HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - No. 2005-26RESOLUTION NO. 2005-26
A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL
FYW THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAI
WHEREAS, an application was filed by Browman Development Company for a
commercial shopping center at 2640 W. Kettleman Lane, more particularly described as
Assessor's Parcel numbers 058-030-08 and 058-030-02 and a portion of 058-030-09;
and
WHEREAS, d. a determination that
the project may have impact on the environment and ordered the preparation of an
Environmental
Impact .yM.p
WHEREAS, EIR was prepared and
Draft
distributed to reviewing agencies on April 14, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was released on
August 5, 2004, for circulation; and
WHEREAS,
r _ i. Planning Commission of the City of M dafter e 0 days
published notice, held. a study session and public hearing on September 9, 2004. Public
comments on the DEIR were taken at that hearing; and
WHEREAS, a Final EIR (FEIR) responding to all public comments on the DEIR
submitted prior to the expiration of the comment period was prepared and released to
the public and commenting agencies on
November 22, 2004;and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi, after ten (10) days
published notice, held a public hearing before said Commission on December 8, 2004;
•
PlanningWHEREAS, the t of r reviewed and
r the Final Environmental-•oprepared the project; d
WHEREAS, that certification has been appealed to the Lodi City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Lodi City Council has reviewed and considered the FOR
prepared for the project; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (C QA) requires that, in
connection with the approval of a project for which an EIR has been prepared which
identifies one or more significant effects, the decision-making agency make certain
findings regarding those effects.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED as follows-
]. The foregoing recitals are tree and -correct.
CEQA Findings Lodi Slopping Center ,SIR
t
2. THAT THE CITY COUNCIL finds that full and fair public hearings had been held on
the EIR and the City Council having considered all comments received thereon, and
determined that said EIR is adequate and complete; and said EIR is hereby
incorporated herein by reference.
& THAT THE CITY COUNCIL determines, in connection with the recommended
approval of the proposed Use Permit application for the Lodi Shopping Center, that
the FEIR for those actions has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the
Mate and local environmental guidelines and regulations, that it has independently
reviewed and analyzed the information contained therein, including the written
comments received during the EIR review period and the oral comments received at
the public hearings, and that the FEIR represents the independent judgment of the
04 of Lodi as Lead Agency for the project.
4. THAT THE CITY COUNCIL finds and recognizes that the FOR contains additions,
clarifications, modifications, and other information in its responses to comments on
the DEIR and also incorporates text changes to the EIR based on information
obtained from the City since the DER was issued. The City Council finds and
determines that such changes and additional information are not significant new
information as that term is defined under the provisions of CECT because such
changes and additional information do not indicate that any new significant
environmental impacts not already evaluated would result from the project and they
do not reflect any substantial increase in the severity of any environmental impact;
no feasible mitigation measures considerably different from those previously
analyzed in the ®EIR have been proposed that would lesson significant
environmental impacts of the project; and no feasible alternatives considerably
different from those analyzed in the DER have been proposed that would lessen the
significant environmental impacts of the project. Accordingly, the City Counpit finds
and determines that recirculation of the FOR for further public review and coM- ment
is not warranted.
5. THAT THE CITY COUNCIL makes the following findings with respect to the
significant effects on the environment resulting from the project, as identified in the
hereinbefore mentioned FEIR, with the stipulation that (i) all information in these
findings is intended as a summary of the full administrative record supporting the
FEIR, which full administrative record is available for review through the Director of
Community Development at his office in City Hall at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi,
95241, and (h) any mitigation measures and/or alternatives that were suggested by
the commentators on the DER and were not adopted as part of the FEIR are hereby
expressly rejected for the reasons stated in the responses to comments set forth in
the FEIR and elsewhere on the record.
MIRMIDOWRIJUEL41,
1, Impact: The project would convert approximately 40 acres of prime agricultural
land to urban uses. As stated in the City's General Plan, no mitigation is available
which would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level except an outright
prohibition of all development on prime agricultural lands. (Significant and
Unavoidable Impact)
2. Mitigation: No feasible mitigation is available.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
Finding: There are no feasible mitigation measures available that would reduce
or avoid the significant loss of agricultural land if the project is implemented.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make
mitigation of this impact infeasible. In particular, mitigation is infeasible because
it is not possible to re-create prime farmland on other lands that do not consist of
prime agricultural soils. This impact therefore remains significant and
unavoidable.
4. Facts In Support of Finding. The following facts indicate that the identifi
impact is significant and unavoidable. i
As discussed in the DER and FEIR, there are no feasible measures that would
reduce the impact of loss of prime agricultural land resulting from the project to a
less -than -significant level. The project's significant and unavoidable impacts to
agricultural resources could be avoided by denying the project or requiring a
reduced project, which would prevent the conversion of all or a portion of the site
to urban uses. However, this action would not meet the objective of the
applicant or the City of Lodi of developing the site for a commercial retail
shopping plaza in conformance with the General Plan and zoning designations
applicable to the site. In addition, denial of the project would not constitute a
"feasible mitigation," and therefore would not be required under Section 15126.4
of the state CEQA Guidelines.
Orn1fact'grarnut 'fdimr � dri-A C a SwifflifMieti,
emphasis on infill development, and its deliberate and considered approach -
urban expansion to accommodate housing and other long-term developme
needs. These guiding principles serve to minimize and forestall conversion
agricultural lands within the City's growth boundaries.
The General Plan policies related to agricultural preservation and protection are
intended, and have been successful, in maintaining the productivity of prime
agricultural land surrounding the City by controlling urban expansion in a manner
which has the least impact on prime agricultural lands. In addition to maintaining
compact and defined urban growth boundaries, this is primarily accomplished
through the City's Growth Management Plan for Residential Development, which
limits housing development to a growth rate of two percent per year, and which
gives priority to proposed residential developments with the least impact on
agricultural land, in accordance with General Plan policy.
The General Plan implementation program includes a directive to "Identify and
designate an agricultural and open space greenbelt around the urbanized area
of the City" (Land Use and Growth Management Implementation Program 10).
This buffer zone is intended to provide a well-defined edge to the urban area,
and to minimize conflicts at the urban -agricultural interface by providing a
transition zone separating urban from agricultural uses, and to remove
uncertainty for agricultural operations near the urban fringe. The implementation
of the greenbelt will involve the dedication of setback zones of varying widths
between the edge of development and adjacent agricultural land. The City of
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
Lodi has initiated the creation of the greenbelt through the Westside Facilities
Master Plan, which encompasses the largely undeveloped lands adjacent to the
northwest portion of the City and extends westward approximately one-half mile
west of Lower Sacramento Road. The designated greenbelt is located along the
western edge of the Master Plan area and varies in width from 200 feet to
approximately 350 feet. The greenbelt will perform an important function in
minimizing urban -agricultural conflicts and promote the preservation of prime
agricultural land west of the greenbelt; however, it will not constitute mitigation
for Joss of farmland since it cannot itself be farmed. In addition, the City is
continuing to study the implementation of a greenbelt area between Stockton
and Lodi, and is committed to the implementation of such a greenbelt.
It has been suggested that the purchase of conservation easements on, or fee
title to, agricultural land not on the project site, or the payment of in -lieu fees for
such purpose, be required as mitigation for loss of prime agricultural lands.
