Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - No. 2006-209RESOLUTION NO. 2006-209 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILOFTHE CITY OF LODI CERTIFYING THE FINAL LODI ANNEXATION EIR (EIR-05-01), ADOPTING FINDINGSAND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE SOUTHWEST GATEWAY ANNEXATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public meeting, as required by law, to consider the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (EIR-05-01); and WHEREAS, the subject properties included in the evaluation are described as follows: APN OWNER ADDRESS 058-030-09 252 E. St. Route 12 Highway Carolyn Reichmuth 058-030-03 14509 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Rulten Ranch, LTD .058-030-04 14499 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-05 14433 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-06 14195 North Lower Sacramento Road Howard Investments, LLC 058-040-01 14101 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-02 13837 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-04 13637 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-05 13589 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-14 f No site address Joe Tamura Trust 058-230-04 13786 North Lower Sacramento Road Tsugio Kubota 058-140-13 14320 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-12 14500 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bili Peterson 058-140-14 14620 North Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 058-140-04 14752 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon Frame Trust 058-140-11 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grover Trust 058-140-06 800 East Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 058-140-07 844 East Olive Avenue Santiag2 and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-08 890 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 058-140-05 865 East Olive Avenue SanflM and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-09 908 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-10 930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F. Ani able et al. WHEREAS, on September 16, 2005, a Notice of Preparation was circulated notifying responsible agencies and interested parties that an EIR would be prepared, indicating the environmental topics that were anticipated to be addressed; and WHEREAS, a Draft EIR (File No. EIR-05-01) was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided there under; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion for the Draft EIR was published in the Lodi News Sentinel and was posted at City Hall on April 17,2006; and WHEREAS, the Notice of completion and copies of the Draft EIR were sent to Responsible Agencies and the State Office of Planning & Research (State Clearinghouse) on April 17,2006; and WHEREAS, a copy of the Draft EIR was kept on file for public review within the Community Development Department at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA, and the public library and posted on the City's website for a 45 -day comment period commencing on April 17, 2006 and ending on May 26,2006; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission received comments and testimony on the Draft EIR from the following individuals on May 10, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., at the Camegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA: • Rick Gerlack • Planning Commission Chairman Randy Heinitz • Planning Commissioner Doug Kuehne • Planning Commissioner Gina Moran • Planning Commissioner Bill Cummins WHEREAS. the City received nine comment letters in response to the {Notice of Completion from the following agencies/persons: • Departmentof California Highway Patrol • Department of Conservation • Department of Transportation • Pacific Gas and Electric Company • Public Utilities Commission • San Joaquin County Public Works • Governor's Office of Planning and Research • San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District • Robert G. Wilson May4,2006 May 26,2006 May 25,2006 May 26,2006 April 26, 2006 May 24,2006 May 26,2006 May 4,2006 May 23,2006 WHEREAS, a Response to Comments Document was prepared in accordance with CEQA, which responds to comments received on the Draft EIR included herein as Attachment A; and WHEREAS, individual responses to the comments received on the Craft EIR were mailed to each commenting agency ten days prior to the Planning Commission recommendation for City Council certif ication of the Final-EIR; and .xm rINdC,,.Md". -. •.. 2 WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared in accordancewith CEQA, which lists mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, identifies mitigation monitoring requirements; identifies the party responsible for carrying out the required actions and the approximate timeframe for the oversight agency; and identifies the party ultimately responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented is included herein as Attachment B; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission held public hearings on the recommendation to the City Council on the adequacy of the EIR on October 11, 2006 and October 25, 2006 and made the following recommendations to the City Council: 1. Mitigation Measure LU -1: To reduce agricultural/residential land use incompatibilities, the following shall be required: a. The applicant shall inform and notify prospective buyers in writing, prior to purchase, about existing and on-going agricultural activities in the immediate area in the form of a disclosure statement. The notifications shall disclose that the residence is located in an agricultural area subject to ground and aerial applications of chemical and early morning or nighttime farm operations, which may create noise, dust, et cetera. The language and format of such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to recordation of final map(s). Each disclosure statement shall be acknowledged with the signature of each prospective owner. Additionally, each prospective owner shall also be notified of the City of Lodi and the County of San Joaquin Right -to -Farm Ordinance. b. The conditions of approval for the tentative map(s) shall include requirements ensuring the approval of a suitable design and the installation of a landscaped open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls around the perimeter of the project site affected by the potential conflicts in land use to minimize conflicts between project residents, non-residential uses, and adjacent agricultural uses prior to occupancy of adjacent houses. c. Prior to recordation of the final maps) for homes adjacent to existing agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping, wall and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department. 2. Imcact LU -2: The proposed SW Gateway project would result in the conversion of approximately 241 acres of Prime Farmland to non-agricultural uses, and the Other Areas to be Annexed would result in conversion of 39 acres of Prime Farmland when and if developed. The Southwest Gateway project site is primarily used in agricultural production and is currently designated as Prime Farmland. Development of the proposed project would result in the conversion of Prime Farmland to non-agricultural uses. Additionally, when and if plans are proposed and approved for development within the Other Areas to be Annexed, the development may result in the conversion of prime farmland. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. This impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with implementation of the following mitigation measure, which would minimize the impact but not to a less -than - significant level: Mitigation Measure LU -2 Prior to issuance of a building permit after the first quarter of the building permits for the Southwest Gateway Project have been approved, or the approval of a parcel or tentative map that would result in the F"<EQA.,k.aQ.,. 3 conversion of prime farmland within the Other Areas to be Annexed, the applicant shall provide and undertake a phasing and financing plan (to be approved by the City Council) for one of the following mitigation measures: (1) Identifyacreage at a minimum ratio of 1:1 in kind (approximatelya total of 241 acres of Prime Farmland for the Southwest Gateway Project and 39 acres for the Other Areas to be Annexed) (currently not protectedor within an easement) to protect in perpetuity as an agricultural use in a location as determined appropriate by the City of Lodi in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust; or (2) With the City Council's approval, comply with the requirements of the County Agricultural Mitigation program, which is currently being developed, if it is adopted by the County prior to this mitigation measure being implemented (SU) qr (3) Comply with the requirements of Exhibit K to the Development Agreement. 3. M[floation Measure TRANS -1: Each of the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce the project's impact on the identified 15 intersections: 1a: Mitigation Measure AIR -2 identifies measures recommended by the San Joaquin ValleyAir Pollution Control District's "Guide forAssessing and MitigatingAir Quality Impactsto reduce vehicle trips and associated air quality impacts. Implementation of the same measures would also reduce associated traffic impacts. The following are considered to be feasible and effective in further reducing vehicle trip generation and resulting emissions from the project and shall be implemented to the extent feasible and desired by the City: • Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructure that includes: sidewalks and pedestrian paths, direct pedestrian connections, street trees to shade sidewalks, pedestrian safety designsAnfrastructure, street furniture and artwork, street lighting, and/or pedestrian signalization and signage. • Provide bicycle enhancing infrastructure that includes: bikeways/paths connecting to a bikeway system and secure bicycle parking. Provide transit enhancing infrastructure that includes: transit shelters, benches, etc., street lighting, route signs and displays, and/or busturnouts/bulbs. Provide park and ride lots. The implementation of an aggressive trip reduction program with the appropriate incentivesfor non-autotravel can reduce project impacts by approximately 10to 15 percent. Such a reduction would help minimizethe project's impact. 1 b: The implementation of each of the improvements listed in Table IV.13-6 would reduce the impacts to the identified 15 intersectionsto a less -than -significant level. To mitigate these impacts, the project applicant shall prepare a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.6-6 for both the Existing+ Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, how the improvement will be funded including a reimbursement program where appropriate; and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. The Plan may include an annual monitoring program of the intersections as a method for determining the schedule for implementing each improvement. The Plan shall take into account whether an maw f,w<uoA. ,s&"..o.n. 4 improvement is already programmed and/or funded in a City or County program (i.e., Lodi Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program, San Joaquin County Regional Transportation Impact Fee, Measure K (existing or renewal program), and San Joaquin Council of Governments Regional Transportation Improvement Program). U an improvement is included in one or more of these programs, the Plan needs to consider whether the program schedule for the improvement will meet the needs of the project and, if not, identify alternatives. The Plan shall be submitted to City staff for review and City Council approval prior to submittal of a Development Plan application. Implementation of Measure TRANS -la and TRANS -Ib would mitigate the project's impact on existing conditions to a less -than -significant level. However, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflict with some of the General Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally, some of the improvements identified are short-term solutions that the City may not choose to implement if a more significant long-term improvement is being planned i.e., reconstruction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 interchange). As a result, the project's impact at some intersections may be significant and unavoidable if the City chooses not to implementthe recommended mitigation measure. (Potentially SU). WHEREAS, adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, included herein as Attachment B, effectively makes the mitigations part of the Southwest Gateway project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED that the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final Lodi Annexation EIR and finds that with regards to the Southwest Gateway Project: 1. