted. The lower limit (lowest speed, highest volume)
of this level of service has been associated with service
volumes used in the design of rural highways.
C Is still in the zone of stable flow, but speeds and maneuvera-
bility are more closely controlled by the higher volumes.
Most of the drivers are restricted in their freedom to select
their own speed, change lanes, or pass. A relatively
satisfactory operating speed is still obtained, with service
volumes perhaps suitable for urban design practice.
D Approaches unstable flow, with tolerable operating speeds
being maintained though considerably offected by changes in
operating conditions. Fluctuations in volume and temporary
restrictions to flow may cause substantial drops in operating
speeds. Drivers hove little freedom to maneuver, and
comfort and convenience are low, but conditions can be
tolerated for short periods of time.
E Cannot be described by speed alone, but represents
operations at even lower operating speeds than in level D,
with volumes at or near the capacity of the highway. Flow
is unstable, and there may be stoppages of momentary
duration.
F Describes forced flow operation at low speeds, where
volumes ore below capacity. These conditions usually result
from queues of vehicles backing up from a restriction
downstream. Speeds are reduced substantially and stop-
pages may occur for short or long periods of time because of
the downstreet congestion. In the extreme, both speed and
volume con drop to Zero.
Source: Highway Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Spec. Rpt. No. 87, 1965.
25
Land Use
80 single-family dwelling
un*ts
160 apartment units
50,000 sq.ft. neighborhocd
commercial
'gross totals
Net totals
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
TABLE 4
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 1,2
Daily
PM Peak -
Trip
Daily
PN1 Peak
Hour
Rate
Trips
Hour %
Trios
10/unit
800
10%
80
6/unit
960
11%
105
80/1000 sq.ft.
4,000
10%
400
5,760
585
3,760
385
LITE, Trip Generation, 1979.
2Caltrans, 13th Progress Report on Trip Ends Generation, 1981.
3Assumes 50% of retail trips would represent new travel on the street network.
26
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
TABLE 5
EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC FLOW CONDITIONS
Source: EIP Corporation
27
Traffic Volume and
Service
Level
With
Street Segment
Existing
Project
Turner Road
West of Lower Sacramento (south)
3,000
(A)
3,300
(A)
Between Lower Sacramento segments
5,000
(A -B)
6,300
(B)
Mills to Ham
8,000
(A)
9,400
(A)
Lower Sacramento Road
North of Turne-
6,000
(B)
6,900
(B)
South of Turner
5,000
(A -B)
6,100
(B)
Lodi to Tokay
81000
(B -C)
8,500
(C)
Lilac Street
North of Turner
4,000
(A)
N/A
Chestnut Street
North of Turner
N/A
4,700
(A)
Source: EIP Corporation
27
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
are within the Lodi area. The project's neighborhood commercial component would
probably generate net new trips from residential areas within 1/2 - 3/4 mile of the site.
Beyond this distance, other existing shopping areas would divert residential shopping trips.
With these factors, the project's trip distribution has been estimated and is outlined in
Figure 5.
b. Cumulative Traffic and Street Network Changes
In addition to the proposed project, additional development and circulation modifications
are planned for the Woodbridge area (basically the area north of Turner and ,vest of Lower
Sacramento Road).7
The Woodbridge area would have a total of about 1175 single-family dwelling units (net
including the proposed project).8 These units would generate about 11,750 daily trips,
which would be added to the street network in the project area.
As adopted by the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors and Lodi City Council, the
Woodbridge Circulation Plan would involve the extension of Chestnut Street southerly
along the wcsteriy boundary of the site. Chestnut would be foir lanes wide from
Mokelumne to Turner. Lower Sacramento Road would remain in its current location but
would eventually be widened to four lanes. Although not addressed as a part of the
Woodbridge Circulation Plan, Turner Road would also be widened to four lanes.
c. Impacts on the Street Network Due to the Project
The proposed project's traffic has been added to the street network and service levels
recalculated in Table a. As shown, the project would result in slight degradations in
traffic operation (by maximum of one-half service level) but traffic flows would remain
stable (service level C or bet ter).9
With the project traffic, volumes at Lower Sacramento/Chestnut/Turrier would be 65-70%
of the minimum levels for signalization.10 At Lower Sacramento (east)/Turner, the
volumes would essentially meet the minimum levels at which a signal could be justified. 11
A signal installation, however, should be subject to a comprehensive analysis of actual
traffic volumes and accident characteristics.
O
DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECT TRAFFIC 5
COMMERC1At RES►DENT►A1
ADT . AOT
TOUT ADT
90URCt:t►► Cc*rc" ATO)ri
FEET
0 300 600 1100
w �--.
Ljj
ce
LfC
ZFF r
�1
:Z1
of 1
a
ol 1
1
PROJECT SITE
1
II �
i
"1
200 + 120 1
320
aor r �saa r
(t.R`FR ROAD
V
29
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and :Mitigations:
Traffic
The project would focus traffic at four areas: two new intersections along Lower
Sacramento Road (east), the Lower Sacramento (east)/Turner intersection, and the Turner
Road frontage of the retail commercial parcel. At each location, turning movements
would result in an increased potential for vehicle conflicts and delay.
d. impacts Due to Cumulative Development
The Woodbridge Circulation Plan projected that with cumulative Woodbridge development
and planned street connections, volumes on Chestnut Street and Lower Sacramento P.oad
(east) would increase to 14,500 and 9,600 vehicles respectively. 12 Because these streets
and Turner Road will eventually be widened to four lanes, traffic flows would remain
stable. However, both intersections of Lower Sacramento Road with Turner Road would
warrant signalization.
3. Mitigation
The primary effec's of project traffic would be increased turning movements and
potential vehicle conflicts at intersection.-, and retail commercial driveways. To separate
turning and through vehicles and alleviate these conflicts, the following measures are
recommended:
• At Woodhaven/Lower Sacramento and Woodlake/Lower Sacramento, Lower
Sacramento should be widened or restriped to allow left -turn lanes on er±ch of
these streets.
• At Lower Sacramento (east)/Turner, the intersection should be widened or
restriped to accommodate a left -turn lane and right -turn lane on Lower
Sacramento, a left -turn lane and through -lane on eastbound Turner and aright -
turn lane and through -lane on westbound Turner. The widening at Lower
Sacramento (east)/Turner would mitigate turning movement conflicts as well as
reducing the need for signalization.
• Along the Retail Commercial parcel's Turner Road frontage, Turner should be
widened or restriped to provide a center two-way turn -lane. This lane should
extend to Lower Sacramento Road, providing a left -turn lane at the intersection.
With cumulative de•ielopment, it is recognized that Lower Sacramento, Turner and
Chestnut would be widened to their ultimate width.
30
IV.B. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Traffic
The mitigation measures discussed would be compatible with these ultimate improve-
ments.
1 Woodbridge Circulation Plan, adopted by San Joaquin County and City of Lodi in 1983.
2City of Lodi, Traffic Volume Map, 1981-1982.
3lrutitute of Transportation Engineers, Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook,
1976.
4Caltrans, Traffic Manual, 1979.
SITE, Trip Generation, 1979.
6Caltrans, 13th Progress Report on Trip Ends Generation, 1981.
7Woodbridge Circulation Plan, op. cit.
8Ibid.
9ITE, Transportation and Traffic Engineerina`Handbook, 1976.
10 Caltrans, Traffic Manual, 1979.
11lbid.
12Woobridge Circulation Plan, op. cit.
31
IV.C. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Soils, Geology and Drainage
C. SOILS, GEOLOGY AND DRAINAGE
1. Setting
a. Soils
The entire site is underlain by Hanford sandy loam (HY). The surface layer contains
grayish -brown, soft, granular material that grades downward to light grayish -brown,
massive soft, sandy loam. A weakly cemented hardpan occurs at about 60 inches below
the surface, but this would have little effect on crops. The soil is a flood plain deposit
developed on moderately coarse-grained alluvium of predominantly granitic origin.1
The Hy soil is prime agricultural soil. It has a Class I capability rating (assigned by the
Soil Conservation Service) indicating few or no limitations for agricultural purposes. The
Storie Index for fly soil is 95 (of a possible 100 points) indicating it is particularly well
suited to general intensive :'arming. It is generally used in the production of vineyards,
orchards and other perennial crops. Hanford sandy loam is one of the most hig'ily desired
soils in the county.2
Hy soil is also rated good for construction purposes, having a bearing capacity of about
2,000 pounds per square foot, and no expansive characteristics. It will support most
structural building loads.3
b. Geology
The soil in the project area is derived from the Modesto Formation, a geologically young
alluvial deposit that is part of 3,000 to 10,000 feet of lake and river sediments filling the
Great Valley. Underlying these sediments are about 60,000 feet of relatively undeformed
marine sedimentary rock. Although no faults appear on the surface in the v`cinity of
Lodi, the structure of the bedrock indicates that ancient faults probably affected the
Great Valley Sequence.4
The nearest potentially active faults are in the Rio Vista -Montezuma area, 22 to 32 miles
west of Lodi. The Stockton Fault (about 14 miles south) and the lsleton-Ryde Fault Zone
(about 14 miles west) are older, buried faults generally considered inactive. The nearest
historically active faults, the most probable source of strong groundmotion, are in the Sari
Francisco Bay Area of the Coast Ranges. These faults include the San Andreas (about 70
32
IV.C. Environmental, Setting, Impacts andMitigations:
Soils, Geology and Drainage
miles southwest), the Hayward (about 55 miles southwest), the Calaveras (about 45 miles
southwest), the Livermore (about 40 miles southwest), and the Antioch (about 30 miles
west southwest). The Midland Fault Zone (about 20 miles west) is buried and considered
mostly inactive although a Richter Magnitude 4+ earthquake was epicentered in the zone
within this century. 5,6
Lateral bedrock acceleration from a maximum expected earthquake along one of the
active faults would be about 30% of the speed of gravity (0.3g). Lodi is in seismic Zone 3,
as defined by the 1978 Uniform Building Code, which requires the strictest design factors
to resist these lateral forces. 7,8
e. Drainage
The project vicinity is virtually flat at about 40 feet above mean sea level (msl). The site
slopes very gently (about three feet per mile) to the southwest with no natural drainage
channels crossing it. The property does not lie within the 100 -year floodplain of the
Mokelumne River.9
The City operates a system of interconnecting storm drainage basins to provide temporary
storage for peak storm runoff. The runoff is stored until the water can be pumped in the
W.I.D. Canal or tht Mokelumne River at controlled rates and locations. The Woodlake
North property is divided by the boundary between B -basin and E -basin. With the closure
of Lilac Street and extension of Chestnut Street, the entire project would be in B2 sub -
basin. B2 sub -basin serves about 460 acres between Lower Sacramento Road and Roper
Avenue with an interconnection line between Twin Oaks basin -park and the major outfall
structure at Lodi Lake Park. Basin -parks serve both a storm drainage function and a
recreational function. The parks are turfed and landscaped and contain baseball diamonds
and concession stands.