However, conservation easements or other techniques used to protect existing
agricultural lands do not create new equivalent agricultural lands which would
compen sate for the conversion of the subject lands to urban uses. In other
words, the easements apply to agricultural land that already physically exists, so
"preserving" such land from future conversion, which may or may not occur,
does nothing to compensate for the reduction in the overall supply of farmland.
Therefore, such easements do not provide true mitigation for the loss of a
particular parcel of agricultural land, and as such cannot be considered project -
specific mitigation for agricultural conversions due to a development project.
This is not to say that the preservation of prime farmland is not a laudable goal,
only that CEQA is not the proper mechanism for achieving this goal.
In summary, the City of Lodi makes an extensive effort to avoid the loss of prime
farmland through its careful planning of urban areas. Nevertheless, the City
recognizes that there is no feasible mitigation available to reduce this impact on
the project site to a less -than -significant level and, therefore, the impact remains
significant and unavoidable. These facts support the City's finding.
Statement of Overriding Considerations, The following is a summary of the
benefits that the City Council finds outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts
of the project, the full discussion of which can be found in the "Statement of
Overriding Considerations" at the end of this document. The project is expected
to provide substantial revenues for the City of Lodi General Fund through
increased sales tax and property tax, and will generate employment opportunities
for Lodi residents. The project will implement vital municipal infrastructure
improvements in the project vicinity, and impact fees paid by the project will help
fund public services throughout the City of Lodi. The project will implement
adopted City plans and policies by accomplishing the City of Lodi's long-term
development plans for commercial use at the project site, consistent with City's
growth controi measures prioritizing in -fill development within the existing city
boundaries, The project will reflect a high quality of design, through the on-site
implementation of the City's recently adopted Design Guidelines for Large
Commercial Establishments, which will be particularly important at this visually
prominent western gateway into the City.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIS
4
i, Impact: Strong ground shaking occurring on the site during a major earthquake
event could cause severe damage to project buildings and structures. (Significant
Impact)
2. Mitigation: Structural damage to buildings resulting from ground shaking shall be
minimized by following the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, and
implementing the recommendations of the project geotechnical engineer.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding. The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
All portions of the project will be designed and constructed in accordance with
the Uniform Building Code guidelines for Seismic Zone 3 to avoid or minimize
potential damage from seismic shaking at the site. Conformance with these
requirements will be ensured by the Building Division through its routine
inspection and permitting functions. These facts support the City's findings.
B. SEISMICALLY -INDUCED GROUND SETTLEMENTS
1. Impact: There is a potential for seismically -induced ground settlements at the site,
which could result in damage to project foundations and structures. (Significant
Impact)
2. Mitigation: If subsequent design -level geotechnical studies indicate unacceptable
levels of potential seismic settlement, available measures to reduce the effects of
such settlements would include replacement of near -surface soils with engineered
till, or supporting structures on quasi -rigid foundations, as recommended by the
project geotechnical engineer.
3. Flndlng: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4, Facts in Support of Finding. The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
As part of the mitigation for this impact, geotechnical investigations will be
completed prior to the approval of building permits for specific buildings, and
these buildings will be designed in conformance with the geotechnical report's
recommendations to reduce this potential hazard. Implementation of the
recommendations will be ensured by the Public Works Department and Building
Division through their routine inspection and permitting functions. These facts
support the City's findings,
CEQ.A Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
Impact, There is a potential for bank instability along the banks of the proposed
basin. (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: Design -level geotechnical studies shall investigate the potential of
bank instability at the proposed basin and recommend appropriate setbacks, it
warranted.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
As part of the mitigation for this impact, geotechnical investigations will be
completed along with the design -level improvement plans for the stormwater
basin, and the Public Works Director will ensure that the basin is be constructed
in conformance with the geotechnical report's recommendations to reduce this
potential hazard. These facts support the City's findings.
1AWL011-0001 M#1 4 1 110JAIll
1. Impact: Soils present on the site are subject to moisture -induced collapse, which
could result in damage to structures. (Significant Impact)
2. gation: The effects of soil consolidation and collapse can be gated by
placing shallow spread foundations on a uniform thickness of ad.
fill;
specific measures shall be specified by an engineering geologist, as appropriate, in
response to localized conditions.
3. Finding. The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts In Support of Finding, The following facts indicate that the identifif0
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
As part of the mitigation for this impact, geotechnical investigations will be
completed prior to the approval of building permits for specific buildings, and the
Public Works Department and Building Division will ensure that these buildings
are be designed in conformance with the geotechnical report's recommendations
to reduce this potential hazard. These facts support the City's finding.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
6
1. Impact: There is a low, but not necessarily insignificant, potential for soils
expansion at the site, which could result in differential subgrade movements and
cracking of foundations. (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: The potential damage from soils expansion would be reduced by
placement of non -expansive engineered fill below foundation stabs, or other
measures as recommended by the geotechnical engineer.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
As part of the mitigation for this impact, geotechnical investigations will be
completed prior to the approval of building permits for specific buildings, and the
Public Works Department and Building Division will ensure that these buildings
are be designed in conformance with the geotechnical report's recommendations
to reduce this potential hazard. These facts support the City's finding.
1. Impact. The corrosion potential of the on-site soils could result in damage to
buried utilities and foundation systems. (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: The potential damage from soil corrosivity can be mitigated by usirlr#
corrosion -resistant materials for buried utilities and systems; specific measur
shall be specified by an engineering geologist as appropriate in response
localized conditions. I
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4, Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identifi
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. i
As part of the mitigation for this impact, geotechnical investigations will be
completed prior to the City's approval specific buried utilities and foundation
systems for buildings, and these features will be designed in conformance with
the geotechnical report's recommendations to reduce this potential hazard.
These facts support the City's finding.
CEQA Findings
Lodi Shopping Center EIR
1, impact. During grading and construction, erosion of exposed soils and pollutants
from equipment may result in water quality impacts to downstream water bodies.
(Significant Impact)
2, Mitigation: A comprehensive erosion control and water pollution preventi
program shall be implemented during grading and construction. Typical measur
required by the City of Lodi to be implemented during the grading and constructi
phase include the following-, I
• Schedule earthwork to occur primarily during the dry season to prevent most
runoff erosion.
• Stabilize exposed soils by the end of October in any given year by revegetating
disturbed areas or applying hydromulch with tetra -foam or other adhesive
material,
• Convey runoff from areas of exposed soils to temporary siltation basins to
provide for settling of eroded sediments.
• Protect drainages and storm drain inlets from sedimentation with berms or
filtration barriers, such as filter fabric fences or rock bags or filter screens.
• Apply water to exposed soils and on-site dirt roads regularly during the dry
season to prevent wind erosion.
• Stabilize stockpiles of topsoil and fill material by watering daily, or by the use of
chemical agents.
• install gravel construction entrances to reduce tracking of sediment onto
adjoining streets.
• Sweep on-site paved surfaces and surrounding streets regularly with a wet
sweeper to collect sediment before it is washed into the storm drains or
channels.
• Store all construction equipment and material in designated areas away from
waterways and storm drain inlets. Surround construction staging areas with
earthen berms or dikes.