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA. 2. The Final EIR was presented to the City Council, the decision-making body of the lead agency, and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR prior to recommending adoption to the City Council. a The Final EIR representsthe independentjudgment of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVEDthat, based upon the evidence within the Draft and Final Lodi Annexation EiRS, staff report, public comments, and the project file, the City Council of the City of Lodi makes the CEQA Findings as described in Attachment A, adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations, included in Attachment A, and hereby certifies the EIR (EIR-05-01), all as they relate to the Southwest Gateway Project. BE IT FURTHER FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program included in Attachment B as it relates to the Southwest Gateway Project. Dated: November 15,2006 hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006-209 passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on November 15,2006, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS—Beckman, Hansen, Johnson, and Mounce NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS — None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS—Mayor Hitchcock 179- RANDIJOHL City Clerk 2006-209 rr" www am*"-ad.n..tawaw 6 ATTACHMENT A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION LODI ANNEXATION EIR FOR SOUTHWEST GATEWAY PROJECT CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code The Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) prepared by the City of Lodi (City) for ft Southwest(SV) Gateway Project, and Additional Areas to be Annexed (project) consists of the Draft BIR (Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report, April 2006) and Responses to Comments Document (Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report Response to Comments Document, July 2006). The Final EIR identifies significant environmental impacts that will result from implemen- tation of the project. However, the City finds that the inclusion of certain mitigation measures as part of project approval will reduce the majority of potentially significant impacts to less -than -significant levels. The impacts which are not reduced to less-than-significantlevels are identified and ovemdden due to specific considerations that are described below. As required by CEQA, the City, in adopting these CEQA Findings and Statement of Ovemding Considerations, also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project. The City finds that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is incorporated by reference and made a part of these findings included as Attachment A, meets the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the project. In accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City adopts these findings as part of the certification of the Final EIR for the projects. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 2 1082. 1 (c)(3), the City also finds that the Final EIR reflects the City's independentjudgment as the lead agency for the project. LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT Olr OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION................................................................................. ......... 1 SECTION2: TBE LODIANNEXATION AREAS 2 SECTION 3: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS -THAN - SIGNIFICANT LEVELS.................................................................................... 4 SECTION 4: SIGNIFICANTEFFECTS THAT MAY NOT BE MITIGATED TO A LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANTLEVEL.............................................................. 20 SECTION 5: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR NOTSIGNIFICANT......................................................................................... 25 SECTION 6: SIGNIFICANTCUMULATIVE EFFECTS 26 SECTION 7: FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ............................................ 29 SECTION 8: STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ................................ 32 Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Pmgran N; (Imam) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDIWGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING COWDFRATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 L 0 D I ANNEXATION EIR SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Statutory Requirements for Findings Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines states that: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out aprojectfor which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of theproject unless thepublic agency makes one or more written findingsfor each cf those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationalefor eachfinding. Thepossiblefindings are: (I) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, theproject which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibilityandjurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency maldng thefrnding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunitiesfor highly trained warkers,make infeasible the mitigation measures orproject alternatives identiled in tWiinal EIR. In short, CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures ar alternatives, where feasible, to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that will otherwise occur with implementation of the project. Project mitigation or alternatives are not required, however, where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with another agency.' For those significant effects that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significantlevel, the public agency is required to find that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, oT other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment? The CEQA Guidelines state in section 15093that: If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits afa propos[edl project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environ- mental effects a y be considered 'acceptable."' 12 Record of Proceedings For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings for the My's decision on the project consists of., a) matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to, federal, State and local laws and regulations; and b) the following documents which axe in the custody of the City: I CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091 (a), (b). 'Public Resources Code Section 21081(b). LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CRQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT O► QVERRIDINQ CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 1006 LCA] ANNEXATIC14 rIR. Notice of Preparation and other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the project (see Appendix A of the Draft EIR for the Notice of Preparation); The Public Review Draft EIR, dated April 2006; All written comments submitted by agencies and members of the public during the public comment period on the Draft EIR and responses to those comments (see Lodi Annexation EIR Response to Comments Document); The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment A); All findings, statements of overriding consideration, and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the project, and all documents cited c r referred therein; ■ All final reports, studies, memoranda, maps, correspondence, and all planning documents pre- pared by the City or the consultants, or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to: a) the City's compliance with CEQA,b) development of the project site; or c) the City's action on the project; and • All documents submitted to the City by agencies or members of the public in connection with development of the project. 1.3 Organization/Format of Findings Section 2 of these findings contains a summary description of the project, sets forth the objectives of the project, and provides related background information. Section 3 identifies the potentially significant effects of the project that were determined to be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. All numbered references identifying specific mitigation measures refer to numbered mitigation measures found in the Draft ER Section 4 identifies the significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level even though all feasible mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project. Section 5 identifies the project's potential environmental effects that were determined not to be significant, and do not require mitigation. Cumulative effects are discussed in Section 6. Section 7 discusses the feasibility of project alternatives and Section S includes the City's Statement of Overriding Considerations. These findings summarize the impacts and mitigation measures from the Draft EIR and Responses to Comments document. Full descriptions and analyses are contained in the original document. SECTION 2: THE LODI ANNEXATION AREAS The objectives for the SW Gateway project and the Other Areas to be Annexed, are listed be1m. 1. Southwest Gateway Project Develop a diversity of high quality housing types to meet housing needs within the City of Lodi. Provide affordable housing options within the City of Lodi. Provide park areas and recreational uses that help to meet park standards within the City of Lodi. ■ Develop a school site that would serve future residents of the proposed project as well as other M i residents. rrw I.w. (IVIMMM 2 qgn[ 000`[ :(saDe Cf, I) shun diisuap moj bSt, :oAgvu]aijE stgi aapun 4uauodmo3 gutmojjo; agi apntout p[nom ioafoad Agmaiso MS agZ a]3E Iad s;tunutjjamp aa]gi Jo �Citsuap s aAEq pjnom 'tiotixuiisap Aitsuap Hoof agi pus `a]3s tad 9itun 2utjjamp SZ;o kitsuap aft ME ug aA�q pjnom ivatudojanap Aitsuap q8n; a p iugi soutnne g3tgm'angBu taijs xSL1i �itsaaQ t1 tH pasBa rsaI aqZ • •ails 100439 $ apntaut jou pjnom aApsu]aije stgd, -ails komaiuo AAS aul uo sutseq lied/s)j]Ed jo sasou 0£ f,jai=txo]dde pun shun 189 3o iinoi s ut ijnsw pjnom st4y •aloE ssolS Iad shun aa]gi jo ads]ans uu anE4 pjnom alts lCsmaisrJ MS aqi iEgi sautnsss g3igm `aAtiguraW dirsuad paanpalf aqs .alis ioafoad atp oiut polmodtomi aq pjnom sa]u 3[]Ed autos PUB ]aivaa 01.iEnb 1 aq,j, •aAtiEu]ai[E SM "pun padojanap aq pjnom sjoogas ON •ails AumaiEo MS agi uo situp py;o TMDj E to ijnsaa p[nom 3na SaWB pj nd }tion jsuQq,ppv I mole pjnom gargm Palut;i8 aq pjnom snu0q �Citsu2p y -sant, OZ ]ad uun 1 jo Alsuap E iu Outsnog jEtiuoptsal aptAo]d pjnom put, `anat;aoa ptnoM 21!9 130101d 2g13o ]aiamga jEmijnat]g$ aril lur{i saumsse tj3m 'a�gsu raise iequapisag ireiniinaia V aqy • -alts 13ofo]d agi uo m33o pjnom ivaaido[anap ou pus `anuguoa pjnom airs ioafo]d aqi;o asn ju]nijnot]SE agy •pado[anap aq jou p[nom pus Cita aqi Aq paxauus oq iou pjnom 13ofo]d ICumaiso MS atti 92tunsse gotgM `aeggu taijn pjmg OX4-3arOld ON aq j, • :$ts/(jEUB IoJ pai3ajaS =tA saATiEuiaijE i3ofo]d 8utmojjo; oqi 4saurjaprnD voyd a p 3o 9.9ZISj uopoaS of iuEnsmd pus `saauan6asuo3 juivaumogAaa pmediarius pus saArioafgo iaafo]d oqi uQ pasug saAquu ra1jv £'Z •ivatuwAV iva ndojana(l oqi ggno]gi pa1E3011s aq RT^ situp ivama&Euuw tpmoa2 aqy •uotjumile stun ivauaagieuem gimo]2 pur auma]d `uotiuxauuu ion suotisatIddR paiittugns sEq itre3tjdde aqi `iia fOId pasodp]d agi ivatuajdtut 01• 'ami3tl tiSE4ut paiEjaI ptre joog3s famuotuaja uE `sl!va puE slied jo sa]ov 1£ `situp jEpuaptsa] 0£Z`i of do ;o ivauudo[aAap aispotztutoaas pjnoo gatgm `tpoZ 3o )4!D agi oiut ,iunoD utnbuol uES tuo g pus[ Jv sa]os LSZ xauus pjnom ioafo]d At;maiEo MS oqy •shun [1etiuoptsa] jsuogtppa S££ of do ut Supjnsai `amv ssoa Iad shun uanas Alawaitxo]dds jo f4tsuop E iE dojanap pjnom saivado]d saiV impo asatp iiegi saumssu std to si Xteus oqi 'satotjod ivatuatg 8utsnol4 girm ivaistsu0D •spuEjs"Ciuno:) 3o uotiEa]3 ptoAE of ko agi,(q paietitut gataq si ivauodtuo3 paxauuV oq of sEa]y ]atpo 2q.L •ioafoid k maiso MS aqi s2pn[3ut iaafo]d aqi jo uotitod So3 ausivauoduxo3 Axaulud omi sapnj3ut iaaCo]d pasodo]d aqZ uotiduasaQ;aafoid Z•Z uatiotpstmf s.i4t:) aqi utgitm sjaa]Ed asagi;o ivautdajanap IEtivaptsa] amitij aiui[jtou3 • •pusjsi 44unoa u jo uoiiva]a ptoAV •sp]Epavis o jdV-1 of iusn&md ivatudojaAap Ajaap]o amsug p4xauuV aq of sua V iagio •Z •uotivaiap IaiEm tu]ois ]oj Sj!:)vdu3 uisuq aiunbopE aptno]d • -airs i--,afoid aip jo gins iagimj satituaure uEuisapad puu jeuoiiaasoa] of si3aut1o3 iEgi alts ioafoid aqi uttp!AN „acids aj3Aajq� '4sapad a3Eds undo„ uu do[anaQ • 311F NOIILVXIINNY Moll 9042 V1ffW3A0N SNOIJLVISGISN0D aNlQlll>(3AQ dO LNZKXLVtg aNY SONIONIJ V037 'awl `SIZVIOOOSSV VS7 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA F1HDINGS AND STATEMENT O? OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 20! 