The project site is connected to Lodi Lake Park by a 24 -inch line along Turner Road
between Lower Sacramento Road and Rutledge Drive And a 42 -inch line from Rutledge
Drive to the park. The connection with Twin Oaks basin -park Is a 42 -inch line along Allen
Drive. Thirty -inch and smaller lines would be extended from Turner Road to serve the
property.
33
W.C. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Soils, Geology and Drainage
2. Impacts
Development of the Woodlake North project would result in the loss of about 32 acres of
prime agricultural land. The property is currently ploughed for row crops, but the
Hanford sandy loam soil is also well suited for vineyards and orchards. Development of
the site would preclude its further agricultural use.
Urbanization of the project site could also affect the continued agricu:'aral use of
adjacent parcels. The presence of a residential development may require modification of
normal farming practices on adjacent agricultural lands. The use of certain controlled
pesticides and herbicides may be restricted on areas adjacent to residential developments.
Cultivation and harvesting operations may result in complaints from urban residents
concerning noise and dust.
Development of the Woodlake North site would increase the erosion potential on the site
during the construction period. Erosion hazard is slight and could be kept low with .a
minimum of erosion/sedimentation control measures.
People and structures on the site would be exposed to strong groundmotion during a major
earthquake on one of the faults in the nearby Coast Ranges. Peak horizontal ground
accelerations of about 0.3g would be equivalent to a Modified Mercalli Intensity of V.
During such an event, windows would be broken, plaster cracked and unstable objects
overturned. Trees, poles and other tall objects would be disturbed. Adherence to the
recommended lateral force requirements of the Structural Engineers Association of
California (embodied in the Uniform: Building Code) would greatly reduce the likelihood of
damage or injury due to seismically induced groundshaking.
Development of the Woodlake Forth project site would create impermeable surfaces in
the form of roads, walks, patios and structures. These surfaces would effectively prevent
stormwater from percolating into the ground and would generate highir runoff values than
currently exist. Runoff values for sandy soils with less than 2% slope range between 5%
and 10% of rainfall. These values rise to between 30% and 50% for single --family
dwellings, 60% to 75% for multiple -family units and 50% to 709E for neighborhood
commercial development. The City storm drainage lines and facilities have been designed
to accommodate this increased runoff from the project area.10
34
IV.C. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Soils, Geology and Drainage
3. Mitigations
r
If Woodlake North :s approved and constructed, 32 acres of prime agricultural soil will be
covered removing it from future agricultural purposes. There is no practical way to
mitigate the loss of this resource. Once cleared and developed with streets, houses and
apartments, It is unlikely that the land will ever return to agricultural use.
Erosion during the period of construction can be kept to a minimum by doing as much of
the excavation as possible during the dry season. Maintaining undeveloped areas in
groundcover and revegetating developed areas as quickly as possible would also reduce
erosion potential. It is unlikely that a formal erosion/sedimentation control plan would be
necessary at this site.
1Soil Conservation Service (SCS), Soil Survey of Lodi Area, U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, 1937 and preliminary data sheets compiled by Paul Nazar, (SCS), 1972.
2Kirby D. McClellan, Soil Conservationist, SCS, letter to EIP Corporation, March 1, 1984.
3City of Lodi Planning Department, Noma Ranch Final EIR, No. 83-2, December 1983,
page 3.
4California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), Sacramento Quadrangle - Map 1A,
1981, scale 1:250,000.
5, Fault Map of California, Geologic Data Map Series No. 1, 1975 scale 1: 750,000.
�CDMG, Earthquake Epicenter Map of California, Map Sheet 39, 1978, scale 1:1,000,000.
7CDMG, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California, Map
Sheet 23, 1974, scale 1:2,50 6,007.
8City of Lodi Planning Department, op.cit., page 4.
9Richard Prima, Associate Engineer, City of Lodi, telephone communication, March 12,
1984.
10RichardPrima, op.cit.
35
IV.D. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Noise
D. NOISE
I. Setting
The proposed project would be subject to the standards contained in Title 25 of the
California Administrative Code which states that residences located in areas of Com-
munity Equivalent Noise Levels (CNEL) of 60 dba or greater are required to have an
acoustical analysis showing that the structure has been designed to limit noise to the
prescribed allowable levels.
Local guidelines would also apply. Areas exposed to less than day night average noise
levels (Ldn) of 60 dba are considered acceptable for residential development. Areas
exposed to Ldn 60-65 dba are conditionally acceptable if minor sound reduction measures
are incorporated into the project design. Further details on noise within San Joaquin
County appear in the County Noise Element.1 However, it should be noted that this
document is about 10 years old and some of its contents may be out of date.
A noise contour map provided by the City of Lodi staff indicates that Ldn noise levels
reach 65-70 dba at the perimeter of the site along Turner Road and Lower Sacramento.
The map does not indicate that railroad operations to the east and northeast of the site
would result in Ldn levels greater than 60 dba.
2. Impacts
The project would result in significant short-term noise impacts due to construction
activities. Peak noise levels generated during the noisiest construction operations, those
involving earthmoving and grading, would range from about 80-85 dba at 50 -foot distances
and about 74-79 dba at distances of 100 feet. Peak noise levels due to construction
activities on the southern edge of the site within residences south of Turner Road would
reach abouut 59-64 dba with windows open and about 49-54 dba with windows closed.
Peak noise levels inside the school due to construction activity on the northern edge of
the site would reach about 59-64 dba with windows open and about 49-54 dba with
windows closed. In both cases noise would be audible with open windows and could be
,r
irritating. With windows shut, impacts would be minimal. Appendix C lists typical sound
levels measured in industry and the environment.
36
R
IV.D. Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Noise
Project operation would increase traffic volumes in the vicinity of the site. It is generally
agreed that perceptible increases -in traffic noise occur when traffic volumes increase by
at least double. Based upon the traffic volumes predicted in Section B of this chapter, it
is expected that increases in traffic noise on adjacent streets due to project generated
traffic would not be perceptible. However, it should be noted that in combinations with
traffic increases from other sources, audible impacts could occur.
3. Mitigation
Because the noise levels on the portions of the site adjacent to Turner Road and Lower
Sacramento exceed CNEL 60 dba, Title 25 would require that a noise analysis be
performed to identify measures which would result in a 15-20 dba noise reduction. Such
measures could include, but would not necessarily be limited to, the following:
• Minimize number and size of windows facing Turner and Lower Sacramento
• Shield sliding glass doors facing noise sources (if any) with solid balcony walls
• Avoid placing bedrooms facing Turner or Lower Sacramento
• Locate recreational areas with intervening structures to block noise transmission
from the adjacent streets.
1San Joaquin County Council of Governments, Noise Element, adopted July 23, 1974.
2Noise map provided by David S. Morimoto, Assistant Planner, Community Development
Department, Lodi, California.
37
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
I~ AIR QUALITY
1. Setting
The proposed project is located in the northern portion of San Joaquin County which is the
northernmost county in the San Joaquin Valley Ai- Basin. The climate in the project area
is characterized by hot dry summers and cool wet winters. Mean annual rainfall is about
nine inches which falls mostly during storms between October and April. Average winter
maximum temperatures are in the high 50s; average summer maximum temperatures are
in the 90s.
The most serious air pollution problem in this area is due to elevated concentrations of
ozone, which have deleterious effects on human health and crop production. The problem
occurs largely from May to October when intense heat and sunlight promote the formation
of ozone from chemical reactions in the atmosphere involving reactive organic gases
(ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NO X). During this period temperatures frequently exceed
1000 F (the average daily maximum in July is 950F) and prevailing welt and northwest
' winds may bring pollutants from the more heavily populated Bay Area into San Joaquin
County. Ozone concentrations exceeding the federal standard of .12 parts per million
have occurred under these conditions.
It is generally assumed that pollutants in the project area are transported to the
southeast; air quality generally worsens to the south in the San Joaquin Valley. Figure 61
shows the general flow pattern. Winds at the project site are influenced by marine air
which flows through the coastal hills and valleys into the San Joaquin Valley; winds are
strongest in the afternoon and evening.