• Wash and maintain equipment and vehicles in a separate berried area, with
runoff directed to a lined retention basin.
• Collect construction waste daily and deposit in covered dumpsters.
• After construction is completed, clean all drainage culverts of accumulated
sediment and debris.
The project also is required to comply with NPDES permit requirements, file a
Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and prepare a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center 'Iii'
8
3. Finding- The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
The above mitigation measures are derived from Best Management Practices
(BMPs) recommended by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and are to
be included in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be
prepared and implemented by the project proponent in conformance with the
state's General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with
Construction Activity. In addition, the project grading plans will conform to the
drainage and erosion control standards of the City of Lodi, and will be
incorporated into the project Improvement Plans to be approved by the City.
implementation of the erosion control measures will be monitored and enforced
by City grading inspectors. These facts support the City's finding,
Impact: The project would generate urban nonpoint contaminants which may be
carried in stormwater runoff from paved surfaces to downstream water bodies.
(Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation. The project shall include stormwater controls to reduce nonpoint
source pollutant loads.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4, Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identifi
impact will be reduced to a less-than-signif icant level. i
In January 2003, the City adopted a Stormwater Management Plan {SMP) to
implement the provisions of its Phase 11 NPDES stormwater permit issued by the
State Water Resources Control Board. The SMP contains a comprehensive
program for the reduction of surface water pollution. The project includes
feasible structural BMPs (Best Management Practices) such as vegetated
swales and a stormwater basin. Much of the stormwater runoff generated in the
northern and southern portions of the site will be conveyed to vegetated swales
or bioswales which will provide partial filtering of pollutants and sediments. This
partially treated runoff, along with all other parking lot and roof runoff from the
project will be conveyed to the 3.65 -acre stormwater basin planned adjacent to
the southwest comer of the site. The basin would serve as a settling pond where
suspended sediments and urban pollutants would settle out prior to discharge of
the collected stormwater into the City's storm drain system, thereby reducing
potential surface water quality impacts to drainages and water bodies, The pump
intake for the basin will be located two feet above the bottom to provide for
accumulation of sediments which would be cleaned out on a regular basis.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center IR
9
Non-structural BMPs typically required by the City include the implementation of
regular maintenance activities (e.g., damp sweeping of paved areas; inspection
and cleaning of storm drain inlets; litter control) at the site to prevent soil, grease,
and litter from accumulating on the project site and contaminating surface runoff.
Stormwater catch basins will be required to be stenciled to discourage illegal
dumping. In the landscaped areas, chemicals and irrigation water will be
required to be applied at rates specified by the project landscape architect to
minimize potential for contaminated runoff. Additional BMPs, as identified from a
set of model practices developed by the state, may be required as appropriate at
the time of Improvement Plan approval. These facts support the City's finding.
1. Impact, The project would result in the loss of approximately 40 acres of foraging
habitat for three protected bird species, and could result in the loss of breading
habitat for two protected bird species. (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: In accordance with the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat
Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP) and City of Lodi requirements,
the project proponent will pay the applicable in -lieu mitigation fees to
compensate for loss of open space and habitat resulting from development of
the project site, and will ensure the completion of preconstruction surveys for
Swainson's hawks, burrowing owls, and California horned larks, as well as the
implementation of specified measures if any of these species are found on the
site.
3. Finding. The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4, Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
The in -lieu mitigation fees prescribed under the SJMSCP vary depending on the
location of the site, its designation under the SJMSCP, and annual adjustments.
The project site is covered by. two designations or pay zones under the SJMSCP.
The 20.5 -acre eastern portion of the shopping center site, is designated "Multi -
Purpose Open Space Lands," where in -lieu fees are currently $862 per acre
(2004). The 19.5 -acre western portion of the site, which includes the proposed
stormwater basin, is designated "Agricultural Habitat and Natural Lands," where in -
lieu fees are currently $1,724 per acre (2004), The compliance with the provisions
of the SJMSCP, along with the prescribed preconfstruction surveys and any
required follow-up measures prescribed at that time, would fully mitigate the small
reduction in foraging habitat resulting from development of the project site. These
facts support the City's finding.
Impact: The project could adversely affect any burrowing owls that May OCCUPY
the site prior to construction, and could also adversely affect any tree -nesting
raptor that may establish nests in trees along the project boundaries prior to
construction. (Significant Impact)
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
10
ON-UNN WE 099M MU'l-liumm
�Jdrawiv �"10111pmg-
int a is Ima 0 1r; 1 "ADUAMM UAF 9111ALS AIR M MIA L*-jl I IMM UP01 It
If ground disturbance is to occur during the breeding season (February 1 to
August 31), a qualified ornithologist shall conduct a pre -construction survey
for nesting raptors (including both tree- and ground -nesting raptors) on site
within 30 days of the onset of ground disturbance. These surveys will be
based on the accepted protocols (e.g., as for the burrowing owl) for the
target species. If a nesting raptor is detected, then the ornithologist will, in
consultation with OAF, determine an appropriate disturbance -free zone
(usually a minimum of 250 feet) around the tree that contains the nest or the
burrow in which the owl is nesting. The actual size of the buffer would
depend on species, topography, and type of construction activity that would
occur in the vicinity of the nest. The setback area must be temporarily
fenced, and construction equipment and workers shall not enter the enclosed
setback area until the conclusion of the breeding season. Once the raptor
abandons its nest and all young have fledged, construction can begin within
the boundaries of the buffer.
If ground disturbance is to occur during the non -breeding season (September
I to January 31), a qualified ornithologist will conduct pre -construction
surveys for burrowing owls only. (Pre -construction surveys during the non -
breeding season are not necessary for tree nesting raptors since these
species would be expected to abandon their nests voluntarily during
construction.) If burrowing owls are detected during the non -breeding
season, they can be passively relocated by placing one-way doors in the
burrows and leaving them in place for a minimum of three days. Once it has
been determined that owls have vacated the site, the burrows can be
collapsed and ground disturbance can proceed.
3. Finding- The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
While none of these species are currently on the project site, this mitigation
measure is included as a contingency to be implemented in the event nesting
occurs prior to construction. As specified in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program attached to this document, the Community Development
Director will ensure that the pre -construction surveys are undertaken and that a
report of the survey findings is submitted to the City prior to the approval of the
project Improvement Plans. If any of the species are found on-site during the
surveys, the Public Works Director will ensure that the required setback zones
are established. No grading or construction in the vicinity of the nests would be
permitted until the project biologist is satisfied that impacts to the species are
mitigated or avoided. Relocation of burrowing owls would be allowed to occur
only under the direction of the California Department of Fish and Game. These
facts support the City's finding.
CE,QA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
Impact; It is possible that previously undiscovered cultural materials may be
buried on the site which could be adversely affected by grading and construction
for the project. (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: Implementation of the following measures will mitigate any potential
impacts to cultural resources:
RONTilinin a 45-1077 raul'FU *T InO 11110 srlUlf *0fldliel U111 d -tXZd111J101PJ Allf,
archaeologist contacted for further review and recommendations. Potential
recommendations could include evaluation, collection, recordation, and
analysis of any significant cultural materials followed by a professional report.