6 LOA! ANNEXATION EIR density units (40 acres); one school site; and 30 acres of parks/park basins. Under this alternative, there would be no medium density residential units. A more detailed description of these alternatives, and required findings, ata. set forth in Section 7 Feasibility of Project Alternatives. SECTION 3: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS -THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS The Draft EM identified certain potentially significant effects that could result from the project. However, the City finds for each of the significant or potentially significant impacts identified in this section (Section 3) that based upon substantial evidence in the record, changes cr alterations have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantiallylessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR3 and, thus, that adoption of the mitigation measures set forth below will reduce these significant or potentially significant effects to less -than -significant levels. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures will effectively make the mitigation measures part of the project. 3.1 Land Use ImpactLU-1: The proposed project could result in a land use conflict with surrounding land uses, Mitigation Measure LU -1: To reduce agriculturallresidential land use incompatibilities, the following shall be required a. The applicant shall inform and notify prospective buyers in writing, prior to purchase, about existing and on-going agricultural activities in the immediate area in the form of a disclosure statement. The notifications shall disclose that the residence is located in an agricultural area subject to ground and aerial applications of chemical and early morning or nighttime farm operations which may create noise, dust, et cetera, The language and format of such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Departmentprior to recordation of final map(s). Each disclosure statement shall be recorded at the County Recorder's Office and acknowledged with the signature of each prospective owner. Additionally, each prospective owner shall also be notified of the City of Lodi and the County of San Joaquin Right -to -Farm Ordinances. b. The conditions of approval for the tentative map(s) shall include requirements ensuring the approval of a suitable design and the installation of a landscaped open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls around the perimeter of the project site affectedby the potential conflicts in land use to minimize conflicts between project residents, non-residential uses, and adjacent agricultural uses prior to occupancy of adjacent houses. c. prior to recordation of the final map(s) for homes adjacent to existing agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping, wall and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department. 3 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091 !1: ()UITAM) 4 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CZQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2486 LODI ANNEXATION BIR Findines for Irnyact LU -1: Mitigation Measure LU -1, which requires notification of pobmtial home buyers that they would be located adjacent to agriculturaluses, and incorporation of buffers into project design, will reduce the potential incompatibilitiesbetween the residential land use and adjacent agricultural uses. The mitigation measures presented in Mitigation Measure LU -1 are feasible and effective measures to reduce the potential land use conflicts. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure LU -1 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact LU -1 to a less -than -significant level. 32 Air Quality Impact AIR -1: Demolition and construction period activities could generate significant dust, exhaust, and organic emissions. Mitieation Measure AIR -la: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PMao Prohibitions of -the SJVAPCD, the following controls are required to be implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the project. • All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construc- tion purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover. • All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. • All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking. • With the demolition of buildings up to six stories in height, all exterior surfaces of the build- ing shall be wetted during demolition. • When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectivelywetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. • All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt fmn adja- cent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry mtny brushes is expressly prohi MW ghGcpt where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly f6r6iJJcn.) • Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of out. door storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficientwater or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. • Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday. • Any site with 150or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. V - sIU17Cl m 5 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDING$ AND STATEMENT Of OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 3006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR Additional Control Measures: Construction of the project requires the implementation of control measures set forth under Regulation VIE, The following additional control measures would further reduce construction emissions and should be implemented with the project: ■ Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; ■ Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than 1 percent; ■ Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site; Install wind breaks at windward side(s) of construction area; Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 20 mph (regardless of wind - speed, an owner/operator must comply with Regulation V 178 20 percent opacity limitation); Limit area excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time; Install baserock at entryways for all exiting trucks, and wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment in designated areas before leaving the site; and Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 20 mph. Miti7-ation Measure AIR -1b: The following construction equipment mitigation mtaslre9 are to be implemented at construction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions: ■ Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -fired equip- ment; • Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as recommended by the manu- facturer manuals, to control exhaust emissions; ■ Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduce emissions asso- ciated with idling emissions; Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment andlor the amount of equipment in use; and ■ Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing ofconstruction activity during the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways, and "Spare The Air Days" declared by the District. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce construction period air quality impacts to a less -than -significant level Findings for Impact AIR -1: Mitigation Measure AIR -1, which requires the implementation cf construction period dust -and exhaust -control measures, will substantially lessen theproject's short-termemissions of dust and exhaust. The short-term air quality measures listed in Mitigation Measure AIR -1 are feasible and are considered by air quality experts, including the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, to be effective measures in reducing the short-term air quality impacts of construction projects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure AIR -1 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact AIR -1 to a less -than -significant level. N: (1 V17aw" 6 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSMICRATIONS NOVEMBER 2004 LODI ANN&%ATION ESR 33 Noise Impact NOISE -1: On-site construction activities would potentially result in short-term noise impacts on adjacent residential uses. Mitigation Measure NOI-la: Construction activities would need authorization under City issu- ance of construction permits before any work could commence on-site. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to I000p.m, Monday through Sunday, consistentwith the City's Ordinance. Mitigation Measure NOI-lb All stationary noise generating construction equipment, such as air compressors and portable power generators, shall be located as far as practical from existing residences. By meeting the hours of construction timeframe and minimizing noise from stationary construction equipment, the project will not result in a substantial temporary orperiodic increase in ambient noise levels. Finainc for Impact NOISE -1: Mitigation Measures NOI-la and NOI-lb requires the implementation of measures to control construction noise and will substantially lessen the adverse construction-periodnoise of the project. These mitigations comprise noise -control actions that have been successfully used by the City of Lodi, as well as municipalities throughout the State to substantiallyreduce construction period noise levels. Similar measures are incorporated into the conditions of approval for development projects throughout California, and are easily monitored during the actual constructionperiod. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 9ectirn 15091(a)(] ), the City finds that Mitigation Measure NOI-la and NOI-lb will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact NOI-1 to a less-than-significantlevel. Cultural Resources Impact CULT -2: Ground disturbing activities at the SW Gateway project areas and Other Areas to be Annexed could adversely impact archaeological resources. Mitigation Measure CULT -2 Ifprehistoric cc historic archaeological materials are encountered during project activities, all work vnft 25 feet Of the dinonq shall be redirected and a quah- tied archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and make recommendations. It is recommended that adverse effects to such deposits be avoided by project activities. If such deposits cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing on the California Register (i.e., it shall be determined whether they qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA). If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided by adverse effects, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, thorough recording on Department of Parks and Recreation form 523 records (DPR 523) or data recovery excavation. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to FCB, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) § 15126.4(bj(3XC))• M, (IM110M) 7 LSA ASSOCIATQS. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF DYERAI DING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2904 LODI ANNEXATION EIA Findings for Impact CULT -2: Mitigation Measures CULT -2 requires construction activity, wig 25 feet of a prehistoric or historic archaeological materials find, to be diverted and a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the finds and make recommendations. Mitigation Measure CULT -2 will ensure that the resource remains intact until its significance is determined, and a plan is prepared for the protection of the resource, if necessary. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT -2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -2 to a less-than-significantlevel. Impact CULT -3: Future development projects at the Other Areas to be Annexed could adversely impact cultural resources. Mitigation Measure CULT -3: Prior to the implementation of any future discretionaryproject within the Other Areas to be Annexed, a cultural resources field survey shall be conducted. If cultural resources are identified in the additional annexation parcels, it is recommended that such resources be documented on the appropriate DPR 523 forms and that adverse effects to such resources be avoided by project activities. If impacts to cultural resources cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing in the California Register (i.e., it shall be determined whether they qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA). If the resource(s) is not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the resource(s) is eligible, adverse effects shall be avoided, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, Historic American Buildings Survey (IA -B S) documentation for built environment resources and data recovery excavation for archaeological sites. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) § I5I2G.4(b)(3XC)). Findines for Imuact CULT -3: Mitigation Measures CULT -3 requires evaluation of potential cultural resources in the Others Areas to be Annexed prior to future implementation of any discretionary projects within the area. Mitigation Measure CULT -3 will ensure that the resource remains intact until its significance is determined, and a plan is prepared for the protection of the resource, if necessary. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), ft City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT -3 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -3 to a less -than -significant level. Impact CULT- 4. Grounddisturhing activities associated with the project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Mitigation Measure CULT -4. If human remains are encountered, work Within 25 feet of the discovery will be redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an archaeologist will be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within W hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods, N:MOminYoriea tl1/1ma6) 8 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 7.006 LODI ANNEXATION $IR Upon completion of the assessment, the archaeologist shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results, and provide recommendations for the treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center. It is anticipated that implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT4 will reduce impacts to human remains to less -than -significant levels. Findings for Impact CULT 4 Mitigation Measure CULT -4 which requires the developer to adhere to existing law and professional standards regarding the treatment of human remains, will substantially lessen the potential effects of the project on human remains, including Native American remains. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT -4 will ensure that human remains are evaluated for their cultural and archaeological importance and are protected from additional disturbance. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT4 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -4 to a less-than-significantlevel. Impact CULT -5: Ground disturbing activities within the project area could adversely impact paleontological resources. Mitigation Measure CULT -5: If ground disturbing activity is anticipated below the project area soil layer, the initial ground disturbance below that depth in geologic units shall be monitored by a qualified paleontologist. Subsequent to monitoring this initial ground disturbance, the qualified paleontologist will make recommendations regarding further monitoring based on the initial findings. This can include, but is not limited to, continued monitoring, periodic reviews of ground disturbance below project area soil layers, or no further monitoring. Re -field monitoring preparation by a qualified paleontologist shall take into account specific details of project construction plans as well as information from available paleontological, geological, and geotechnical studies. Limited subsurface investigations may be appropriate for defining areas of paleontological sensitivity prior to ground disturbance. If paleontological resources are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until the paleontological monitor has evaluated the resources, prepared a fossil locality formdocumenting them, and made recommendations regarding their treatment If palCplltolofical rcmu 05 are identified, it is recommended that such resources be avoided by project activities. Paleontologicalmonitors must be empowered to halt constriction activities within 25 feet of the discovery to review the possible paleontological material and to protect the resource while it is being evaluated. If avoidance is not feasible, adverse effects to such resources shall be mitigated. Mitigation can include data recovery and analysis, preparation of a report and the accession of fossil material recovered to an accredited paleontological repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley (UCMP). Monitoring shall continue until, in the paleontologist's judgment, paleontological resources are no longer likely to be encountered. Upon project completion, a report shall be prepared docu- menting the methods and results of monitoring. Copies of this report shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi Planning Department, and to the repository where fossils are accessioned. N: (IVF7/J10{I 9 {,SA, ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION$ NOVEMBER 5906 LODI ANNEXATION LIR Finding for Imuact CULT -5: Mitigation Measure CULT -5, which setsprotocol for the identification and protection of unidentified paleontological resources, will avoid the project's adverse effects to paleontological resources. Requiring a qualified paleontological monitor be present during ground disturbing activities below the soil layer will ensure that adequate measures are taken to protect unidentified resources. Requiring construction to halt if paleontological resources are found will allow such resources to be analyzed and protected (if necessary) without additional disturbance. The presence of a paleontological resources monitor can be easily verified in the field by the City. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT -5 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -5 to a less -than -significant level. 2.4 Geology, Soils and Seismicity Impact GEO-1: Seismically -induced ground shaking at the project area could result in risk of loss of property, injury, or death. Mitization Measure GEO-la: Each project's conditions of approval shall require the project be designed according to the most recent CBC and UB C Seismic Zone 3 requirements, applicable local codes, and be in accordance with the generally accepted standard for geotechnical practice for seismic design in Northern California. Mitieation Measure GTEO-117: Prior to the approval of grading plans, the project applicant shall perform design -level geotechnical investigations and incorporate all recommendations into the project construction documents and grading plans. Findings for Imuact GFQ-1: Requiring the project to be designed in accordance with the applicable Uniform Building Code and all applicable local codes is feasible, and will minimize hazards associated with ground shaking within the project site. These measures are commonly imposed on development projects in California and are considered to minimize the effect of earthquakes on new structures. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures GEO-la and GEO-lb will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact GEO-1 to a less -than -significant level. Impact GEO-2: The project area contains soils that are moderately corrosive to buried metal objects. Mitieation Measure GEO-2 If the project includes buried metal components, a corrosionengi- neer shall be retained to design corrosion protection systems appropriate for the project sites to be approved by the Community Development Department. Findings for Imuact GEO-2: The incorporation of a corrosionprotection system into the proposed project will help ensure buried components of the proposed project are able to tolerate moderately corrosive soils at the project sites. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure GEO-2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact GEO-2 to a less-than-significantlevel. w a=nTruoc> 10 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC CEQA FINDJNGS AND STATEMENT O? OVERAIDIN'G C*N51DERATION$ NOVEMBER 2006 LCD) ANNEXATION E1R Impact GEO-3: The SW Gateway site contains undocumented fills which could potentially result in differential compaction. Mitigation M_casure GEO-3: Prior to issuance of a building permit for the SK Gateway site, the project applicant shall include the over -excavation and replacement of the undocumented fills in accordance with the earthwork, grading, filling and compaction recommendations of the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation of the Gateway Residential Development in Lodi, pre- formed by Lowney Associates, November 12, 2004. Findings for Impact GEO-3: The City finds that requiring the replacement of undocumented fill will minimize hazards associated with differential compaction at the. project site. The implementation this measure will mitigate the potential effects on the proposed buildings and site improvements. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures GEO-3 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact GEO-3 to a less -than -significant level. 2.5 Hydrology and Water Quality Impact HYD -1: Increased runoff volume resulting from creation of new impervious surfaces could potentially exceed the capacity of downstream storm water conveyance structures,resulting in localized ponding and flooding. Mitieation Measure HYD -I: Implementation of the following two-part mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts associated with increased peak runoff volumes to a less -than - significant level: la: Asa condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the projects, the Public Works department shall verify that the Master Utility Plan for the S W Gateway site will comply with the City's stormwater requirements. lh: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans for tlp— SW Gateway project and any subsequent development applications that maybe proposed for the Other Areas to be Annexed, a hydraulic analysis shall be provided to the Public Works Department for verification that implementation of the proposed drainage plans would comply with the City's storm water requirements. Findings for Impact HYD -1: The City finds that requiring COtPiiAWa Willi Stormatff requirements and a hydraulic analysis of the proposed project would help to ensure that new runoff from the site would not exceed the capacity of existing conveyance structures. The implementation this measure will mitigate the potential effects of new impervious surfaces. Pursuant to CEQA (sidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures HYD - 1 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HYD -1 to a less -than -significant level. Impact HYD -2: Construction activities could result in degradation of water quality of storm water runoff and ground water quality in the Project area. N:%A*r&kaarim tJlln w) i 1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 1006 LODI ANNEXATION RIR Mitigation Measure HYD -2: The project proponent for each developmentproject shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the construction period of the project. The SWPPP must be maintained on- site and made available to City inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs designed to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include practices to minimize the contact of constructionmaterials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhesives) with storm water. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas that keep these materials out of the rain. An important component of the storm water quality protection effort is the knowledge of the site supervisors and workers. To educate on-site personnel and maintain awareness of the importance of storm water quality protection, site supervisors shall conduct regular tailgate meetings to discuss pollution prevention. The frequency of the meetings and required personnel attendance list shall be specified in the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall specify a monitoring program to be implemented by the construction site supervisor, which must include both dry and wet weather inspections. In addition, in accordance with State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2001-046, monitoring would be required during the constructionperiod for pollutants that may be present in the runoff that arc "not visually detectable in runoff." RWQCB and/or City personnel, who may make unannounced site inspections, are empowered to levy considerable fines if it is determined that the SWPPP has not been properly prepared and implemented. BMPs designed to reduce erosion of exposed soil may include, but are not limited to: soil sta- bilization controls, watering for dust control, perimeter silt fences, placement of hay bales, and sediment basins. The potential for erosion is generally increased if grading is performed during the rainy season as disturbed soil can be exposed to rainfall and storm runoff. Y grading must be conducted during the rainy season, the primary BMPs selected shall focus on erosion control; that is, keeping sediment on the site. End -of -pipe sediment control measures (e.g., basins and traps) shall be used only as secondary measures. If hydroseeding is selected as the primary soil stabilization method, then these areas shall be seeded by September 1 and irrigated as necessary to ensure that adequate root development has occurred prior to October 1. Eby and egress from the construction site shall be carefully controlled to minimize off-site tracking of sediment. Vehicle and equipment wash -down facilities shall be designedtobe accessible and functional during both dry and wet conditions. The City Public Works Department shall review and approve the SWPPP and drainage plan prior to approval of the grading plan. City staff may require more stringent storm water treatment measures, at their discretion. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce the level of significance of this impact to a less -than -significant level. Finding for Impact HYD -2 Mitigation Measure HYD -2, which requires the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) with both construction and operation-periodBest Management Practices (BMPs), will substantially lessen the effects of the project on stormwater quality. A SWPPP is considered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to be an effective way to reduce the contamination of stormwater on a project N:u6melwrim g111"aw - 12 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA PINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2405 LODI ANNEXATION SiR site resulting from erosion and chemical contamination on impervious surfaces. The adequacy of the SWPPP (including associated BMPs) will be verified by the City prior to the initiation of grounddisturbing activities. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sectim 15091(a)(I), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HYD -2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HYD -2 to a less -than -significant level. Impact HYD -3: Dewatering may contain contaminants and if not properly managed could be detrimental to constructionworkers and the environment. Mitigation Measure HYD -3: Each SWPPP shall include provisions for the proper management of construction-perioddewatering. At minimum, all dewatering shall be containedprior to discharge to allow the sediment to settle out, and filtered, if necessary to ensure that only clear water is discharged to the storm or sanitary sewer system, as appropriate. In areas of suspected groundwater contamination (i.e., underlain by fill or near sites where chemical releases are known or suspected to have occurred), groundwater shall be analyzed by a State -certified laboratory for the suspected pollutants prior to discharge. Based on the results of the analytical testing, the pro- ject proponent shall acquire the appropriateperznit(s) from the RWQCB prior to the release of any dewatering discharge into the storm drainage system. Section N.I, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, includes a discussion of the Remediation Action Plan (RAP) and Health and Safety Plan (HSP) for the site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ 4a, HAZ-4B, HAZ-4c, HAZ-4d, and HAZ-4e would ensure the safety of construction workers from hazardous concentrations of contaminants from soil and groundwater. Proper implementation of the mitigation measure described above would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. Finding for Imuact HYD -3: Mitigation Measure HYD -3 requires that the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) include provisions for the proper management of construction -period dewatering. The adequacy of the SWPPP dewatering provisions will be verified by the City prior to the initiation of grounddisturbing activities. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(I), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HYD -3 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HYD -3 to a less -than -significant level. 2.6 Biological Resources Impact BIO -I: Implementation of the project could impact western burrowing owl if this species occupies the SW Gateway project site or Other Areas to be Annexed site prior to the start of construc- tion. Mitigation Measure BIO -1: Implementation of these measures will reduce impacts to western burrowing owl to a less than significant level. la: Prior to approval of grading plans, the project proponent shall pay the appropriate fees to SJOOG,in accordance with the SJMSCP conservation strategy, for conversion of undeveloped lands. >+. 45 vPrrAGN) 13 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC CEQA FINDINGS AND STA78M£N7 OR OVERRIDING CONSID£AA71ON$ NOVEMBER 2006 LORI ANNEXATION £IR 4�b: No more than 30 days prior to any ground disturbing activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for burrowing owls. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the initial preconstruction surveys, the site shall be resurveyed. All surveys shall be conducted in accordance with CDFG's Staff Report on Burrowing Owls (CDFG, 1995). -1c: If the preconstruction surveys identify burrowing owls on the site during the non -breeding season (September I through January 31) burrowing owls occupying the project site shall be evicted from the project site by passive relocation as described in the CDFG's Staff Report on BurrowingOwls(CDFG, 1995). Ld If the preconstruction surveys identify burrowing owls on the site during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31) occupied burrows shall not be disturbed and shall be provided with a 75 meter (250 -foot) protective buffer until and unless the SJMS CP Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), with the concurrence of CDFG representatives on the TAC; or unless a qualified biologist approved by CDFG verifies through non-invasive means that either: 1) the buds have not begun egg laying, or 2) juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. Once the fledglings are capable of independent survival, the burrow(s) can be destroyed. Findings for Impact BIO -1: The City finds that conducting surveys for the. western burrowing owl, and adhering to the protocol set forth in Mitigation Measures BIO -la, 13 70-1 b, BIO -lc, and BIO-ld is feasible and will adequately protect the species should it occur within the project site. Pursuant to CBQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures BIO -la, BIO -lb, BIO -lc, and BIO-ld will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact B IO -1 to a less -than -significant level. Iml2act BIO -2: Implementation of the project could impact nesting Swainson hawk or other nesting raptors if these species are present on the SW Gateway site or Other Areas to be Annexed site prior to the start of construction. Mitigation Measure BIO -2 Implementation of these measures will reduce impacts to nesting Swainson's hawk and other nesting raptors to a less -than -significant level. 2a: Prior to approval Qf gAing plans, the project proponent shall pay the appropriate tees to SJCOG, in accordance with the SJMS CP conservation strategy, for conversion of undeveloped lands. 2b Removal of suitable nest trees shall be completed during the non -nesting season (when the nests are unoccupied), between September 1 and February 15. 2c: If suitable nest trees will be retained and ground disturbing activities will commence during the nesting season (February 16 through August 31), all suitable nest trees on the site will be surveyed by a qualified biologist prior to initiating construction -related activities. Surveys will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of work. If an active nest is discovered, a 100-footbuffer shall be established around the nest tree and delineated using orange construction fence or equivalent. The buffer shall be maintained in place until the end of the breeding season or until the young have fledged, as determined by a qualified biologist. K:*d" 01113401., 14 SI (9OWMAaMa:K •(anal 1ueagiu21s-uelp -ssal a oa £-OIg loudull aanpal IpA pue 'lt,AoaddL, jo suopipuoa etA laafold aql olut palt,lodloaut aq tI £-4IS amsuayj uotlailtl�li lugs spug XITO aql `(I)(t,)IGOSi uopaas sau' pzn0 gO of lut,nSlnd uopt,2iltui;o suuaux alenbapv palaplsuoa aye samsuaux asaU •IaAai lut,3ldtu3is-u>Igl-ssal u of alts laafold oql uM!m spuepam of slaudun oanpaY Igm pue algisuaj st `situilad,(Iolulngal Aaessaaau Ilt, 8ututu;go st, {lam su `uorloli.Tasuoo Juunpal3uduit fpuaumwQd spuepann;o uotl$iolsal so uotlnal3 `uollenlasand zugl sPu3 AtO aI,L £- IS 13L' uIZ Ion MR PUR •palummidiut aq lIEgs q£-OIg pim E£-4Ig 1=90ON UagV211jW `IuaLUdojanap rtq palol4v aq 11!m pus axis ally uo pagpuapt aIu slalt,m Ieuoll3ipsuunf xaglo Io spurpam jj •(poglaW oullnolf) Iundeyq uorisautlaQ PusllaM ssaaur2ug;o sdioa G$5I arp raauupaoaoe ux paianpuoo aq Ilglls uorlgailtlap [03 s `paxauuV aq 01 sBalV IaglO agl Jo luaurdolanap of toad :a£ 'H�M2I iolFus SOOy ay moi; palmbal silimad bolupifti ,Cut, utelgo hugs lueotfdde aql 'sue[d Suz vAjo Iunoxddu of Io.0 j :q£ •1vAOlddu 13afoid ,Io (s)uotlipuoo u auiooaq osis IFgs 'anoqu pagtlasap ut,gl lualajjip 3t sIuailiannbaj uouigntui agtaads `SOZ}M2i m/put, HOOd kq pognb-aj are sltuuad•g •I:I;o oijaz Iunlum ul is it, saannosai pal3udun mp jo uagwalsai Yo/pllu uotlBalo `uoxlun Iaswd g2nolgl pameSp!iu aq MIs (saran ZO•a AIalBujyoiddu) uononalsuo3 Sump palaudult fipuauwwod spunilaM :t,£ Itanal luu3gtu is-uegl-ssal of (gsmw tutmA `•a•t) spuupam of slat,dun aoapoi Ilton samst,aui uopuSlltux guimolloj agl jo uotiuluauialduq :£-OIH arose IN dge nFw •(punilam Inuost,as) gSJUUI It,ulaA Jo t,alu ouo laudun Ilt^A laafold aqy-plg;ae urI •Ianal lue3glu3is-uugl-ssal u al Z -OIs louduq aonpas [[tm pus `Iunoadde jo suopipuoo viA 13afold a p olut poleiodloout aq 11!m pZ-OIg pus n-OIS `gZ-OIg 1oZ-OIU saansuaw uonu$Iltyg lulls spug �1t0 alll `(I)(e)IbOSi uorlaaS sazgja;n nq ViDgj of luunsmd -alts 132foid atll u.gjIm m000 hEu sat3ads osagl a p haloid ,�[alenbape Ilion pus algisua; st pZ-OIg puts `3Z-OIS `gZ-OIS `vZ-OIg salnsuaW uollE2il!W m quoj las l000loid agl of guuogps pus `sloldel gansau iaglo Io 'Ameg uosuiuta �ulISZU Io; Sut,taAMS lugs spUg AlIJ 2II,� :Z-OIg 1-1 uq JO3 s utputd •paluauataldcut aq [It,gs a£-OIg g3noup e£-OIg samsualq uoilegglyll `s3oidui Iaglo Io Ammg syosuivms Ioj saau zsou alglnl ns;o IBAouaax agl ui llnsa.I Ilton paxauW aq of suwV IaglO mp jo luauidolaAap alnlnj jj pZ •satnst,aux osagl of laafgns ag lou Ilt,gs uossas Supsou aql olut 2uinulluo3 put, uosum Vuilsau-sou ail? 2ullnp !Iuxuuj2aq uopmr asuoD •paumId st, ui22q una unilangsuoo'paIaAO3Slp SS allg a oujj ( In1p3t, 'Surzsau .iolniout of uosi as Suilsau aql fuunp sallrAllae u011o�suoo 2utanp ails-uo 1siSoloiq paijqunb B $aIneg 6•3•a) samst,aul uolleztulturm put, aauteptoAt, Iaglo;o uotpulualualduzl ql�m mgnq pagtaads ails guisi;asaap anolddu Amu O3Q0 `sominsul autos ul 1113 NOIJLVY7NNV IGO I 9001 VH%K3AON sNO1ZY113aisNOO oxiatumaAo do 1x31K3ivis aNY s`JNIamA vOaa 'ONI '9z.Lvlao99v VS 1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2606 LODI ANNEXATION EIR 2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact HAZ-1: Improper use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities could result in releases affecting construction workers, the public, and the environment. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1; Preparation and implementation of the required SW PPP (see Miti- gation Measures HYD -2 and HYD -3) would reduce the potential impacts of hazardous materials releases during construction to a less -than -significant level. No additional mitigation is required. Findings for 1mract HAZ-1: A SWPPP is considered to minimize environmental effects associated with the leakage or spill of hazardous materials used during the construction period. The City finds that a SWPPP is a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated with the use of hazardous materials during the construction period to a less -than -significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-I to a less -than -significant level. Impact HAZ-2: The pesticide storage buildings at APN 05 8-030-04 contained pesticide stained asphalt and concrete f]a�orcs. Mitieation Measure HA -Z-2: As a condition of approval for grading plans for SW Gateway project site, the applicant shall be required to test the soils beneath the stained asphalt floor of the older storage building and complete any clean-up necessary to remediate any identified contamination to an acceptable level. Findings for or Impact HAZ-2: Testing of soils under a stained asphalt fk=, in addition to remediation of contaminationto an acceptable level, reduces the impact associated with potential soil contamination. The City finds this a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated with potential soil contamination. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-2 to a less-thawsignificant level. Impact HAZ-3: Future development of any portion of the Other Areas to be Annexed site could be associated with hazards. Mitieation Measure HAZ-3: Prior to the approval of any specific developmentprojects on the OtherAreas to be Annexed, the project applicant shallprovide the City with an environmental investigation, as necessary, to ensure that soils, groundwater, and buildings affected by hazardous material releases from prior land uses, and lead and asbestos potentially present in building materials, would not have potential to affect the environment or health and safety of future property owners or users. Findings for Impact HAZ-3: Additional environmental investigation associated with specific development projects on the Other Areas to be Annexed would identify potential hazardous materials as well as remediation actions. The City finds this a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated with potential soil or water contamination. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-3 to a less - than -significant level. N++a+o�.�oou�oo�++4a.,eeua�(ilmrmoi) 16 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDI!RATION5 NOVEMBER 2006 LOD] ANNEXATION EIP Impact HAZ-4: Implementation of the SW Gateway project could expose construction workers and/or the public to hazardous materials from contaminants in soils during and following construction activities. Mitigation Measure HAZ-4 : Implementation of the following five-part mitigation measure would reduce these risks to less -than -significant levels. 4a Prior to the issuance of any demolition or building permits for the project site, a Risk Man- agement Plan (RMP) shall be prepared for the project site. At a minimum, the RMP shall establish soil mitigation and control specifications for grading and construction activities at the site, including health and safety provisions for monitoring exposure to construction workers, procedures to be undertaken in the event that previously unreported contamination is discovered, and emergency procedures and responsible personnel. The RMP shall also include procedures for managing soils removed from the site to ensure. that any excavated soils with contaminants are stored, managed, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations and permits. The RMP shall also include an Operations and Maintenance Plan component, to ensure that health and safety measures required for future construction and maintenance at the project site shall be enforced in perpetuity. The RMP shall include the following Mitigation Measures. 4 b Prior the approval of a building permit, soil sampling and boring shall be done in the historic circular depression area in the western portion of APN 05 8-040-02 in order to determine the quality of the fill and to determine if hazardous materials are present below the surface. If the soils investigation determines that hazardous materials are present, they shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. 4c: The soil samples collected from the equipment storage areas (and near the pesticide dis- pensers) were analyzed for rkta1 Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TRPH). Oil and grease were detected at elevated concentrations in both samples collected from the equipment storage areas; 12,000 ppm of oil and grease were detected near the 55 -gallon waste oil drums east of the equipment storage buildings on APN 058-030-04 and at 38,000 ppm of oil and grease were detected near the waste oil drums in the southern portion of APN 058-030-04. Both concentrations detected are above the CVRW QCB threshold concentrations based on protection of ground water quality. The stained area is approximately 10 feet in diameter. Prior to the approval of the building permit, oil and grease stained sod in this area shall be removed and disposed in accordance with f 6 recomMildAfiOtit Of the Phase YU. 4d: Six areas of APN 058-030-04 contain old equipment and various piles of debris and garbage, which can potentially leave lead based paint and other hazardous materials residue in the soils beneath the piles. No obvious soil staining was noticed beneath the piles of debris and garbage; however, soil beneath the piles could potentially contain lead based paint and other hazardous materials. As a condition of approval for a demolitionpermit for the buildings located on APN 058-030-04, the trash and debris shall be removed. Soils beneath the debris piles shall be tested for lead based paint residues and other possible hazardous materials. If it is determined that lead based paint or other hazardous materials are present in the soils beneath the piles, these soils shall be removed by a qualified lead abatement contractor and disposed of in accordance with existing hazardous waste regulations. r ("Maw 17 NOVEMSERIATJ . INC, CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 4OA1 ANNEXATION EIR 4e: The truck scale observed cn the eastside of APN 058-030-04could have soils contaminated Y with hydraulic fluid, which may contain PCBs. Truck scales often used hydraulic fluid, which can contain PCBs, which can be released during spills and leaks. As a condition of approval for grading plans permit for the SW Gateway site, the soils shall be observed when the scales are removed to determine if there are indications of leakage. If it is determined that leakage has occurred, soils samples shall be collected for laboratory analysis. If it is determined that the soils are contaminated at levels beyond established threshold levels, the contaminated soils shall be removed in accordance with all applicable regulations. Findings for Imoact HAZ-4: A RMP is considered to minimize ze environmental effects associated with the leakage or spill of hazardous materials used during the construction period. The City finds that a RMP, as well as the specified actions listed in Mitigation Measures RAZ -4a, HAZ- 4b, HAZ-4c, HAZ4d, and HAZ-4e are feasible mitigation measures that will reduce risks associated with the use of hazardous materials during the constructionperiod to a less -than - significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(ax 1), the County finds that Mitigation Measures HAZ-4a, HAZ-4b, HAZ-4c, HAZ-4d, and HAZ-4e will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-4 to a less -than -significant level. Impact HA Z-5: Many of the parcels within the project area contain hazardous materials that may be harmful to the public and the environment. Mitieation Measure HAZ-5 : Prior to approval of any demolition or construction permits, ASTs, pesticides, waste oil, equipment maintenance chemicals, discarded trash and debris shall be removed from the individual project site and disposed in accordance with applicable regulations. Findings for or Impact HAZ-5 : The City finds removal of hazardous materials in accordancewith applicable regulations as a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated the hazardous materials that may be on the project sites. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(] ), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-5 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-5 to a less -than -significant level. Impact HAZ-6: The septic tanks and wells cn the SW Gateway sites could potentially create. a significant hazard to the public cr the environment. Mitigation Measure HAZ-6: Prior to approval of any grading plans or construction permi is for each individual project, the wells and septic system shall be properly abandoned in accordance with applicable regulations. Findings for Irnyact HAZ-6: The City finds removal of septic tanks and wells in accordance with applicable regulations as a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated with septic systems and wells. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(ax1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-6 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-6 to a less -than -significant level. Impact HAZ-7: The reported presence of a possible underground storage tank (UST) within the SW Gateway site could potentially impact construction workers and the environment. N. I ww" 18 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 I.QAI ANNEXATION EIR Mitigation Measure HAZ-7: Prior to approval of any demolition or constructionpermits for the project site, a geophysical survey shall be performed locate the possible UST. Drilling and soil sampling shall be conducted to determine if this UST may have contained petroleum hydrocar- bons that may have leaked and affected soil and ground water. Should the sampling indicate a release from the tank has occurred, additional investigation and remediation may be required by San Joaquin County EHD prior to case closure. If the UST is present, it shall be removed and backfilled with engineered fill prior to site development. Findings for Impact HAZ-7: The City fmds further investigation in reports of a UST,testing for the contents of the UST, and removal of the potential UST would reduce the potential impact associated with this hazard to a less -than -significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-7 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-7 to a less -than -significant level. Impact HAZ-8: Demolition of buildings containing lead-based paint and asbestos -containing building materials and the removal of asbestos containing irrigation pipes could release airborne lead and asbestos particles, which may affect construction workers and the public. Miti nation Measure HAZ-8 : Implementation of the following two-part mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. Ra- As a condition of approval for a demolition permit for the project site buildings, an asbestos and lead-based paint survey shall be performed. If asbestos -containing materials are determined to be present, the materials shall be abated by a certified asbestos abatement contractor in accordance with the regulations and notification requirements of the San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Control District. If lead-based paints are identified, then federal and State construction worker health and safety regulations shall be followed during renovation or demolition activities. If loose or peeling lead-based paint are identified, they shall be removed by a qualified lead abatement contractor and disposed of in accordance with existing hazardous waste regulations. 8b: As a condition cf approval for grading plans for the project sites, an asbestos investigation of subsurface structures shall be conducted. If asbestos -containing materials are determined to be present, the materials shall be abated by a certified asbestos abatement contractor in auardom with the regulations and notiflutlOri requirements of the San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Control District. Finding for Imuact HAZ-8 : Mitigation Measures HAZ-Sa and HAZ-8b require the investigation and abatement of asbestos and lead within the project sites prior to demolition and 'All substantially lessen the health risks resulting from the presence of these substances. After any necessary abatement, these materials will not pose a health threat to construction workers M future employees or customers of the project site. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures HAZ-8 a and HAZ-8b will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-8 to a less -than - significant level. N:1MmieiMwUm pulz� 19 I,SA ASSOCIATES. INC. CFQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ROVENBER 2866 NODI ANNEXATION EIR 2.8 Visual Resources Impact VIS -2: The proposed project would create a new source of light and glare affecting day and nighttime views. Mitigation Measure VIS -2: Outdoor lighting shall be designed to minimize glare and spillover to surroundingproperties. The proposed project shall incorporate non -mirrored glass to minimize daylight glare. Findings for Impact VIS -2 The City finds that designing outdoor lighting to minimize glare and spillover light and requiring non -mirrored glass in construction of the housing is a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce impacts associated with light and glare to a less -than - significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 1509 1 (a)(]), the City fords that Mitigation Measure VIS -2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact VIS -2 to a less -than -significant level. SECTION 4: SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS THAT MAY NOT BE MITIGATED TO A LESS -THAN -SIGNIFICANT LEVEL The Draft E1R and Response to Comments document identify several impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level even though the City finds that all feasible mitigation measures have been identified and adopted as part of the project. The significant unavoidable impacts are discussed below. 