A second air quality problem in San Joaquin County occurs from October through January
when strong temperature inversions trap pollutants near the earth's surface. At such
times build-ups of carbon monoxide (CO) may violate the Federal eight-hour average CO
standard of nine parts per million. Violations generally occur in the evening due to the
combination of emissions from heavy vehicular traffic and stagnant atmospheric condi-
tions.
to 38
WIND FLOW IN SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY AIR BASIN
"MATK31N SYMOMS
10.000 TO 50,000
100.000A1,4D OVER
SOUka: [IF' CORPORATION
MILES=md--6� /
0 to
39
W.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
A third air quality problem is violation of state and federal air quality standards for total
suspended particulates (TSP). This situation exists throughout the Central Valley. The
major sources of TSP are resuspended dust from spring winds and agricultural operations
including burning.
A summary of applicable air quality standards appears in Table 6. A summary of air
quality in San Joaquin County from 1980-1982 appears in Table 7.
San Joaquin County's air quality violates air quality standards for ozone, CO, and TSP.
The 1977 Amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act require non -attainment areas (areas
which will not be in comiAiance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by
1982), to prepare air quality plans (called nonattainment area plans or NAP), designed to
bring the areas into compliance by the end of 1987. The San Joaquin County Board of
Supervisors was designated the lead planning agency for ozone and CO, while the
California State Air Resources Board was the lead agency for TSP planning.
The Air Quality Management Plan for San Joaquin County includes the following
strategies to attain compliance with the ozone and CO air quality standards: reducing
emissions from on -road motor vehicles; a Transportation Control Plan to encourage less -
polluting forms of transportation; emissions controls on stationary sources such as
industry, and businesses; and control of many other area sources such as off-road vehicles,
agricultural emissions and miscellaneous combustion processes.
2- Impacts
Construction activities would generate pollutants in the project vicinity. Trucks and
other motorized construction equipment would release exhaust during construction hours.
The quantities involved would not be likely to cause air quality violations in the
immediate vicinity of thZ project, nor would they be likely to produce measurable
increases in pollutant concentrations in surrounding areas. Earth moving and grading
operations would generate suspended particulates through the movement of earth and the
Passage of wind over exposed earth surfaces. Such activities would occur over the entire
period of community build -out. The resulting particulates would increase soiling
downwind, and could aggravate individuals with respiratory problems and annoy nearby
40
TABLE 6
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
�r
A • q • • • • • V C;
California Stendanlal
National Standards=
Concentration
Method
Primary3.5
Secondary 3,41
Mathody
Pollutant Averaging Time
Oxidant10
1 hour
0.10 ppm,
(200 ug/m)
Ultraviolet
Photometry
—
—
--
Ozone
1 hour
---
—
0.12 ppm
9235 ug/ml)
Same as Primary
Standard
Ethylene
Chem ltumineseenee
9.0 ppm
Non -Dispersive
Infrared
10 mg/ml
Same as Primary
Non -Dispersive
Infrared
Carbone Monoxide
S hour
N0 mg/m3)
Spectroscopy
(9 ppm)
Standards
Spoatroscopy
(N D I It)
(N Dl lt)
1 hour
20 ppm
(23 mg/m3)
30 mg/ml
(35 ppm)
V!!. -Ogen Dioxide
Annual Average
—
Cas Phas4q
Chemiktml-
100 ug/in3
(0.05 ppm)
Some as Primary
Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence
1 hour
0.25 ppm3
0170 a hn )
ncscence
Standard
—
Suhrc Dioxide
Annual Average
--
90 ug/m3
(0.03 m)
24 hour
0.05 ppm
131 a /m3)9
365 ug/m
(0.13 m)
—
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence
Pararo satin
3 hour
—
—
1300 ua/m
(0.5 m)
1 hour
0.5 ppm
a
1310 hn3)
—
—
SL-Spended
Partictiiate
Annualeometr a
Mean
60 ug/m3
liigh Volume
75 us/m3
60 ug/m
High Volume
MatterSomlln�
p 6
260 a /ml
150 Intlinl
Sampling
23 luwr
100 a /m
sulfates
23 hour
25 ug/m3
T%joildimetric
—
--�
—
Barium
3ulfnte
lead
30 Jay
1.5 ughn3
Atomic
Average
Absorption
Calendar
Quarter
_„
—
1.5 tqf/m3
Same as Primary
Standnrd
Atomic
Absorption
Hydrogen
Sulfhie
I hour
0.03 ;x►i�
(42 ug/m)
CAdniium llydroxhle-—
5'1'itnrinn
Viuyl Chloride
(Chlorocthcne)
24 hoar
0.010 ppt�
(26 t+g/m
Tedlar nag
Collection, flna
—
�
—
Chromutogrophy
�r
A • q • • • • • V C;
A
N
TABLE ' 6
_ Californla Stnncinrtisi National Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time Concentratlod Method,l Prlmary3,$ Secondary3#6 Mothal7
Visibility 1 observation in sufficient amount to
Iteducing reduce the prevailing visibility
s
Particles to less titan 10 miles when the
relative humidity ix less than 70%
APPLiCARLF ONLY iN T1IR LAKE TAIIOF. AiR BASiN:
Carbon Monoxide
a hour
' 6 ppm NDIR
(7 mg/in
—
--
--
Visibility
i observatlon
in sufficient amount to reduce
Reducing
the prevalling vis:bllity to less
Particles
Own 30 miles when the relative
--
--
humidity Is less Ilion 70%
I Cailfornla standards, other than carbon monoxide, are values that are not to be equated or exceeded. The carbon monoxide sta..Aards are not to be exceeded.
=National standards, other titan ozone and those based on annual averages or annual geometric means, are not to be exceeded more than once s year. 11he ozone
standard Is attained when the expected number of days a calendar year with a nloximum hourly average -concentration above the standard is equal to or loss
than one.
3Concentration expressed first In units In which It was promulgated. Equlvatent units given h: parentheses are based upon a refercatce icempersture of 250C and a
reference pressure of 760 mm of mercury. All measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference temperature of 25 C and a reference pressure of
760 mm of Ile (1,013.2 millibar); ppm in this tsblo refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas.
4Any equivalent procedure which can he shown to the satisfaction of the Air Resource hoard to give equivalent results at or near the level*( the atr quality
standard may he used.
$National Primary Standards: T11e levels of air quality necessary, with an a.lequnte margin of sa;cty, to protect the public health. Each slate must attain the
primary standards no litter than three years after that state's Implementation plan Is a;gxovcd by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
6National Secondary Stnndarbs: 1110 levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse offoets of a pollutant.
Each state must attain the secondary standards within a "reasonable lima" after the Implementation plan b approved by the EPA.
7Rcference method as described by the EPA. An "equivalent method" of measurement may be used but must have a "consistent relationship to Ilio reforetwo
method" and must be approved by the FPA.
aPrevailing visiblilty is defined as the greatest visibility which Is nttnined or snrlmsscd around at least half of the horizon circle, but not necessarily In
continuous sectors.
5 A locations where the stales standards for oxidant and/or suspended particulnto matter are violated. National standards apply elsewhorc.
"Menst:red its ozone.
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
TABLE 7
AIR QUALITY IN THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL DISTRICT 1980-1982
Number of Exceedances of Standards
1980 1981 1982
Ozone
number of hours exceeding
standard 11 5 30
number of days exeeding
standard 6 4 15
Carbon Monoxide
8 -hour average 1 0 0
Particulates3 39 16 13
IViolations recorded in Lodi, Ripon, two locations in Stockton and Union Island in 1979;
Lodi and Stockton only in 1980 - 1982.
2Violations recorded in Stockton.
3Violations recorded in Stockton, although particulates are a valley -wide problem.
Source: California Air Resour--es Beard, California Air Quality Data, Annual
Summaries, 1980-1982.
43
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
residents. Violations of the particulate air quality standard could occur in the immediate
vicinity of the project; data and models with which to quantify these impacts are not
available. It should be noted, however, that because of the agricultural land uses in the
vicinity of the project site, it is likely that ambient particulate concentrations are already
relatively high.
The project would produce carbon monoxide mainly from motor vehicle exhaust emissions.
The potential impacts of these emissions were calculated using the air quality model of
the California Air Resources Board.l It is a Gaussian line source model which was applied
to worst-case conditions of traffic and meteorology at the most heavily traveled and
congested intersections which would be impacted by the proposed project. Emission
factors provided by the California Air Resources Board for a temperature of 35OF were
used in the calculations.
The traffic input to the model was based upon the data contained in Section B of this
chapter. Peak hour traffic was assumed to be 10% of average daily total (ADT) and peak
eight-hour traffic was assumed to be 60% of ADT. Traffic speed was assumed to be 20
mph for the peak hour and 35 mph for the eight -flour average. The model also accounts
for roadway width: Lower Sacramento and Turner were assumed to remain two lanes wide.
Wind direction was selected to be parallel to the more heavily travelled road in each
intersection modeled. Wind speed was assumed to be two mph for all model runs.
Stability E was assumed for one-hour and stability D for eight-hour (stability is one
measure of the capacity the atmosphere to disperse pollt!tants; D represents slightly
better dispersion than E).
The modeling results (Table 8) indicate that no violation of either the state one-hour
standard of 20 ppm or the federal or state eight-hour standards of nine pprn is anticipated
to occur or even be approached. As a result no significant local CO impact is predicted.