In the event that fossils are exposed during site clearing, grading or
subsurface construction, work within a 25 -toot radius of the find shall be
halted and a qualified professional paleontologist contacted for further review
and recommendations. Potential recommendations could include evaluation,
collection, recordation, and analysis of any significant paleontological
materia)s followed by a professional report.
If human remains are discovered, the San Joaquin County Coroner shall be
notified. The Coroner would determine whether or not the remains are
Native American. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject
to his authority, he will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who
would identify a most likely descendant to make recommendation's to the
land owner for dealing with the human remains and any associated grave
goods, as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts In Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
While the detailed site reconnaissance by Basin Research Associates indicated
that there is no evidence to suggest that cultural resources may be buried on
site, the mitigation measure is a standard contingency that is applied in all but
the least archaeologically sensitive areas. In the unlikely event artifacts are
encountered during grading or excavation, the Public Works Director will enforce
any required work stoppages, and the Community Development Director will
contact the project archaeologist and will ensure that the archaeologist's
recommendations are implemented. These facts support the City's finding,
A. NEAR TERM PLUS PROJECT UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
OPERATIONS
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Cenier EIR
12
1. lmpact: The addition of project -generated traffic would exacerbate LOS F
operations at the intersection of Lower Sacramento Road J Harney Lane during
both a.m. and p.m. peak hour conditions. (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: The project shall contribute its fair share cost to the installation of a
traffic signal at Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identifil
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. I
The traffic report prepared by Fehr & Peers Associates calculated that with the
above mitigation in place, the level of service at the affected intersection would
rise to Level of Service C and thus meet the service standards of the City of
Lodi. These facts support the City's finding.
B. CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT ACCESS CONDITIONS AT SIGNALIZE1
ACCESS DRIVE PROPOSED ALONG LOWER SACRAMENTO ROA
FRONTAGE
L Impact-, During the p.m. peak hour, the eastbound left -turn queue length of 250
feet (average queue) to 375 feet (95'h Percentile queue) of exiting vehicles would
extend west to the internal intersection located south of Pad 10. (Significant
Impact)
2. Mitigation: Modify the project site plan to provide dual eastbound left -turn
movements out of the project site onto northbound Lower Sacramento Road,
consisting of a 150 -foot left -turn pocket and a full travel lane back to the internal
project site intersection. In the eastbound direction, a left -turn pocket and a full
travel lane back to the signalized intersection will provide adequate capacity for
inbound traffic. In addition, STOP signs shall be installed on all approaches at
the on-site intersections adjacent to Pads 10 and 11, except the westbound
approaches to provide continuous traffic flow into the project site and eliminate
the potential for backups onto Lower Sacramento Road. On the Food 4 Less
approach, a I 00 -foot left -turn pocket will be provided at the signalized
intersection.
3, Finding: The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
The traffic report prepared by Fehr & Peers Associates indicates that with the
above mitigations in place, the potential for traffic conflicts at this intersection
would be eliminated. These facts support the City's finding.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
13
C. CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT ACCESS CONDITIONS AT ANORTHERI
UNSIGNLIZED ACCESS DRIVE PROPOSED ALONG LOWE
SACRAMENTO ROAD
Impact: The addition of a northbound left -turn lane under Access Alternative B
would result in Level of Service F conditions at this unsignalized intersection.
(This condition does not occur under Access Alternative A where no northbound
left -turn movement would occur.) In addition, a non-standard 60400t back-to-
back taper is provided between the northbound left -turn lane (Alternative B) at
the northern unsignalized access drive and the southbound left -turn lane at the
signalized project entrance. (Significant Impact)
a. Extend a third southbound travel lane on Lower Sacramento Road from
its current planned terminus at the signalized project driveway to the
southern boundary of the project site;
b. Construct a I 00 -foot southbound right -turn lane at the signalized project
driveway;
c. Extend the southbound left -turn pocket by 100 feet;
d. Extend the taper from 60 feet to a City standard 120 -foot taper;
a. Eliminate the northbound Jett -tum lane into the northern driveway,
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
The traffic report prepared by Fehr & Peers Associates indicates that with the
above mitigations in place, the potential for traffic conflicts at this intersection
would be eliminated. These facts support the City's finding.
111� i 1�110 �0;1
1. Impact: On Westgate Drive, a non -City standard 64 -foot back-to-back taper is
proposed between the northbound left -turn lane at W. Kettleman Lane and the
southbound left -turn lane at the northern project driveway. (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: The project site plan shall be modified to move the north project
driveway on Westgate Drive south by 25 feet in order to accommodate the
required 90 -foot taper length.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding. The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
The traffic report prepared by
above mitigation in place,
inadequate queuing capacity
facts support the City's finding,
Fehr & Peers Associates
the potential for traffic
on Westgate Drive would
indicates that with the
conflicts arising from
be eliminated. These
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
14
1. Impact: On Lower Sacramento Road, a non -City standard 70 -foot back-to-back
taper is proposed between the dual northbound left -turn lanes at W. Kettlernan
Lane and the southbound left -turn lane at the middle Food 4 Less Driveway,
(Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: The project site plan shall be modified to extend the northbound lefm
turn pocket to 250 feet, and to extend the taper from 70 feet to a City standa
120 -foot taper. i
3. Finding: The above feasibJe mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less-than-signif [cant level.
While the traffic report by Fehr & Peers indicated that mitigation for this impact
would need to be achieved through closure of the southbound left -turn lane at
the middle Food 4 Less Driveway, the applicant instead proposes to provide
additional roadway right-of-way along the project frontage on Lower Sacramento
Road to accommodate side-by-side left -turn lanes (instead of the back-to-back
turn pockets as originally proposed). This would allow the mitigation to be
implemented as specified while also maintaining the existing southbound left
turn. Fehr & Peers Associates has reviewed the proposed roadway
configuration and concurs that it would serve as adequate mitigation for the
deficiencies noted in the EIR traffic impact report. Therefore, Fehr & Peers
Associates concludes that with the above mitigation in place, the potential for
traffic conflicts at this intersection would be eliminated. These facts support the
City's finding.
0 M11 � � g gn g M
Impact: Development of the project would create a demand for increased public
transit service above that which is currently provided or planned, (Significam
Impact)
Z. M1119abon. The project applicant shall work with and provide fair share funding
to the City of Lodi Grapeline Service and the San Joaquin Regional Transit
District to expand transit service to the project.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts In Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
The traffic report prepared by Fehr & Peers Associates indicates that with the
above mitigation in place, the additional demand for transit service generated by
the project would not exceed the capacity of the transit system. These facts
support the City's finding.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
15
ME'l
1. Impact-, Development of the project would create an unmet demand for public
transit service which would not be met by the single transit stop proposed for the
northwest portion of the project. (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation. Modify the project site plan to: 1) provide a bus bay and passenger
shelter at the proposed transit stop; and 2) include a second transit stop and
passenger shelter in the eastern portion of the project near Lower Sacramento
Road.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The followinsr. cate that the identifi--9
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. I
The traffic report prepared by Fehr & Peers Associates indicates that with the
above mitigations in place, the transit service to the site would be adequate to
meet ridership demand and would be provided in a manner which is convenient
to transit riders, and which avoids traffic and circulation conflicts or congestion.
These facts support the City's finding.
impact: Development of the project would create an unmet demand for
pedestrian facilities along West Kettlernan Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and
Westgate Drive, and internally between the different areas of the project site.