4.1 Land use Impact LU•2: The proposed projects would result in the conversion of approximately 280 (241 Southwest Gateway and 39 Other h e x e d Area) acres of Prime Farm) and to non-agricultural uses. Mitigation Measure LU -2 Prior to issuance of a building permit after the first quarter of the building permits for the SK Gateway project -have been approved, or the approval of a parcel or tentative map that would result in the conversion of prime farmland within the Other Areas to be Annexed, the applicant shall provide and undertake a phasing and financing plan (to be approved by the City Council) for one of th; f9fl9wing mitigation measures: (1) Identify acreage at a minimum ratio of i 'I in kind (approximately a total of 241 acres of prime farmland-forthe SW Gateway project and 39 acres for the Other Areas to be Annexed) (currently not protected or within an easement) to protect in perpetuity as an agriculturaluse in a location as determined appropriate by the City of Lodi in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust; or (2) With the City Council's approval, comply with the requirements of the County Agricultural Mtigation program, which is currentlybeing developed, if it is adopted by the County prior to this mitigation measure being implermnted (SU); or (3) Comply with the requirement of Exhibit K to the Development Agreement, t1:5A�rial+uMit* >eU III/17rb) 2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 LODZ ANNEXATION EIR Findintys for Imuact LU -2 The proposed project would convert approximately 280 acres of prime farmland. While the mitigation measures would result in other farmland being preserved, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. However, pursuant to Section 21091(aX3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. Imuact LU -3: The proposed projects would result in a conflict with existing Agricultural Use and Williamson Act Contracts. Mitigation Measure LU -3: The applicant shall pay all fees associated with terminating a Wil- liamson Act Contract. Findin es for Imuact LU -3: The proposed project would conflict with existing Williamson Act Contracts. While the applicant would pay all required fees associated with terminating a Williamson Act Contract, the proposed project would still result in significant impact. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. 4.2 Transportation, Circulation and Parking As is noted in the Final EIR, the City has the capacity to reduce to a less -than -significant level the impacted intersections in the project -related and cumulative conditions. However, as is noted in the EIR, the City may decide not to implement the identified improvement in order to further other City General Plan goals. As such, the potential transportation impacts is less -than -significant, but would be significant and unavoidable if the City decides not to implement selected improvements. Imuact TRANS- 1: Implementation of the proposed project would significantlyimpact the level of service at 15 intersections under the Existing with Project scenario. Mitigation Measure TRANS -1: Each of the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce the project's impact on the identified 15 intersections: la: Mitigation Measure AIR -2 identifies measures recommendedby the SJVAPCD's " GtWur Awsft and MWfating Air Quality Impacts to reduce vehicl a trips and associated air quality impacts. Implementation of the same measures would also reduce associated traffic impacts. The following are considered to be feasible and effective in further reducing vehicle trip generation and resulting emissions from the project and shall be implemented to the extent feasible and desired by the City: ■ Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructurethat includes: sidewalks and pedestrian paths, direct pedestrian connections, street trees to shade sidewalks, pedestrian safety designs/infrastructure, street furniture and artwork, street lighting and or pedestrian signalization and signage, • Provide bicycle enhancing infrastructure that includes: bikeways/paths connecting to a bikeway system, secure bicycle parking. (Iin7/ZM 21 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION E1R Provide transit enhancing infrastructure that includes: transit shelters, benches, etc., street lighting, route signs and displays, and/or bus turnouts/bulbs. • Provide park and ride lots. The implementation of an aggressive trip reduction program with the appropriate incentives for non -auto travel can reduce project impacts by approximately /Oto 15 percent. Such a reduction would help minimize the project's impact. .lb.: The implementation of each of the improvements listed in Table IV. B-6would reduce the impacts to the identified 15 intersections to a less -than -significant level. To mitigate these impacts, the project applicant shall prepare a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.B—ffor both the Existing+ Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2). who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, the applicant's fair share contribution towards the improvement, how the improvement will be funded including a reimbursement program where appropriate; and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing constructionprior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. The Plan may include an annual monitoring program of the intersections as a method for determining the schedule for implementing each improvement. The Plan shall take into account whether an improvement is already programmed and/or funded in a City or County program (i.e., Lodi Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program, San Joaquin County Regional Transportation Impact Fee, Measure K (existing or renewal program), and San Joaquin Council of Governments Regional Transportation Improvement Program). If an improvement is included in one or more of these programs, the Plan needs to consider whether the programs schedule for the improvement will meet the needs of the project and if not identify alternatives. The Plan shall be submitted to City staff for review and City Council approval prior to submittal of a Development Plan application. Implementation of Measure TRANS -la and TRANS -lb, would mitigate tine project's impact on existing conditions to a less -than -significant level. However, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflict with some cf the General P1 an polkkl that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally some of the improvements identified are short-term solutionsthat the City may not choose to implement if a more significant) Ong -term improvement is being planned (i.e., reconstruction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 interchange). As a result, the project's impact at some intersections may be significant and unavoidableif the City chooses not to implement the recommended mitigation measure. Findines for Impact TRANS -1: The proposed project would significantly impact 15 intersections. While the mitigation measures are available to reduce potential impacts to a less - than -significant level, the City may decide to not implement measures so as to not conflict with some policies of the General Plan, thus resulting in a significant impact. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. N:1Rdminiaroioe *n�F.Utadoe(II/ITI�6) LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVSRRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 7006 LOP] ANNEXATION SIR Impact TRANS -2: Implementation of the proposed project would significantly impact the LOS at 19 intersections under the 2030 Cumulative scenario. Mitigation Measure TRANS -2 Implementation of Measure TRANS -la and TRANS -lb, would mitigate the project's contribution to Cumulative condition to a less -than -significant level at the 19 intersections that would be significantly impacted in the 2030 Cumulative condition. For the intersections that could be mitigated to a less -than significant level, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflict with some of the General Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally some of the improvements identified are short-term solutions that the City may not choose to implement if a more significant long-term improvement is being planned (i.e„ reconstruction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 interchange). Findings for Impact TRANS -2 The proposed project would significantlyimpact 19 intersections in the cumulative scenario. While the mitigation measures are available to reduce potential impacts to a less -than -significant level, the City may decided to not implement measures so as to not conflict with some policies identified in the General Plan. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations,the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific ovemding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. 4 3 Air Quality Impact AIR -2: Project -related regional emissions would exceed the SNAPCD thresholds of significance for ozone precursors. Mitigation Measure AIR -2 The SJVAPCD's "Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts" identifies potential mitigation measures for various types of projects. Me Guide identifies a number of measures to further reducing vehicle trip generation and resulting emissions. The following measures shall be implemented to the extent feasible (it is noted that many of these features are already incorporated into the project). • Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructurethat includes: sidewalks and pedesman paths, direct pedestrian connections, street trees to shade sidewalks, pedestrian safety dcsignslinfrastructure, street furniture and artwork, street lighting and or pedestrian cip2lintion and signage. ■ Provide bicycle enhancing infrastructure that includes: bikeways/paths connectingto a bikeway system secure bicycle parking. Provide transit enhancing infrastructure that includes: transit shelters, benches, etc., street lighting, route signs and displays, and/or bus turnouts/bulbs. Provide park and ride lots. The plans for each phase of the proposed project shall implement these measures to the extent feasible and appropriate. The implementation of an aggressive trip reduction program with the appropriate incentives for non -auto travel can reduce project impacts by approximately /Oto 15 percent. A reduction of this magnitude could reduce emissions, however, ozone precursors would still exceed the significance thresholds. There is no mitigation available with currently x NWoAh-wd0&aa01n?n q 23 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 LCD! ANNEXATION EIR feasible technology to reduce the project's regional air quality impact by an additional SO percent to a less -than -significant level. Therefore, the project's regional air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Finding for Impact AIR -2: Implementation of trip reduction measures, such as providing transit facilities, sidewalks, and bicycle enhancing infrastructure, would reduce vehicle emissions by approximately 10to 15 percent. However, this reduction would not be sufficient to reduce ozone precursors to below (be significance threshold. Only substantially restricting private vehicle use in and around Lodi would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. However, such draconian measures are not socially or politically feasible. There are no other feasible measures that would reduce vehicle emissions from the project to below the KVAPCD threshold. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Ovemding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on the specific ovemding considerations found in Section 8 below. 