The most important pollutant at the regional scale is ozone, which is the product of
photochemical reactions in the atmosphere involving non -methane hydrocarbons (NMHC,
sometimes called reactive organic gases). Oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and the reactions
require energy from the sun to proceed and may take several hours; as a result peak ozone
44
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts "d Mitigations:
Air Quality
TABLE 8
ROADSIDE CARBON MONOXIDE
CONCENTRATIONS ALONG TURNER ROAD
(parts per million)
Future Future
Existing Without Project With Project
1 hr 8 hrs 1 hr 8 hrs 1 hr 8 hrs
Location
Turner, between
Lower Sacramento
segments 7 4 5 2 5 2
Turner, between
Mills and Ham 8 4 5 3 5 3
Background 6 3 4 2 4 2
Assumptions: Windspeed 2 mpP
Wind angle 22.5
Stability E for one hour, D for eight hours
Peak speed = 20 mph
Average link speed = 35 mph
Background = Half highest measured
CO value in Lodi in 1982
45
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
levels tend to occur downwind of the emissions. Althounh the mechanism for -ozone
formation is extremely complex and not completely understood, it appears that ozone
concentrations in the San Joaquin Valley are most sensitive to changes in the amount of
hydrocarbon emissions.2 The proposed project would add about .02 t/d to the total burden
of 60.4 t/d, or about .03%. These quantities of NMHC would not produce a significant
(i.e., greater than .005 ppm with conventional monitoring equipment) increase in ozone
concentrations at any downwind location, although the general downwind levels would be
marginally increased.
The increase in particulate concentrations shown in Table 9 should not noticeably affect
overall TSP levels in the region, since agricultural and natural sources are the major
sources of TSP pollution. The two remaining pollutants in Table 9, NO and SOX, are not
considered problematic on a rep onal scale. The project would, therefore, be consistent
with the regional air quality plan.
3. Mitigation
The following steps may be taken to reduce dust emissions during construction:
- watering exposed surfaces (complete coverage twice daily can reduce emissions by
50%)3
- use of tarpaulins on loaded trucks
- minimization of the period during which soils are exposed
Since motor vehicle emission rates are regulated by state and federal agencies, the
available mitigation measures are restricted to reducing traffic volumes and congestion.
Measures to reduce VMT or improve flow are identified in the transportation section of
this report.
Kalifornia Air Resources Board, Research Division, Air Quality Modeling Section, Lecture
Notes for Workshop on Estimating Carbon Monoxide Concentrations for Hot-rpots
Analysis, Sacramento, California, May 1980.
2San Joaquin Planning Department, Sar, Joaquin County, 1982 Air Quality Plan (AQNIP),
Stockton, CA, 1982.
3U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidelines for Development of Control Strategies
in Areas with Fugitive Dust Problems, OAQPS 1.2-071, October 1977.
46
IV.E. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Air Quality
TABLE 9
REGIONAL POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
Regional Emissions
1980 344.59 102.3 55.36 NA NA
Projected 1987 Regional
Emissions Without
Controls 302.07 91.46 49.03 NA NA
Projected 1987 Regional
Emissions With
Controls 253.57 60.4 NA NA NA
Source: San Joaquin Planning Department, San Joaquin County, 1982 Air Quality Plan,
(AQMP), Stockton, California, 1982.
47
Tons Per Dav
Non
Oxides
Methane
of Oxides
Project Ilydro-
Nitro- of Particu-
Generated CO CarbonseLnn
Sulfur later VMT
1990 .3 .02
.02 .003 .03 120800
Regional Emissions
1980 344.59 102.3 55.36 NA NA
Projected 1987 Regional
Emissions Without
Controls 302.07 91.46 49.03 NA NA
Projected 1987 Regional
Emissions With
Controls 253.57 60.4 NA NA NA
Source: San Joaquin Planning Department, San Joaquin County, 1982 Air Quality Plan,
(AQMP), Stockton, California, 1982.
47
IV.F. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigations:
Historic and Cultural Resources
F. 1ElMORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Setting
The Plains Miwok Indians inhabited the northern portion of the San Joaquin Valley. The
Wwok, as other California Indians, can be characterized as a hunting and gathering people
who lived a semi --sedentary village life. Indian sites in the Lodi area are usually found
along the banks of the Mokelumne River, just north of the project site.
In 1852, Je-emiah H. Woods and Alexander McQueen established a ferry across the
Nlokelumne River. As a result, a new road from Stockton to Sacramento was established
by way of this ferry which became known as Woods' Ferry. In 1858, Woods built a bridge
at the site of the ferry. From it the town, which was laid out in April 1859, took the
name of Woodbridge. The town of Woodbridge is a California Historic Landmark.
Woodbridge and other towns such as Lakeford absorbed the river trade of the Mokelumne,
but later .on the agricultural districts became dependent upon towns like Lodi which had
railway access.2
In 1878, Albert Stokes Thomas deeded land north of the project site to the town of
Woodbridge. One year later on this site, Bishop Castle of the United Brethren Church
dedicAted the Woodbridge Seminary. This became the San Joaquin Valley College (1882-
1897), one of the first colleges in California. It was later used as Woods Grammer School
until 1922 when the building was dismantled. The site is a California Historic Landmark.3
East of the school is the Woodbridge Cemetery. As Party as 1847, burials took place at
this site, however, the date of the formal founding of the cemetery is 1875. The
cemetery is maintained by the Oddfellows, Masonic Lodge.4
Adjacent to the proposed project, to the west, is a 6 -bedroom farm house situated on a
2 1/4 -acre parcel of the Towne Ranch. It was built about 70 years ago by the Towne
family to replace an earlier structure which had been destroyed by fire. The Townes were
large agricultural land owners in the Lodi/Woodbridge area and have lived in the area for
about a century. The home has recently been purchased by a group who plan to convert
the Towne home into a restaurant/bed and breakfast enterprise.5
HN.
IV.F. Environmental, Setting, Impacts and Mitigation:
Historic and Cultural Resources
The Central California Information Center at California State College .at Stanislaus has
been provided the project description and maps depicting the project site. A search of the
State Office of Historic Preservation cultural records maintained at the Center indicated
that no known cultural resources are within the project site; however, three resources
mentioned above, San Joaquin Valley College, Woodbridge and the Oddfellows Cemetery
are all within one mile of the project sAe.6 The farm house on the Towne Ranch site is
not listed as a historic structure.
2. Impacts
Although there are no recorded archeological surveys of the site, it is doubtful that there
are any archeological sites on the property. The digging and plowing necessary to
cultivate the site would have destroyed any archeological material.
Implementation of the project may affect the old Towne family farm house depending
upon which alignment of Chestnut Street is chosen. The project would not directly affect
the California State Historical Landmarks.
3. Mitigation
Should any archeological artifacts be discovered during project excavation, the Central
California Information Office at Stanislaus State College and State Office of Historic
Preservation should be notified. Excavation which might damage the discovered artifact
would be suspended to allow determination of significance by a qualified archeologist.
Kalifornia Office of Historic Preservation, California Inventory of Historic Resources,
March 1976, page 164.
2Bancroft, Hubert Howe, The History of California, Vol. VI, 1848-1859, The History
Company, 1888.
3Debbie Mastel, archivist, San Joaquin County Historical Museum, telephone conversa-
tion, March 20, 1984.
4Ibid.
5Jim Gerard, Gerard and Gerard Realty, telephone conversation, March 22, 1984.
6E. A. Greathouse, Assistant Coordinator, Central California Information Office,
California State College, Stanislaus letter, March 16, 1984.
49
. r
IV.G Environmental Setting, impacts & Mitigations:
Community Services
G. COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Police
a. Setting
The Lodi Police Department serves the area within Lodi City limits. The Department has
54 sworn officers, 40 patrol officers and 14 patrol cars. There is one central dispatch
station, and the City Is divided into seven patrol areas (beats). The average response time
for the City is 2.9 minutes.
Currently the project site is not patrolled by the Lodi Police Department. It does not
respond to calls north of Turner Road or west of Lower Sacramento Road. Through an
Informal agreement, the San Joaquin Sheriff's Department patrols Lilac Road and west to
the County line.I This arrangemerit has been satisfactory to date because the property has
been agricultural land.
b. Impacts
The development of the Woodlake North project will mean the end of the present patrol
arrangement between the Lodi Police and San Joaquin Sheriff. The Lodi Police will be
expected to provide police service to the development as it is within City limits. The
Department has not indicated any adverse impact on its service due to the Woodlake
North project.2
c. Mitigation
None required.
2. Fire
a. Setting
The City of Lodi will provide fire protection to the project area. The Lodi Fire
Department provides service within City limits, an area of approximately 8.5 square miles
with a service population of 40,000. The Department has 48 firefighters with 42 on line.
It has four 1500 -gallon pumpers, one elevated platform truck, one ladder truck and one
equipment truck. This equipment is distributed between three stations. The station
closest to the project site is the 210 West Pine Street Station. Emergency response time
50
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts do Mitigations:
Community Services
to the project area is estimated to be 4 to 41 minutes. The City has a Class III ISO
rating.3
b. Impacts
The Department Chief has indi::ated that service to the proposed area is not a problem.
However, continued development in northwest Lodi could mean a longer run and the
eventual addition of another fire station in that area.4
c. Mitigation
None required.
3. Schools
a. Setting
The Lodi Unified School District (LUSD) serves the City of Lodi and nearly all of northern
San Joaquin County, including portions of North Stockton. The School District has a
student population of. 17,000, which is estimated to be growing by 4 to 7 percent per
year.