(Significant Impact)
3, Finding: The above feasible mitigation measure, which has been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding. The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
The traffic report prepared by Fehr & Peers Associates indicates that with the
above mitigations in place, the pedestrian facilities provided in the project would
be adequate to meet demand and provide for safe pedestrian movement
throughout the project. These facts support the City's finding.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
1,6
Impact: Noise generated by activity associated with the project would elevate off-
site
ff-site noise levels at existing and future residences in the vicinity. (Significant
Impact)
2. Mitigation: The following noise mitigations are identified as appropriate for the
various types of project activities, to reduce project noise at both existing and
planned future adjacent development:
Bp2f�tMe�chani�calE�uime�nt. To ensure that the potential noise impact of
mechanical equipment is reduced to less -than -significant levels, the applicant shall
submit engineering and acoustical specifications for project mechanical equipment,
for review prior to issuance of building permits for each retail building,
demonstrating that the equipment design (types, location, enclosure
specifications), combined with any parapets and/or screen walls, will not result in
noise levels exceeding 45 dBA (L,, -hour) for any residential yards.
To assure compliance with the City of Lodi Noise
Regulations regarding occasional excessive noise, leaf blowing in the southeast
comer of the project site shall be limited to operating during the hours of 7:00 a.m.
to 10:00 P.M.
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact is significant and unavoidable.
The City of Lodi Building Official will require demonstration of compliance with
noise specifications for rooftop mechanical equipment in conjunction with each
individual building permit required for the project. The enforcement of the City
Noise Regulations with respect to leaf blower noise will be the responsibility of
the Community Development Director, who may enforce the noise restrictions
with or without a citizen complaint from a nearby resident. These facts support
the City's finding.
F,
�* �-� Z N11111111011TH
i. impact: Occasional pumping of water from the stormwater basin would generate
noise at the planned future residential areas to the south and west of the basin.
(Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: The following measures shall be implemented to mitigate potential
noise generated by the stormwater basin pump:
1 ) The pump shall be located as far as is feasible from the nearest future planned
residential development. In addition, the pump facility shall be designed so that
noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA at the nearest residential property lines.
The pump may need to be enclosed to meet this noise level. Plans and
specifications for the pump facility shall be included in the Improvement
Plans for the project and reviewed for compliance with this noise criterion.
2) In order to avoid creating a noise nuisance during nighttime hours, pump
operations shall be restricted to the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., except under
emergency conditions (e.g., when the basin needs to be emptied immediately
to accommodate flows from an imminent storm).
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Cenier EIR
17
3. Finding: The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact is significant and unavoidable.
The City of Lodi Public Works Director will require demonstration of compliance
with noise specifications for the basin pump in conjunction with the Improvement
Plans for the project. The enforcement of the City Noise Regulations with
respect to the hours of pump operation will be the responsibility of the
Community Development Director, who may enforce the noise restrictions with or
without a citizen complaint from a nearby resident. These facts support the
City's finding.
1. Impact: Noise levels would be temporarily elevated during grading and
construction, (Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: Short-term construction noise impacts shall be reduced through
implementation of the following measures-
Qonstrgicqfi[oqn_Sch�eg. The applicant/contractor shall limit noise -
generating construction activities to daytime, weekday, (non -holiday) hours of
7:00 a.m. to 6:00 pm.
The applicant/contractor
shall properly muffle and maintain all construction equipment powered by
internal combustion engines.
!�! �inPr�oblfio�s. The applicanticontractor shall prohibit unnecessary idling
of internal combustion engines.
The applicant/contractor shall locate all
stationary noise -generating construction equipment such as air compressors
as far as practicable from existing nearby residences. Acoustically shield
such equipment as required to achieve continuous noise levels of 55 dBA or
lower at the property line.
Notification. The applicant/contractor shall notify neighbors located adjacent
to, and across the major roadways from, the project site of the construction
schedule in writing.
Noise Disturbance Coordinator. The applicant/contractor shall designate a
"noise disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to
any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator
would notify the City, determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g.,
starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and would institute reasonable measures
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center SIR
18
to correct the problem. Applicant/contractor shall conspicuously post a
telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site,
and include it in the notice sent to neighboring property owners regarding
construction schedule. All complaints and remedial actions shall be reported
to the City of Lodi by the noise disturbance coordinator.
3, Finding: The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding. The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
Each phase of grading and construction will be required to implement the above
noise control measures and other measures which may be required by the City
of Lodi. The construction noise control measures will be required to be included
as part of the General Notes on the project Improvement Plans, which must be
approved by the City Public Works Department prior to commencement of
grading. Although there are noise sensitive uses such as residential
neighborhoods in the vicinity of the project site, most existing dwellings would be
at least 200 feet away from the nearest grading and construction activity. This
distance separation from the noise sources and the effective implementation of
the above mitigation measures by the contractors, as monitored and enforced by
City Public Works Department and Building Division, would reduce the noise
levels from this temporary source to acceptable levels. These facts support the
City's finding.
11% WMIZ, &H UTION
Impact: Construction and grading for the project would generate dust aa*
exhaust emissions that could adversely affect local and regional air quality.
(Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: Dust control measures, in addition to those described in the FEIR,
shall be implemented to reduce PMI() emissions during grading and construction,
as required by the City of Lodi and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District (Air District).
3. Finding- The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated rporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a fess -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
Each phase of grading and construction will be required to implement the dust
control measures specified in the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
district's Regulation Vill, as well as additional practices itemized in the FEIR and
as otherwise required by the City of Lodi. The dust control measures will be
required to be included as part of the General Notes on the project Improvement
Plans, which must be approved by the City Public Works Department prior to
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIS
19
commencement of grading. The Public Works Department will monitor and
enforce the dust suppression requirements as part of their site inspection duties.
Violations of the requirements of Regulation Vill are also subject to enforcement
action by the Air District. Violations are indicated by the generation of visible
dust clouds and/or generation of complaints. These facts support the City's
finding.
Impact: Emissions from project -generated traffic would result in air pollutant
emissions affecting the entire air basin. (Significant Impact)
1 Mitigation: Project design measures shall be implemented to reduce project
area source emissions, and a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan
should be implemented to reduce project traffic and resulting air emissions,
including those measures described in the FEIR; however, these measures
would not reduce the impact to a less -than -significant level.
Finding: While the implementation of specified design measures and a TDM
plan in conjunction with the project would reduce the level of the air quality
impact, the impact would not be reduced to less -than -significant level.
Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact is significant and unavoidable.
Due to the large size of the project and the very low thresholds for significance
established by the Air District for the emission of Reactive Organic Gases,
Nitrogen Oxides, and fine Particulate Matter, the air quality report by Donald
Ballanti concluded that the project would exceed the significance thresholds
established for these pollutants. In addition, large commercial shopping centers
attract high volumes of personal vehicles, and transportation alternatives such as
public transit, carpooling, and bicycling have limited effectiveness in reducing
automobile traffic generated by this type of project. Thus, although the City will
require the implementation of selected Transportation Demand Management
measures, as appropriate, it is estimated by Donald Ballanti that such measures
would reduce project -generated traffic by no more than five percent. The small
reduction in associated emissions would not reduce overall regional air quality
impacts to less -than -significant levels. These facts support the City's finding.