5
The LUSD does not have adequate classroom space and students are bussed throughout the
District. Lodi High School is on extended hours to handle the student overload. A
statement of impaction has been filed with the State of California and a tax of $200 per
bedroom is in effect in Lodi.6
b. Impact
According to School District estimates one student is added by each new single-family
home, and by every two multiple -family units.7 Therefore, the Woodlake Forth project
can be expected to add 160 students to the Lodi School District. Lakewood Elementary,
Woodbridge Middle and Lodi High Schools would be most affected.
c. Mitigation
The developer of Woodlake North has entered into an agreement with the LUSD to
mitigate adverse impacts on the School District by the development of this property. This
51
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts be Mitigations:
Community Services
agreement was signed in June 1981. A text of this agreement can be found in Appendix B
of this document. The School District has no objection to the project as long as the fees
are paid.8
4. Water
a. Setting
The City of Lodi provides water to the area from a series of 18 wells drawing on 150 -500 -
foot deep aquifers. The entire system has a capacity of 42 million gallons per day (mgd).
Current residential water use is not known. New wells are drilled using water utility
revenues as additional areas are developed. The developer is responsible for extension of
all water mains.9 Residential water use is not metered; commercial and industrial use is
metered and priced at a declining rate. 10
The City of Lodi has an ongoing water monitoring and testing program for all its City well
sites. The program is designed to alert the City to the presence of any chemicals,
organisms or other potentially harmful materials that may be present in the water system.
Of particular concern has been the possible presence of the chemical DBCP, a chemical
product that was used by farmers to control nematodes. Although the product has been
banned for a number of years, traces of the chemical are still present in the soil and
underlying water tables. Trace levels have been detected in some of the City's wells,
however, the levels are below the State's "Action Level" of 1 p.p.b. If the DBCP level did
exceed 1 p.p.b., the City would either reduce or curtail pumping from the problem well In
accordance with State regulations. Testing done so far has not resulted in any DBCP
prolems in any of the wells in the area of Woodlake North.
In addition to the regular testing program, the City will begin a comprehensive water
testing program later this year to test for an entire spectrum of chemicals. This test will
be done to comply with recent State of California Health Department regulations.
b. Impacts
The City estimates that each acre of single-family development uses approximately 3.1
acre feet of water per ••ear, and each acre of multiple-fan::ly development uses 4.2 acre
feet of water per year.11 If Woodlake North used water at this level, the project's
52
iV.G Environmental Setting, impacts do Mitigations:
Community Services
residential water consumption would be 97 acre feet of water per year, or on a daily basis,
.09 mgd.
Commercial development of the southwest corner of the site will have minimum water
needs. Ths small retail shopping area envisioned (40,000 sq.ft.) should use only
approximately 8.74 acre feet of water per year or .01 mgd. 12
The total water consumption for the Woodlake North project will be approximately 106
acre feet per year or .10 mgd. This level of water consumption will not significantly
affect the City's current 42 mgd capacity. 13 Water use will be heavier if the property is
developed as residential than if it remains in agricultural use. The California Department
of Water Resources estimates that alfalfa would use 3.4 acre-feet (AC) of applied water
per year, deciduous orchards 3 AC, vineyards 2.4 AC, truck gardening 1.8 AC, and barley -
- no applied water. (An acre-foot of water is the amount of water needed to cover one
acre of land with one foot of water, or 326,000 gallons.) The Woodlake North project is
estimated to use 106 AC per year. This is equivalent to 3.31 AC of water per acre. 14
Consumption can be substantially reduced through water conservation and cut by as much
as half by metering the supply.
c. Mitigation
None required.
5. Wastewater
a. Setting
The City of Lodi Sanitary System handles wastewater within City limits, serving 35,000
residential and commercial customers. The City's White Slough Treatment Plant provides
primary and secondary treatment and has a capacity of 5.8 mgd. Current residential
wastewater flow is not known. The developer pays for installation of all connecting lines
and a connection fee (treatment plant buy -in charge) for each unit developed. 15
b. Impacts
Assuming that 75% of water consumption is carried away as wastewater, the Woodlake
North project can be expected to generate .425 mgd of wastewater. The treatment plant
has capacity to absorb the flow. But du,i to the nature of the terrain, a lift station will be
53
.4
rl
1V.G Environmental Setting, impacts & Mitigations:
Community Services
necessary to serve the project and the surrounding area. 16
c. Mitigation
The lift station will be located on the project site. The optimal location would be in the
southeast corner of the project's high density zone, with access to the street. The lift
station would be approximately 30 feet by 40 feet. A lift station in this location would be
able to serve property up to Canal or Academy Street. l? The developer will pay for
Installation of the station. If it serves an area larger than his project, the City will
reimburse him in proportion to capacity used outside the project.
6. Solid Waste
a. Setting
Solid waste disposal is provided in the project area by Sanitary City Disposal, a private
franchise collector. Sanitary City Disposal services the area within Lodi City limits and
has more than 14,000 customers. Collection is made by truck on a weekly basis for
residential customers and more frequently for commercial clien.ts.la Refuse is taken to a
transfer station in Lodi where approximately 25% is reclaimed. The remainder is trucked
to Harney Lane disposal site, a Class II -2 landfill. The Harney Lane Landfill is estimated
to have 1-1/2 to 2 years of capacity left. It is scheduled to close in 1986. An EIR is
underway on the Barney Lane Replacement Site.19
b. impacts
The franchise operator estimates an average of 39 lbs. of solid waste is generated per unit
per week. 20 Therefore the 240 proposed units would create approximately 243 tons of
refuse a year. This will not have a significant effect on the remaining capacity of the
current Harney Lane Landfill.
The sanitary service is a mandatory service that operates on a user fee basis. Though the
Woodlake North development would require additional manpower and service equipment,
this is part of a normal growth pattern and the cost of capital improventonts would be
repaid by user fees. No negative impact would result.21
C. Mitigation
None required.
54
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts do Mitigations:
Community Services
7. Electricity
a. Setting
The City of Lodi owns and operates the local electrical distribution system. It Is a
member of the Northern California Power Agency from which it receives power, and also
buys power from a number of other sources.
A 60-Kv line currently runs through the project site. The developer pays all costs of line
extension for service. 22
b. Impact
The proposed project will have no impact on electrical service and is readily served. The
existing 60-Kv line through the site may be moved for esthetic reasons to the periphery of
the site though the developer must pay for the relocation. 23
c. Mitigation
None required.
8. Gas
Pacific Gas and Electric Company will provide service. 24
q. Telephone
Pacific Bell will provide sec•; �ce.25
10. Television Cable
Lodi Cablevision will provide service. 26
1Linda Sunday, Administrative Assistant, Lodi Police Department, telephone conversa-
tion, March ?, 1984.
2Ibid.
3Dan MacLeod, Chief, Lodi Fire Department, telephone conversation, March 2, 1984.
41bid.
55
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts & Mitigations:
Community Services
5Mamie Starr, Facilities Planner, Lodi Unified School District, telephone conversation,
March 2, 1984.
6City of Lodi, Development Information, November 1982.
7Mamie Starr, op. cit.
8Mamie Starr, op. cit.
9CIty of Lodi, op. cit.
10 Richard Prima, Associate Engineer, City of Lodi, telephone conversation, March 2, 1984.
11Cityof Lodi, op. cit.
12 Estimate based on water consumption of retail stores; 400-450 gallons per 25 -foot
frontage. (The Design of Small Water Systems by J.A. Salvato, Jr., in Public Works, May
1960.)
13 Richard Prima, op. cit.
14 State of California, Department of Water Resources, Vegetative Water Use in
California, 1974, page 44.
15 Richard Prima, op. cit.
16 Richard Prima, op. cit.
17 Richard Prima, op. cit.
18HarryMarzolf, Sanitary City Disposal, telephone conversation, March 14, 1984.
19TomHorton, Solid Waste Manager, San Joaquin Co. Public Works, telephone
conversation, :March 20, 1984.
20Cityof Lodi, Noma Ranch, op. cit.
21 David Vaecarezza, President, Sanitai- y City Disposal, telephone conversation, March 16,
1984.
22HansHanson, Electrical Engineer, City of Lodi, telephone conversation, March 2, 1984.
23Ibid.
IV.G Environmental Setting, Impacts be Mitigations:
Co:amunity Services
24OscarCox, Marketing Representative, PG&E, telephone conversation, March 16, 1984.
25NancyDeets, Design Engineer, Pacific Bell, telephone conversation, March 16, 1954.
26DeannaEnright, General Manager, Lodi Cablevision, telephone conversation, March 16,
1984.
57
V. iUNAVOMABLE LIIPACTS
The loss of prime agricultural land would be an unavoidable impact. Once the land is
developed with homes, apartments, streets and stores there is little likelihood that it
would ever be used for agricultural purposes.
VI. IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The loss of agricultural land is also considered to be an irreversible change. It is unlikely
that the land, once developed, would ever be used again for agricultural purposes.
58
VII. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT
AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
Development of the site would have a long-term effect of depleting the supply of prime
agricultural land in the Lodi area. This is both a project -specific and cumulative impact.
59
VIII. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The proposed project will contribute to a cumulative loss of prime agricultural land that
has occurred in the past several years. Table 10 shows the projects that did or will
contribute to this loss.
Project
Lake Shore Village
Lobaugh Meadows
Kennedy Ranch
Tandy Johnson Ranch
Noma Ranch
Woodlake North
Total
TABLE 10
LOSS OF FARM LAND IN LOCI
Approximate
Acres
98 acres
92 acres
88 acres
43 acres
20 acres
32 acres
371 acres
Status
Approved
Approved
Approved
Application Pending
Approved
Application Pending
Source: City of Lodi, Tandy -Johnson EIR, 1984, and EIP Corporation.
All land in and around the City of Lodi is designated as prime agricultural land. Thus
every development must utilize agricultural land. Most future residential, commercial
and industrial deve:iopment will require the urbanization of agricultural land.