5. Statement of Overriding Considerations: The following is a summary of the
benefits that the City Council has found to outweigh the significant unavoidable
impacts of the project, the full discussion of which can be found in the
"Statement of Overriding Considerations" at the end of this document. The
project is expected to provide substantial revenues for the City of Lodi General
Fund through increased sales tax and property tax, and will generate
employment opportunities for City residents. The project will implement vital
municipal infrastructure improvements in the project vicinity, and impact fees
paid by the project will help fund public services throughout the City of Lodi. The
project will implement adopted City plans and policies by accomplishing the City
of Lodi long-term development plans for commercial use at the project site. The
project will reflect a high quality of design, through the on-site implementation of
the City's recently adopted Design Guidelines for Large Commercial
Establishments, which will be particularly important at this visually prominent
western gateway into the City.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EER
20
ra�
U&M
i. Impact: The restaurant uses in the project could release cooking exhausts
which could result in noticeable odors beyond project boundaries. (Significant
Impact)
2, Mitigation: All restaurant uses within the project shall locate kitchen exhaust
vents in accordance with accepted engineering practice and shall install exhaust
filtration systems or other accepted methods of odor reduction.
3, Finding: The above feasible mitigation measures, which have been required in,
or incorporated into, the project, will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental impact described above to a less -than -significant level.
4. Facts in Support of Finding-, The following facts indicate that the identified
impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level.
While the nature and location of restaurants within the project has not been
determined, this mitigation requirement will ensure that cooking odors from any
on-site restaurants will not result in annoyance or nuisance conditions. The
Building Official will ensure that the required equipment is included on the plans,
and will ensure that the equipment is properly installed and functioning, These
facts support the City's finding.
1. Impact. The conversion of prime agricultural land at the project site., combined
with the agricultural conversion associated with other foreseeable projects in the
area, would result in a cumulatively substantial impact to agricultural resources.
(Significant Impact)
2. Mitigation: No feasible mitigation is available,
3. Finding: As with the project -specific agricultural impacts, there is no feasible
mitigation measure available that would reduce or avoid the significant
cumulative loss of agricultural land resulting from development of the proposed
project and other foreseeable projects in the area. Specific economic, legal,
social, technological or other considerations make mitigation of this impact
infeasible. In particular, mitigation is infeasible because it is not possible to re-
create prime farmland on other lands that do not consist of prime agricultural
soils. This impact therefore remains significant and unavoidable.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact is significant and unavoidable.
As discussed in the Draft Elly and Final EIR, there are no feasible measures that
would reduce the impact of loss of prime agricultural land to a less -than -
significant level. Although impacts to prime farmland cannot be feasibly
mitigated to less -than -significant levels, the City has in fact minimized and
substantially lessened the significant effects of development on prime
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
21
agricultural land through the policies of its adopted General Plan. A principal
purpose of the City's General Plan regulatory scheme is to minimize the impact
on prime agricultural land resulting from the City's urban expansion, The City of
Lodi is recognized for its compact growth pattern and clearly defined urban
boundaries, its emphasis on infill development, and its deliberate and considered
approach to urban expansion to accommodate housing and other long-term
development needs. These guiding principles serve to minimize and forestall
conversion of agricultural lands within the City's growth boundaries.
The General Plan policies related to agricultural preservation and protection are
intended, and have been successful, in maintaining the productivity of prime
agricultural land surrounding the City by controlling urban expansion in a manner
which has the least impact on prime agricultural lands. In addition to maintaining
compact and defined urban growth boundaries, this is primarily accomplished
through the City's Growth Management Plan for Residential Development, which
limits housing development to a growth rate of two percent per year, and which
gives priority to proposed residential developments with the least impact on
agricultural land, in accordance with General Plan policy.
The General Plan implementation program includes a directive to "identify and
designate an agricultural and open space greenbelt around the urbanized area
of the City" (Land Use and Growth Management Implementation Program 10).
This buffer zone is intended to provide a well-defined edge to the urban area,
and to minimize conflicts at the urban -agricultural interface by providing a
transition zone separating urban from agricultural uses, and to remove
uncertainty for agricultural operations near the urban fringe. The implementation
of the greenbelt will involve the dedication of setback zones of varying widths
between the edge of development and adjacent agricultural land. The City of
Lodi has initiated the creation of the greenbelt through the Westside Facilities
Master Plan, which encompasses the largely undeveloped lands adjacent to the
northwest portion of the City and extends westward approximately one-half mile
west of Lower Sacramento Road. The designated greenbelt is located along the
western edge of the Master Plan area and varies in width from 200 feet to
approximately 350 feet. The greenbelt will perform an important function in
minimizing urban -agricultural conflicts and promote the preservation of prime
agricultural land west of the greenbelt; however, it will not constitute mitigation
for loss of farmland since it cannot itself be farmed. In addition, the City is
continuing to study the implementation of a greenbelt area between Stockton
and Lodi, and is committed to the implementation of such a greenbelt.
It has been suggested that the purchase of conservation easements on, or fee
title to, agricultural land, or the payment of in -lieu tees for such purpose, be
required as mitigation for loss of prime agricultural lands. However, conservation
easements or other techniques used to protect existing agricultural lands do not
create new equivalent agricultural lands which would compensate for the
conversion of the subject lands to urban uses, In other words, the easements
apply to agricultural land that already physically exists, so "preserving" such land
from future conversion, which may or may not occur, does nothing to
compensate for the reduction in the overall supply of farmland. Therefore, such
easements do not provide true mitigation for the loss of a particular parcel of
agricultural land, and as such cannot be considered as mitigation for agricultural
conversions due to development projects. This is not to say that the
preservation of prime farmland is not a laudable goal, only that OEQA is not the
proper mechanism for achieving this goal.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
22
In summary, the City of Lodi makes an extensive effort to avoid the loss of prime
farmland through its careful planning of urban areas within its boundaries.
Nevertheless, the City recognizes that there is no feasible mitigation available to
reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level on a project -specific or
cumulative basis and, therefore, the impact remains cumulatively significant and
unavoidable. These facts support the City's finding.
5o Statement of Overriding Considerations: The following is a summary of the
benefits that the City Council has found to outweigh the significant unavoidable
impadts of the project, the full discussion of which can be found in the
"Statement of Overriding Considerations" at the end of this document. The
project is expected to provide substantial revenues for the City of Lodi General
Fund through increased sales tax and property tax, and will generate
employment opportunities for Lodi residents. The project will implement vital
municipal infrastructure improvements in the project vicinity, and impact fees
paid by the project will help fund public services throughout the City of Lodi.
The project gill implement adopted City plans and policies by accomplishing the
City of Lodi's long-term development plans for commercial use at the project
site, consistent with the City's growth control measures prioritizing in -fill
development within the existing City boundaries. The project will reflect a high
quality of design, through the on-site implementation of the City's recently
adopted Design Guidelines for Large Commercial Establishments, which will be
particularly important at this visually prominent western gateway into the City.