A second cumulative environmental impact is the increased traffic in and around the
community of Woodbridge. Although the proposed pre;ect lies within the City of Lodi, it
is adjacent to Woodbridge, where numerous ne •v re-'rientia! developments have been built
or are proposed.
60
Vill. Cumulative Impacts
According to the San Joaquin County General Plan, the Woodbridge community, is
projected to have an additional 1,176 dwelling unit (not including the proposed project) by
the year 1995.1 The San Joaquin Planning Department has either approved or is currently
considering subdivision maps for 616 of those units.2
This cumulative development including the proposed project could result in as many as
17,510 additional daily vehicle trips on local roads with an attendant Increase in an
pollution.
The final cumulative impact is the contribution the project will make to increased student
population on the already overcrowded Lodi Unified School District. This increase In
school-age children places a strain on the District's ability to provide classroom space,
particularly in light of the fiscal problems facing the District.
Currently developers in the Lodi area have been entering into agreements with the School
District to provide funding that will eventually help alleviate the school impacts.
1San Joaquin County General Plan, Land Use Element, April 13, 1976.
2Peggy Keranen, San Joaquin County Planning Department, telephone conversation,
March 9, 1994.
61
IX. GROWTII-INDUCING IMPACTS
The development of Woodlake North would introduce new urban uses to the northwest
corner of Lodi. These new uses may accelerate the rate at which the surrounding area's
commercially and industrially zoned properties are developed.
With regard to inducing the conversion of the Towne Ranch and other agricultural land,
often the introduction of urban uses adjacent to agricultural uses results in a rippling
effect, in which lands not subject to immediate development have gone idle or risen in
price beyond levels that agricultural profits can support. The introduction of conversion
may create uncertainty among farmers as to whether they will be able to continue to
operate in the future. This uncertainty is often manifested in postponement of capital
and equipment investments needed to continue farming in the long run.
This uncertainty about the future viability of agriculture has been labeled the "imperman-
ence syndrome."
With regard to the Woodlake North Project, two conflicting factors have a bearing on
whether further agricultural land will be converted to urban uses.
The Greenbelt Initiative, Measure A, which was designed to prevent the loss of
agricultural land, is the first factor. Since the Towne Ranch and some other agricultural
properties west of the project site are in the Greenbelt, a vote of the electorate would be
required prior to annexation by the City.
In November 1983, Sunwest II4, a residential project, went before the voters under this
"Greenbelt" process. The project was soundly defeated. If this is any !ndication of the
future, there may be. little or no growth within the City limits once existing projects are
62
s
IAC. Growth -Inducing Impacts
completed. Since most of the undeveloped land in the area of the proposed project Is not
in the City limits, the voters will ultimately determine whether any additional growth will
occur.
1
Despite the deterrent effect Measure A may have on futher conversions of agricultural
land, some of the property adjacent to the proposed project is, in fact, planned for
residential under the San Joaquin County General Plan, due to its proximity to the
community of Woodbridge. If such land were annexed to the Woodbridge Sanitation
District, which provides sewer services to Woodbridge, these areas could be developed
without annexation by the City of Lodi. Though the Woodbridge Sanitation District is
currently reluctant to annex agricultural land, such annexations could occur in the
future.2
1City of Lodi, Tandy- Johnson EIR, 1984.
2Peggy Keranen, San Joaquin County Planning Dept., telephone conversation, March 9,
1984.
R. ALTERNATIVES
A. NO -PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Under .his alternative the proposed project would not be approved by the City and
therefore would not be built. This would enable the IanJ to continue to be used for
agricultural purposes and would eliminate the other adverse impacts that might result
from the project.
While the alternative would eliminate the environmental impacts, it could have an adverse
effect on the provision of housing for current and future upper-income families in Lodi.
According to recent studies, most of the subdivisions recently proposed in Lodi will serve
lower- and moderate -income households with very few upper-income housing units.l
Table 11 shows a breakdown of proposed housing prices. Prices shown are estimates since
the units are not yet built and market and economic conditions may change the price.
Of the 230 units estimated to cost more than $120,000, only about 20 units are estimated
to sell for more than $150,000. Thus, the no -project alternative may interfere with the
City's ability to provide housing for upper-income. families.
As for the proposed multiple -family units, there are currently over 1,000 unbuilt multiple -
family units in subdivisions with either a final or tentative map. Over 600 of these units
are located in Lobaugh Meadows, although the final nucnber of units in Lobaugh Meadows
may be less. The remainder are scattered in a dozen or so projects of various sizes, and
range in price frim moderate to very expensive. Since this number includes both
apartment and condominium units, it is difficult to compare prices. It does appear,
however, that when these units are completed there will be units available at all price
ranges.
64
TABLE 11
PRICE ESTIMATES FOR FUTURE SUBDIVISIONS
Over $120,000
(Category A)
$85,000 - $119,999
(Category B)
Less than $85,000
(Category C)
Category A
No. Lots
Lobaugh Meadows
153
Lakeshore Village
9
No. 1,2,3,5,& 6
57
Rivergate-Mokelumne
16
Sunwest No. 3
2
Aaron Terrace
2
230
Category
Lodi Park West (portion)
175
Mokelumne Village
78
Lakeshore Village 3 & 4
10
Burlington Manor
2
Homestead Manor
3
268
Category C
Turner Road Estates
59
Beckman Ranch #5
55
Lakeshore Village No. 4
75
Lodi Parkwest (portion)
175
Burgandy Village
32
Pinewood
9
English Oaks #7
1
406
Source: City of Lodi, Tandy -Johnson EIR, 1984.
65
X. Altermatives
The 1,000+ units represent a 5+ year supply of multiple -family units based on a 10 -year
average of 180 units per year.2
Thus, the no -project alternative may not affect the supply of multiple -family units in the
near future.
B. ALL-RESIDENTIAI, ALTERNATIVE
Another alternative would be to develop the property in conformance with the existing
general plan designation of low density residential. This would permit both R-1 and R-2
zoning and would therefore eliminate the multiple -family and commercial portions of the
project. No general plan amendment would be necessary.
Under this alternative, there could be as many as 223 units if the entire site were
developed under R-2 zoning (the most dense single- farr,iiy residential vone).
Although this alternative would not require a general plan amendment, it would still
require rezoning from U -H to R-1 or R-2, o* a combination of the two.
Although the number of dwelling units is only slightly less than the proposed project (223
rather than 240), the elimination of commercial areas would result in fewer vehicle trips.
There would also be a slight decrease in the number of schoci-age children.
This alternative would not reduce the impact of the loss of agricultural land. Whether the
land is developed with all single-family lots or a mix of single-family, multiple -family and
commercial uses, the land will still be removed from agricultural use.
C. REDESIGNED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
A third alternative would be to design the subdivision so that the commercial and
multiple -family units were on the east side of the site rather than the west.
The primary advantage of this alternative would be to locate the most densely developed
areas as far as possible from the agricultural land to minimize trespass and nt,-.;;nce
problems.
66
X. Alternatives
Relocating the commercial development from the southwest corner of the site to the
southeast corner may also reduce the traffic flow on the new alignment of Lilac Road and
direct it instead to Lower Sacramento Road. On a localized basis, the intersection at the
southeast eo-ner would become a busier intersection with a possible need for earlier
signalization.
1City of Lodi, Tandy -Johnson EIR, 1984.
2Ibid.
67
XI. EIR AUTHORS AND PERSONS CONSULTED
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PLANNING CORPORATION
Principal -in -Charge
Project Manager
Proieet Team
George Nickelson
Rick Pollack
Douglas Svensson
George Burwasser
Kristie Postel
Don iNesn
Lisa Lefholz
Alexis Jetter
Michael Dunham
Gabriel Lasa
Damon Gay
B. PROJECT SPONSOR
Doug Donaldson
Ron Bass
Transportation Engineer
Senior Scientist
Planner/Economist
Geologist
Geographer/Historian
Planner
Graphics
Technical Editor
Publications Manager
Production
Word Processing
A. Bryce Carey, President
Carey Development
5405 North Pershing Avenue
Suite C-3
Stockton, California 95207
C. PERSONS CONSULTED
City of Lodi
David Morimoto
Assistant Planner, Community Development Department
Dan ,MacLeod
Chief, Fire Department
Linda Sunday
Administrative Assistant, Police Department
Richard Prima
Associate Engineer
Hans Hanson
Electrical Engineer
Other
Mamie Starr
Facilities Planner, Lodi Unified School District
Kirby D. McClellan
Soil Conservationist, Soil Conservation Service
David Vaccarezza
President, Sanitary City Disposal
Harry Marzolf
Sanitary City Disposal
68
KI. EIR Authors and Persons Consulted
Oscar Cox
Marketing Representative, PG&E
Nancy Deets
Design Engineer, Pacific Bell
Deanna Enright
General Manager, Lodi Cablevision
John Kono
California Department of Water Resources
Jim Gerard
Gerard and Gerard Realtors
Jim Yost
R. W. Siegfried & Associates
Peggy Keranen
San Joaquin County Planning Department
Henry Eilers
Former Owner, project site
John Ledbetter
Veno Farms
Tom Horton
Solid Waste Manager, SanJoaquin County Public Works
69
APPENDIX A
INITIAL STUDY
APPENDIX A
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To Be Completed By Lead Agency)
I. Background
I. Nome of Proponent CarPy DPVP1nnrnPnt Cn-pan z
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent
5405 tlorth Pershing Avenue, Suite C-3
Stockton, California 95207 (209) 478-9283
3. Date of Checklist Submitted
4. Agency Requiring Checklist City of Lodi
S. Name of Proposal, if applicable Woodlake North
11. Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.)