I. Impact: Emissions from project -generated traffic, combined with the emissions
of other foreseeable projects in the area, would result in air pollutant emissions
affecting the entire air basin. (Significant Cumulative Impact)
Mitigation, For the proposed project, design measures shall be implemented to
reduce project area source emissions, and a Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) plan should be implemented to reduce project traffic and
resulting air emissions. However, these measures would not reduce the impact
to a less -than -significant level, either on a project -specific basis or on a
cumulative basis.
Finding: While the implementation of specified design measures and a TDM
plan in conjunction with the project would reduce the level of the air quality
impact, the impact would not be reduced to less -than -significant level. This
impact would be exacerbated by emissions from other foreseeable projects in
the area. Therefore, the cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable.
4. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts indicate that the identified
impact is significant and unavoidable.
Due to the large size of the project and the very low thresholds for significance
established by the Air District for the emission of Reactive Organic Gases,
Nitrogen Oxides, and fine Particulate Matter, the air quality report by Donald
Ballanti concluded that the project would far exceed the significance thresholds
established for these pollutants. In addition, large commercial shopping centers
attract high volumes of personal vehicles, and transportation alternatives such as
public transit, carpooling, and bicycling have limited effectiveness in reducing
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center E IR
23
automobile traffic generated by this type of project. Thus, although the City will
require the implementation of selected Transportation Demand Management
measures, as appropriate, it is estimated by Donald Ballanti that such measures
would reduce project -generated traffic by no more than five percent. The small
reduction in associated emissions would not reduce overall regional air quality
impacts resulting from the proposed project to less -than -significant levels. Other
foreseeable projects in the area may be more suitable for the implementation of
TDM measures to reduce emissions on an individual project basis; however, the
cumulative impact would not be reduced to a less -than -significant level. These
facts support the City's finding.
5. Statement of Overriding Considerations. The following is a summary of the
benefits that the City Council has found to outweigh the significant unavoidable
impacts of the project, the full discussion of which can be found in the
"Statement of Overriding Considerations" at the end of this document. The
project is expected to provide substantial revenues for the City of Lodi General
Fund through increased sales tax and property tax, and will generate
employment opportunities for City residents, The project will implement vital
municipal infrastructure improvements in the project vicinity, and impact fees
paid by the project will help fund public services throughout the City of Lodi. The
project will implement adopted City plans and policies by accomplishing the City
of Lodi's long-term development plans for commercial use at the project site,
consistent with City's growth control measures prioritizing in -fill development
within the existing City boundaries. The project will reflect a high quality of
design, through the on-site implementation of the City's recently adopted Design
Guidelines for Large Commercial Establishments, which will be particularly
important at this visually prominent western gateway into the City.
Under CEQA, an EIR must describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to
the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the objectives of the project
but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and
evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Even if a project alternative will avoid
or substantially lessen any of the significant environmental effects of the project, the
decision -makers may reject the alternative if they determine that specific considerations
make the alternative infeasible. The findings with respect to the alternatives identified in
the Final EIR are described below.
I. NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
A. Description of the Alternative: The No Project alternative consists of not building
on the project site and possibly resuming agricultural cultivation of the property for
oats, hay, or row crops.
B. Comparison to the Project: The No Project alternative would avoid some of the
significant unmitigable effects of the proposed project, such as conversion of prime
farmland and regional air quality impacts. For all other areas of concern, the
differences in impacts between the No Project alternative and the proposed project
would not be significant because the project impacts could be reduced to less -than -
significant levels through feasible mitigation measures. On balance, the No Project
alternative would be superior to the proposed project because it would not result in the
significant unavoidable impacts to agricultural resources and air quality which are
associated with the proposed project, and because it would result in little or no impact
in the other impact categories.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
24
C. Finding. This alternative is hereby rejected for the reasons set forth below.
The substantial revenues for the City of Lodi General Fund through increased sales
tax and property tax that would be generated by the project would be lost, as would
the employment opportunities for City residents created by the project. The vital
municipal infrastructure improvements that would be constructed by the project
would be foregone, as would the impact fees paid by the project which would help
fund vital public services throughout the City of Lodi. Unlike the proposed project,
the No Project alternative would not implement adopted City plans and policies by
accomplishing the City of Lodi long-term development plans for commercial use at
the project site, consistent with City's growth control measures prioritizing in -fill
development within the existing City boundaries. The No Project alternative also
would not implement the high quality of design reflected in the proposed project for
this visually prominent western gateway into the City.
HISM014141240=4111
A. Description of the Alternative'. This alternative would consist of a substantially
reduced project site of approximately 24 acres, including about 22 gross acres for
retail development and 2 acres for the stormwater basin. This would represent
approximately 60 percent of the proposed project size of 40 acres. This alternative
would include the Wal-Mart Supercenter, as proposed, but would not include any of
the ancillary retail pads proposed in the project.
B. Comparison to the Project, The Reduced Project Size alternative would result in a
slight reduction in the levels of impact associated with the proposed project in several
topic areas, although these impacts would be mitigated to less -than -significant levels
under the proposed project. For the two significant and unavoidable impacts
associated with the proposed project — impacts to agricultural resources and regional
air quality — the Reduced Project Size alternative would lessen these impacts but
would not avoid them or reduce them to less -than -significant levels. Thus, although
the Reduced Project Size alternative would be slightly superior to the proposed project,
it would not achieve the CEQA objective of avoiding the significant impacts associated
with the project.
C. Finding. This alternative is hereby rejected for the reasons set forth below.
The revenues for the City of Lodi General Fund that would be generated by the
project would be substantially reduced, as would the number of employment
opportunities for City residents created by the project. This alternative would not
complete the vital municipal infrastructure improvements that would be constructed
by the project, and would substantially reduce the impact fees paid by the project to
help fund vital public services throughout the City of Lodi. This alternative would
lessen the City's ability to implement adopted City plans and policies for
accomplishing long-term development plans for commercial use at the project site.
This alternative would also compromise the City's ability to implement the high
quality of design reflected in the proposed project for this visually prominent western
gateway into the City.
A. Description of the Alternative: An alternative project site was identified in the
unincorporated area of San Joaquin County known as Flag City, consisting of
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
25
approximately 36 gross acres in the northeast quadrant of Highway 12 and Thornton
Road, just east of 1-5. To allow direct comparison, it was assumed that a 36 -acre
portion of the lands at this location would be developed with roughly the same land
use configuration and intensity as the proposed project.
B. Comparison to the Project., The impacts associated with development of the Flag
City site would be somewhat greater than for the proposed project site. Although the
impacts for many categories would be similar for both project locations, development
of the Flag City site would result in negative effects in terms of land use policy, and the
resulting potential for growth inducement, which would not occur with the proposed
project site. Traffic impacts would be greater for the Flag City site, as would impacts
to utilities and public services, although these impacts would be less than significant or
could be fully mitigated. More importantly, the alternative project site would result in
the same significant and unavoidable impacts to agricultural resources and air quality
as are associated with the proposed project. Therefore, the alternative site would not
lessen or avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts of the project.
C. Finding: This alternative is hereby rejected for the reasons set forth below.
The alternative project site is not environmentally superior to the proposed project site,
In addition, due to its location outside the City of Lodi., the alternative site would not
provide the benefits associated with the proposed project including increased
municipal revenues and impact fees for providing services, creation of employment
opportunities for City residents, construction of vital municipal infrastructure
improvements, and the opportunity to implement City goals and policies with respect to
the commercial development of the project site (consistent with City's growth control
measures prioritizing in -fill development within the existing City boundaries), and the
chance to provide a high quality development at the western gateway to the City.
Of the three project alternatives considered, only the No Project alternative would avoid or
substantially lessen the significant impacts of the project. The significant and unavoidable
impacts to agricultural resources and air quality associated with the proposed project
would both be avoided by the No Project alternative. Since all other project impacts are
either less than significant or can be reduced to less -than -significant levels through the
implementation of feasible mitigation measures, the No Project alternative would not offer
substantial reductions in impact levels under the other impact categories. Therefore, the
No Project alternative would represent the environmentally superior alternative to the
proposed project. The No Project alternative was not selected because it would not meet
the applicant's I objective of developing the site for shopping center uses; nor would it meet
the City's goals of enhancing its revenue base, creating jobs, providing vital municipal
infrastructure, and implementing the City's policy objective of developing the site with
commercial retail uses,
The CEQA Guidelines, at Section 15126,6(e)(2), require that it the environmentally
superior alternative is the No Project alternative, the FIR shall also identify an
environmentally superior alternative from among the other alternatives, The Reduced
Project Size alternative was found to result in the same significant and unavoidable
impacts to agricultural resources and air quality as the proposed project. However, it
would result in slightly lower levels of impact in several impact categories, although these
impacts would all be reduced to less -than -significant levels in conjunction with the
proposed project. Therefore, the Reduced Project Size alternative represents the
environmentally superior alternative. The Reduced Project Size alternative was not
CE..QA Findings Lodi Shopping Center 'IR
26
selected by the applicant because it would not fulfill the project objective of a 30 -acre
minimum project size needed for project feasibility. It also would be substantially less
effective than the proposed project in fulfilling the City's objective of enhancing its fiscal
resources through increased sales tax and property tax revenues, or in meeting the
objectives of creating new jobs, providing vital municipal infrastructure, and implementing
the City's policy objective of developing the proposed project site with commercial retail
uses.
In conclusion, there are no feasible environmentally superior alternatives to the project
(other than the No Project alternative) which would avoid or reduce the significant
impacts associated with the proposed project to less -than -significant levels.
Attached to this resolution and incorporated and adopted as part thereof, is the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Lodi Shopping Center. The
Program identifies the mitigation measures to be implemented in conjunction with the
project, and designates responsibility for the implementation and monitoring of the
mitigation measures, as well as the required timing of their implementation.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Sections
15091-15093, the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby adopts and makes the
following Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the remaining significant
and unavoidable impacts of the project and the anticipated economic, social and other
benefits of the project.
With respect .to the foregoing findings and in recognition of those facts which are
included in the record, the City Council has determined that the project would result in
significant unavoidable impacts to prime agricultural land and regional air quality. These
impacts cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level by feasible changes or
alterations to the project.
The City Council specifically adopts and makes this Statement of Overriding
Considerations that this project has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant
effects on the environment where feasible, and finds that the remaining significant,
unavoidable impacts of the project are acceptable in light of environmental, economic,
social or other considerations set forth herein because the benefits of the project
outweigh the significant and adverse effects of the project.
The City Council has considered the EIR, the public record of proceedings on the
proposed project and other written materials presented to the City, as well as oral and
written testimony received, and does hereby determine that implementation of the
project as specifically provided in the project documents would result in the following
substantial public benefits:
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
27
1. Erm iect Will Generate City Gales Tars. The sales generated by the Lodi Shopping
L99UKMAZt
Center will generate additional sales tax and property tax revenues for the City,
which would otherwise not be generated by the undeveloped site. These revenues
go to the City's General Fund which is the primary funding source for the
construction, operation and maintenance of a number of essential City services,
programs and facilities including fire and police services, recreation programs,
transit operations, library services, public infrastructure such as water and sanitary
sewer service, and administrative functions, among other things.
2. Ejoject -Creates Eml2loymeat Opportunities for City Residents. The Lodi Shopping
Center project will generate both temporary construction jobs as well as hundreds of
permanent full-time and part-time jobs. The vast majority of the permanent jobs will
not require special skills and therefore could be filled by existing local residents,
Thus, with the exception of a very few management positions which will likely be
filled by transferees from other localities, no specially -skilled workers would need to
be "imported" from outside the City. Consequently, it is expected that City residents
would benefit from added employment opportunities offered by the Lodi Shopping
Center.
3. Pr )'ect Will I Aement Vital. Munic . Dal Infrastructure lura roverraents. Through the
development of the project, a number of public infrastructure projects will be
constructed on the project site and the project vicinity. As described on page 15 of
the Draft FIR, the project will construct planned roadway improvements along the
portions of Lower Sacramento Road and State Route 12/Kettleman Lane that front
the project site, and as well as Westgate Drive to its full design width along the
western project boundary. This is an economic benefit of the project in that these
improvements would otherwise not be made without approval and implementation of
the project. The project will also be conditioned to pay impact fees to the City in
accordance with City's adopted Development Impact Fee program, which can be
applied toward municipal improvements such as water, sewer, storm drainage, and
streets, as well as police, fire, parks and recreation, and general City government.
These are vital municipal improvements necessary to the function of the City and the
quality of life for City residents, providing another economic benefit as well as social
benefit of the project.
4. tP[rgjgegt1 I
--Mlements Adopted City Plans. The project is situated within Lodi City
limits and has been planned for commercial development in the current City of Lodi
General Plan since its adoption in 1991. Therefore, the project implements adopted
City plans and policies by accomplishing the City of Lodi long-term development
plans for commercial use al the project site, consistent with City's growth control
measures prioritizing in -fill development within the existing City boundaries. In
addition, the project completes the development of the "Four Corners" area by
providing a large-scale retail center on the last remaining undeveloped site at the
Lower Sacramento Road/Kettleman Lane intersection consistent with the goals and
policies of City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
5. Creates _High _Qualitv De:.Sign at The Lodi Shopping
Center has been designed in conformance with the City's recently adopted Design
Standards for Large Retail Establishments which will ensure a consistent high quality
of design throughout the project site. This is a particularly important consideration
given the project's visually prominent location at the western gateway to the City,
and will effectively implement the General Plan goal and policies which call for the
establishment of identifiable, visually appealing, and memorable entrances along the
principal roads into the City.
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center EIR
28
The City Council has weighed the above economic and social benefits of the proposed
project against its unavoidable environmental risks and adverse environmental effects
identified in the EIR and has determined that those benefits outweigh the risks and
adverse environmental effects and, therefore, further determines that these risks and
adverse environmental effects are acceptable.
6. The Final Environmental Impact Report for the Lodi Shopping Center project was
certified by the Lodi Planning Commission pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act by adoption of their Resolution No. 04-64 on December 8, 2004- All
feasible mitigation measures for the project identified in the Environmental Impact
Report and accompanying studies are hereby incorporated into this resolution.
Dated: February 3, 2005
---------------- ----------------
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2005-26 was passed and adopted by the City
Council of the City of Lodi in a special meeting held February 3, 2005, by the following
vote:
111 11 Ill 1 Fi 111111
W'
2005-26
CEQA Findings Lodi Shopping Center Elly'
29