Yes M be No
I. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
o. Unstable earth conditions or in changes
in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction
or overcovering of the soil? X
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features? X
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical features? x
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soiis, either on or off the site? Y _
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or
erosion which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the oceon or
any bay, inlet or take?
309
Yes M be no
g.
Exposure of people or property to geolo-
gic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards?
2. Air.
Will the proposal result in:
a.
Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b.
The creation of objectionable odors?
c.
Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally?
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
o.
Changes in currents, or the course of di-
rection of water movements, in either
marine or fresh waters?
b.
Chonges in absorption rates, drainage pat-
terns, or the rate and ornount of surface
X
runoff? X
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in
any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration, of surface woter quality, in-
cluding lxA not Limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of groLnd waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or with-
drawols, or through interception of on
aquifer by cuts or excavations? _
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise avoiloble for public water
supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water re-
loted hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
• 310
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
_ X
X
X
Yes Maybe No
4.
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
13. Change in the diversity of species, or'
number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic
plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of plants? X_
c. Introduction of new species of plants into
on area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species? X
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop? _X_
S.
Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals? X
C. Introduction of new species of animals into
on area, or result in a burrier to the
migration or movement of animals? X_
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat? X
6.
Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in.existing noise levels? X
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
7.
Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce
new light or glare? X
8.
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub-
stantial alteration of the present or planned
land use of an area? X
9.
Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
r
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources? X
ir
311
::-sew
Yes May No
312
b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource? X
10.
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
o. A risk of on explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to,'oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of on occident or
upset conditions?
X
b. Possible interference with on emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
X
11.
Population. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate of the
human population of on area? X
12.
Housing. Will the proposal affect existing hous-
ing, or create a demand for additional housing? X
13.
Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
X
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
X
c. Substantial impact upon existing tronspor-
tation systems? X
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulo-
tion or movement of people and/or goods? X
e. Alterations to waterborne, roil or air
troff ic?
X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
14.
Public Services. Will the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the
X
following areas:
a. Fite protection?
X
b. Police protection?
X
C. Schools?
X
312
Yes Ma�►be Tb
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
X
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
X
f. Other governmental services?
X
IS.
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon exist-
ing sources of energy, or require the
development of new sources of energy?
X
16.
Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
X
b. Communications systems?
X
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
_X
e. Storm water drainage?
X
f. Solid waste and disposal?
X
17.
Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
_
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards?
X
18.
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the
obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to
the public, or will the proposal result in the
creation of on aesthetically offensive site open
to public view?
X
19.
Recreation. Will the proposal result in an
impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities?
X
20.
Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
X
historic archaeological site?
313
Yes
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical
or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or
historic building, structure, or object?
c. Does the proposal have the potential to
cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values?
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious
or sacred uses within the potential impact
area?
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
o. 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 wild-
life population to drop below self sus-
taining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or an ima I community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or elimincte
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to
achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals? (A short-
term impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relative,y brief, definitive
period of time while long-term impacts
will endure well into the future.)
c. Does the project have impacts which ore
individually limited, but cumulatively con-
siderable? (A project may impact on two
or more separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small, but
where the effect of the total of those
impacts on the environment is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
111. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation
IV. Determination
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
314
May No
X
X
X
0
X
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case
because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet hove
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED_
I find the proposed project MAY hove a significant effect on the environ-
ment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ( I
February 27, 1984 Ron Bass, Environmental Impact Planning
ate Signature Corporation
For City of Lodi
(Note: This is only a suggested form. Public agencies are free to devise their own
fcrmot for initial studies.)
315
INTLAL STUDY
EXPLANATION OF ALL "YES" AND "MAYBE"
lb. Soil covering will be disrupted and compacted in order to develop the site
with housing, stores and roads.
Id. Prime agricultural soil will be covered with urban uses.
2a. The introduction of new urban land uses may increase traffic and thereby
increase mobile source air emissions.
3b. The urbanization of the site will increase the impervious surface area,
altering drainage patterns and increase the rate and amount of runoff.
3e. Storm drainage systems that empty into Lake Lodi will increase in flow.
3h. Change from agricultural to urban uses may alter water usage.
4a. The ability of the site to support continued crop growth will be eliminated.
4d. Urbanization of the site will result in a permanent loss of 32 acres of
agricultural land.
6a. Noise from more traffic and human activity may increase.
6b. Future residents of the project may be exposed to railroad noise and noise
from farm harvesting equipment.
7. Additional street lighting may be added to the project as well as lighting
from commercial parking lots.
8. The project will convert the site from its current agricultural use to
residential and commercial uses.
9b. The proposed project will cover prime agricultural soil, a nonrenewable
natural resource.
11. Additional urban growth will be introduced resulting in a corresponding
increase of population.
12. The project will add 80 additional single-family residences and approx-
imately 160 multiple -family units to the City of Lodi.
13a. New residential and commercial uses may introduce substantial traffic
increases in the project area, primarily from automobiles.
13b. Parking lots will be added for the multiple -family residences and the
commercial areas.
13c. In addition to increases in traffic, the relocation of Lilac Road will alter
traffic patterns in the area.
13d.
See 13c.
13f.
The increase in traffic resulting from the project will likely result In a
corresponding increase in the likelihood of traffic accidents.
14a,b,c.
Increased urbanization may result in new demands for fire protection,
police services and schools. All three of these issues will be addressed in
the E1R.
16a.
The electric line servicing the City of Lodi that crosses the project site
may have to be relocated.
16e.
The project may change the amount of water used on the site.
16d.
New sewer lines and a lift station may need to be insta_Med.
16e.
The project may increase runoff and will add to the flows in the City's
storm drainage systems.
16f.
The project may increase amounts of solid waste disposal handled by the
City.
17b.
The proximity of the proposed project to adjacent fields where agricultural
pesticides and herbicides are used may expose people to health risks.
20a,b.
The project may affect historic buildings surrounding the site although
none are located on the site itself.
21a.
The project will eliminate prime agricultural land from production.
21e.
Traffic, loss of agricultural land and overcrowding of the schools are
cumulative impacts on the City of Lodi.
APPENDIX B
WOODLAKE NORTH LUSO AGREEMENT
Lodi Unified School District
e,15 gest Lockcfo= .treet
Lodi, California 9�240
AGREEMENT
ff•• F�ELtttLc
This AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 26'r', day
of * �1c,_-, , 1981, by and between HENRY G. EILERS,
(hereinafter, "EILERS"), and LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT OF
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the State of
California, (hereinafter, "LODI UNIFIED").
W I T N E S S E T H:
The partici: hereto ar•knowledge and mutually agree that:
1. The purpose of this Agreement is to mitigate the ad-
verse environmental impacts upon Lodi Unified caused by any
future development of the hereinafter described real proF--rty.
2. In the event the said property is developed wholly
or partially into residential units, it will cause increased
enrollment in the District, compounding the current problems
faced by Lodi Unified in providing facilities for students.
3. Eilers desires to alleviate the impact upon Lodi
Unified of an anticipated increase in enrollment, if any.
4. The real property, the subject of this Agreement,
is more particularly described as:
That certain real property situate in the
County of San Joaquin, State of California,
described as follows:
The Southwest quarter of the Southeast Quarter
(SW 1/4 of SF 1/4) of Section Thirty-four
(34), Township Four (4) North, Range Six (6)
East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian.
EXCEPT such portion thereof conveyed by Grant
Deed dated June 1, 195:, to Woods School Dis-
trict of San Joaquin County, recorded June 6.
1955, in volume 1756, Page 421, Official Re-
cords of San Joaquin County, Document No.
23282.
5. Lodi Unified has no objection to a real estate pro-
ject, provided that Eilers, or his assignee, makes a reason-
able and appropriate contribution to mitigate the impact that
-1-
A
the project may have on Lodi Unified, assuming the project
contains residential units.
6. Eilers, or his assignee, shall make such reasonable
and appropriate contribution by:
(a) Depositing with Lodi Unified an amount equal to,
and in lieu of, any sums prescribed to be deposited for such a
residential development by Lodi City Ordinance number 1149,
Chapter 19A of the Lodi City Code, commonly referred to as the
"School Facilities Dedication Ordinance."
(1) It is understood by the parties hereto that
the fee schedule, under the provisions of said Ordinance, is
set by the City Council periodically by resolution.
(2) The rate of fees ;?plicable to this Agree-
ment shall be the rate in effect on the date payment becomes
due under the terms of this Agreeme-t.
(3) in no event shall the fees exceed two per-
cent (28) of the actual construction cost of Eilers, or his
assignee.
(4) In the event that said Ordinance is de-
clared unconstitutional by any court of law having jurisdic-
tion over the City of Lodi, the applicable rate of fees shall
be the last rate set by the Lodi City Council prior to the
effective date of the court's ruling. Said declaration of
unconstitutionality shall have no force or effect upon Lodi
Unified's ability or right to collect the fees set by this
Agreement.
(5) Said fees shall tic: due and deposited with
Lodi Unified at such time. as Eilers, or his asignee, shall
be in a position to receive from the City of Lodi, residen-
tial building permits necessary for the construction of such
portion of the development as Eilers, or his assignee, is
then currently planning to develop.
(6) Upon receipt of the fees provided for by
this Agreement, Lodi Unified shall notify the City of Lodi
of its receipt thereof and request that Eilers, or his as-
signee, be exempt from any fee imposed upon the same resi-
dential units by Lodi City Ordinance number 1149, Chapter
19A of the Lodi City Code.
(7) In the event that the City of Lodi should
-2-
collect any fees under said Ordinance, upon residential units
for which Eilers, or his assignee, has already paid a fee un-
der this Agreement, Lodi Unified shall reimburse Eilers, or
his assignee, for any duplication of payment based upon the
same residential units, and in no event shall Lodi Unified
collect the fee both under the Ordinance and this Agreement.
7. In the event that school facilities are constructed
with proceeds from the sale of bonds and/or by levy of a
special override tax by Lodi Unified eliminating the student
housing shortage caused by said project prior to completion
of said project, Eilers, or his asignee, shall be released
from his obligation under this Agreement, and shall be re—
funded all unexpended moneys then on deposit with Lodi Uni-
fied.
8. There is currently a "County Task Force Dealing with
School Housing Shortage" which is working to find a solution
to the aforementioned shortage of facilities for students in
the Lodi Unified School District. In order that this Agree-
ment will not hinder the efforts of said Task Force, in the
event that the "Task Force" should conclude that a fee is an
appropriate vehicle to remedy the aforementioned shortage of
facilities, and the City Council of Lodi should approve of,
and assess such a fee within six months of the execution of
this Agreement, Eilers, or his assignee, shall abide by said
fee and Ordinance, and this Agreement shall become null and
void and of no further effect.
9. in the event Eilers, or his assignee, should breach
any term of this Agreement, Lodi Unified reserves the right
to notify the City of said breach and request that the City
withdraw its approval of the residential portion of any pro-
ject and refrain from issuing any further approvals until
Eilers, or his assignee, agrees to remedy the breach or
otherwise mitigate the impact of the r.r,:•ject on Lodi Unif ied's
overcrowded classroom conditions. Lodi Unified's reserved
right under this paragraph shall be in addition to, and shall
in no way preclude, its right to pursue other lawful remedies
for breach of this Agreement.
10. So long as Eilers, or his assignee, performs under
the terms of this Agreement, Lodi Unified will not oppose
efforts to gain approval from any public agencv or entity
of any aspect of a future devel.onment. a will
spe�se af►d peleked
�Att,
11. Lodi Unified may record a copy of this Agreement
in the Official Records of San Joaquin County. From and
MIM
A. iS ij ti t :J
t7�
after the date of such recording, the obligation to pay any
fee under this Agreement shall constitute a lien on the
title to each residential unit contained in any final de—
velopment, until such time as the lien is extinguished by
payment of the appropriate fee. Lodi Unified shall execute
appropriate releases for each residential unit upon receipt
of fees pursuant to this Agreement. 6
12. In the event any, portion of the Agreement shall be
found or declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, the remaining terms and conditions hereof not ex-
pressly declared invalid shall remain in full force and ef-
fect. A legislative or judicial amendment or declaration
altering or eliminating the authority corfnrre�3 ,,pon the
City of Lodi. b,,- t. e prn.visior.s of Government Co3e Section
65970, et seq., or otherwise declaring the School Facilities
Dedication Ordinance to be invalid shall not affect the
rights and obligations created by this Agreement, except as
specifically provided hereinbefore.
13. In tre event that either party to this Agreement re-
sorts to litigation to enforce the terms and conditions
hereof, or to seek declaratory relief, or to collect damages
for breach hereof, the prevailing party in such litigation
shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees.
14. All notices and payments to be given or made under
this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered
either personally or by first-class U.S. mail, postage pre-
paid to the following persons at the locations specified:
FOR THE DISTRICT
Director of Facilities & Planning
Lodi Unified School District
815 West Lockeford Street
Lodi, California 95240
FOR EILERS, OR HIS ASSIGNEE
Henry G. Eilers
c/o Litts, Mullen, Perovich, Sullivan & Newton
Attorneys at Law
P. O. Box 517
Lodi, California 95241
15. TERM. This Agreement shall be effective the date
first above written and shall terminate upon completion of
the construction of the final residential unit, if any, in
the project, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.
-4-
16. MODIFICATION. This Agreement contains each and
every term and condition agreed to by the parties and may
not be amended except by mutual written agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into
this Agreement the day and year first written above.
H my G. Eilers
-Iierei';taNOv? Called "EILERS"-
LOCI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT OF
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, a Political
Subdivision of the State of
California,
/Z By a lily
Planner
By Superintendf
-H a nabov al ed "LODI UNIFIED"-
-5-
.L
;2.'
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
( SS.
COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN)
8ie����s3
On this -307 day of --jAsove 1981, before nye,
the undersigned , a Notary Public in and for the County of
San Joaquin, State of California, residing therein, duly com-
missioned and sworn, personally appeared HENRY G. EILERS,
known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the
within instrument and ackn-,41edged to me that he executed
the same.
'.N WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set and and af-
fixed my official seal the day and year it i_ ertificate
first above written.
.-� OPF'IC SEAL •"e"U_f
C. PA 'YAJR
NO iV^tJ., • CA iI*O.iil".A
SAm JLAGLIK C011r+7'r
M► VJ.MltlY,y G" �iY! .�. 1%4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
( SS.
COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN)
NOTARYUBLIC
in nd for the State of Calif onia,
with principal office in the C my
of San Joaquin.
My Commission Expires: 9 T
On this %6711 day of 1(c.�L� 1981, before me,
the undersigned, -a -Notary Pub ;c in and for the County of
San Joaquin, State of California, residing therein, duly com-
m ssioned and sworn, personally appeared.[c.n;,�.�1 ; '',tet.;.., ,.jam
ti. r t' ;, L known to me to be the
,� of the entity described in and that
executed w
`the ithin n instrument, and also known to me to be
the personawho execu':ed the within instrument on behalf of
the entity therein named, and acknowledged to me that such
entity executed the within instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and af-
fixed my cfficial seal in the County of Sari Joaquin the day
and year in this Certificate first above written.
OFFICIAL S
BAf�BARA J. MINTON - NOTARY PUBLIC
a' Z A"PUel1C-CALWORMA in and for slid County and State.
r�u.•�,`.�9s. My Commission Expires: 03 8
am
BLFORZ THE BOARD OF .RUSTEES OF THE LOD: UVIFIED SM.— DISTRICT OF THE COUNTY
OF SAN JOAOUIN. STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION N0. Al -24
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF ACRZLXr--X: FOR ALLEVIATING THE E.mMoNMi's-TAL
TMFACT ON DISTRICT CAUSED BY 4E EILERS ANNEXATION.
UNEREAS. the Board of Trustees hes determined that the construction of
resiiencee on the Lilera property will exacerbate an existing student housing
shortage in the District; and
WHEREAS, the developer KEN-RY G. EILERS, desires to alleviate the housing
caused by thu yu:;s ib l e levo l a;,,ent ; ,an!
WHIMS. the District considers the said Agrtencnt to be in no way contrary
to the efforts of the "County Task Force Dea.lr.g With Scnool Housing Shortage
NOW, MREFOR-r, BE IT RZSOL';ED that the Board of Trustees hereby authorize
the SUMINTENDENT OF T7{E LODI UNIFIED SCF.00L DISTRICT, ELLERTH Z. LARSOM. to
execute on behalf of the District, that certain agreement. s copy of which is
attached hereto, upon the following tens and conditions;
1. Developer shall deposit with District an amount equal to and in lieu
of 4" sums prescribed for such residential development by the Lodi City
Ordinance No. 1149, Chapter 19A of the Lodi City Code.
2. District. shall, upon receipt of the sums, notify the City of Lodi
of its receipt thereof and shall request that Developer!)* exempt from the
requirement of Ordinance Not 1149, and be allowed to acquire building permits
in the project phase for which full payment has been made.
BE IT MRidER RLSOLVED rhat the Facility Planner :s hereby authorized to
notify the City of Lodi of the Agreement.
FASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June 1901. by the following
vote of the Board of Trustees, to wit;
AYES: ANN JOHNSTON. GEORGE ABRAHAMSON. JO" VATSULA, XOSE1tT SALL
MOESt LAUREL WISENOR. BON.411 MLY£z
ABSENT: HEXBERT 3UCX. JR.
110*rN VA4-.rULA. President
ATTEST:
LAUREL 11SE.K0R. 'Ierk of the Board
of Trustees of the Lodi Unified
School District
APPENDIX C
TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS
11
A -WEIGHTED SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL. IN DEDCIBLES
CIVIL DEFENSE SIREN (1001
JET TAKEOF (2C0')
RIVETING MACHINE
DIESEL BUS (1S')
BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT
TRAIN PASSBY (10')
PNEUMATIC DRILL (SO')
SF MUNI LIGHT RAIL VEHICLE (35')
FREIGHT CARS (100')
VACUUM CLEANER (10')
•
SPEECH (1')
AUTO TRAFFIC NEAR FREEWAY
LARGE TRANSFORMER (200')
AVERAGE RESIDENCE
SOFT WHISPER (S')
RUSTLING LEAVES
THRESHOLD OF HEARING
THRESHOLD OF PAIN
ROCK MUSIC BAND
PILEDRIVER (50')
AMBULANCE SIREN (100')
BOILER ROOM
PRINTING PRESS PLANT
GARBAGE DISPOSAL IN HOME (31
INSIDE SPORTS CAR (50 MPH)
DATA PROCESSING CENTER
DEPARTMENT STORE
PRIVATE BUSINESS OFFICE
LIC;HT TRAFFIC (100')
TYPICAL MINIMUM NIGHTTIME
LEVELS -RESIDENTIAL AREAS
RECORDING STUDIO
MOSQUITO (3')
(100') -DISTANCE IN FEET BETWEEN SOURCE AND LISTENER
TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS
MEASURED IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND INDUSTRY