4.4 Noise As is noted in the Final EIR, the City has the capacity to reduce to a less -than -significant level the impacted intersections in the project -related and cumulative conditions. However, as is noted in the EIR, the City may decide not to implement the identified improvement in order to further other City General Plan goals. As such, the potential transportation impacts is less -than -significant, ht would be significant and unavoidable if the City decides not to implement selected improvements. Impact N0I-2: Local traffic would generate long-term noise levels exceeding Normally Acceptable and ConditionallyAcceptable noise levels on the project site. Mitigation Measure NOI-2a: A 6 -foot -high sound wall shall be constructed along therear prop- erty line of all lots adjacent to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. Mitigation Measure NOI-2b Mechanical ventilation (such as air conditioning) shall be installed in the proposed residential units adjacent to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Har- ney Lane so that the windows can remain closed for prolonged periods of time. Mitigation Measure NOI-2c: Windows with a minimum STC rating of STC -32 shall be installed in all units directly exposed to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. Mitigation Measure NOI-2d A sound barrier with a minimum height of 5 feet is recommended for all upper floor outdoor use areas directly adjacent to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. Should the City determine that sound wall and sound barriers are not appropriate or feasible for the proposed project, the impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Finding,s for Impact N01-2: Local traffic would generate long-term noise levels exceeding Normally Acceptable and Conditionally Acceptable noise levels on the project site. While the mitigation measures are available to reduce potential impacts to a less -than -significant level, the City may decide to not implement measures so as to created walled communities, thus resulting in N« 24 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT O? OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NovrmD9R 200; LOD] ANNEXATION EIR a significant impact. However, pursuant to Section21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Ovemding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. 4.5 Visual Resources Impact VIS- 1: The proposed project would degrade the existing visual character. Mitieation Measure VIS -l: No mitigation is available to reduce this significant and unavoidable impact. Findines for Imuact VIS -1: The proposed project would result in the conversion of farmland, which would degrade the existing visual character; there are no mitigation measures available to reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations,the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. 4.6 Growth Inducement Impact GROWTH -1: Potential growth -inducing impacts associated with the project's ability to facilitate development to the west if the City decides it wants to grow west. Mitigation Measure GROWTH -1: No mitigation was identified to reduce this potentially significant and unavoidable impact. Findings for Imuact GROWTH -1: The proposed project could result in the growth -inducing impacts by facilitating development to the west if the City should decide that it wants to grow to the west. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Ovemding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific ovemding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. SECTION 5: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR NOT SIGNiMANT The City finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, as discussed below, the following impacts associated with the project are not significant or less than significant. 5.1 Mineral Resources The City of Lodi General Plan does not identify the project sites as mineral resources. Additionally, the San Joaquin County General Plan does not identify the project sites as significant sand and gravel aggregate resource areas or as generalized aggregate extraction sites. The project sites do not contain known mineral resources, and the majority of the project sites are in active agricultural uses. Nr JW01/04moa) 25 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT O? OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 7006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR 5.2 Population, Employment and Housing The City of Lodi Housing Element was adopted by the City in 2004. The Housing Element anticipated the development of SW Gateway site. As such, housing and population impacts were addressed within this Element, and the environmental impacts associated with Population and Housing were addressed in the EIR that was completed for the Housing Element. SECTION 6: SIGNIFICANT CUMULATIVE EFFECTS The cumulative analysis in the Draft EIR utilizes development that is likely to occur under the buildout of the General Plan in addition to specific development projects listed on page 324 of the Draft EIR. 6.1 Land Lbe and Planning Policy The proposed project includes the development of the SW Gateways project site, as well as the annexation of other parcels within the City's Sphere of Influence. While no development has been proposed for the additional annexation areas, it is assumed that these sites would be developed in the future at an average density of approximately? units per acre. While the proposed project would develop land that is currently in agricultural production, this land is designated as "Planned Residential" within the City's General Plan. Additionally. the Housing Ele- ment of the General Plan identifies these sites as areas to be developed. As such, the project would not contribute to any significant cumulative land use impacts. 6.2 Transportation, Circulation and Parking As noted in the Final EIR, 19 intersections would be significantly impacted by the proposed project. However, all the intersection impacts could be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of the identified mitigation measures discussed in Section 1V , B of the Draft EIR. However, the City may choose not to implement some of these mitigation measures so as to further certain goals within the General Plan. 6.3 Air Quality A number of individual projects in the City of Lodi may be under construction simultaneously with the proposed project (see list above). Depending on construction schedules and actual implementation of projects in the area, generation of fugitive dust and pollutant emissions during Constmctionm a y result in short-term air pollutants, which would contribute to short-term cumulative air quality impacts. However, each individual project would he subject to SJVAPCD rules, regulations, and other mitigation requirements during construction. Currently, the San Joaquin Valley is in non -attainment for ozone, PM14 and PMzS standards. Con- struction of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other planned developments within the study area, would contribute to the non -attainment status. Thus, the proposed projects would exacerbate nonattainment of air quality standards within the San Joaquin Valley. Section N . C, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, includes a discussion of cumulative and future conditions related to air quality. Nom' (I1117l7w 26 LOA ASSOCIATES, INC CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRJDING CONSID$RATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR 6.4 Noise Implementation of the proposed project and cumulative projects would result in noise increase in the City of Lodi due to construction -period activity and increased traffic on City streets. However, noise increases associated with construction of the proposed project would be reduced to a less -than - significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE -1, which would restrict construction activities to daytime hours, reduce unnecessary idling of construction equipment, and require muffling of combustion engines. It is anticipated that cumulative projects in Lodi would incorporate these standard noise -reduction measures and that the project construction would not result in substantial adverse cumulative noise impacts. Cumulative traffic noise is discussed in Section IV.D, Noise, of the Draft EIR. Implementation of the proposed project would not be anticipated to significantly change noise levels. 6.5 Cultural and Paleontological Resources Construction activities associated with the proposed project and cumulative projects could result in significant impacts to unidentified archaeological and paleontological resources, and human remains. However, like the proposed projects, the cumulative projects would be subject to extensive mitigation measures designed to protect unidentified cultural and paleontological resources. Such mitigation would include the monitoring of construction areas and ensuring that the recovery of human remains is reported to the proper authorities. With implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the proposed projects would not result in any significant and unavoidable impact. The project would not contribute to any significant cumulative cultural and paleontological resources impact. 6.6 Geology, Soils and Seismicity The potential cumulative impact for geology does not generally extend far beyond a project's boundaries, since geological impacts are confined to discrete spatial locations and do not combine to create an extensive cumulative impact condition. The exception to this generalization would occur where a large geologic feature (e.g., fault zone, massive landslide) might affect an extensive area, or where the development effects from the project could affect the geology of an off-site location. These circumstances are not present on the project site, and implementation of the project would not make a considerable contribution to a significant cumulative geologic impact. 6.7 Hydrology and Water Quality Tho propOX4 prOjwt would result in an increase in impervious surface area and an increase in the amount of storm water generated on the project sites. Construction and operational impacts to stormwater that would result from implementation of the proposed project would be minimized through implementation of the SWPPP. The runoff from the project sites, in combination with other sites, could exceed the capacity of conveyance structures. The project applicant must incorporate design features and show the projects ability to contain and convey stormwater on the project site. It is anticipated that other cumulative projects in Lodi would be required to undergo the same water quality maintenance measures and would not result in cumulative adverse impacts to water quality. 6.9 Biological Resources Impacts to biological resources from the proposed project would consist primarily of loss agricultural lands (row crops and orchards) and nonnative grassland, which provide foraging habitat for several special status species, and potential impacts to burrowing owl, Swainson's hawks nesting habitat, and NVlm�iwarga f1w7rim) 27 L54 ASSOCIATES. INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS KOYEM";Z 200b LOrl ANNEXATION EIR seasonal wetlands. Except for the potential impacts to seasonal wetlands, impacts to biological resources resulting from project implementation will be offset through the City's implementation of the SJMSCP conservation strategy. The SJMSCP conservation strategy was developed in consideration of projected growth in San Joaquin County, and thus was developed to minimize cumulative impacts to SJMSCP covered species. hi addition, other projects in the area with similar impacts to biological resources are also likely to implement the SJMSCP conservation strategy. Consequently, with implementation of the SJMSCP conservation strategy, the project will not result in significant cumulative impacts to SJMSCP covered species. Potential project impacts to seasonal wetlands will he minor due to the small area affected, the low habitat value associated with the seasonal wetlands on the project site, and the proposed mitigation that will reduce impacts to a level less than significant. Consequently, although other projects in the area could result in impacts to similar wetlands, the project will not result in significant cumulative affect to seasonal wetlands. 6.10 Hazards and Hazardous Materials As two of several residential developments within the City of Lodi, the project would contribute to increase in the generation of household hazardous wastes in the City. Implementation of the proposed projects would help to ensure that existing hazardous materials contamination on the project site is remediated. Given the residential nature of the proposed projects, it is unlikely that the project would involve the use or storage of large quantities of hazardous materials or waste. The proposed project would not result in significant cumulative hazardous materials impact. 6.11 Utilities Development of the proposed project, in addition to other future development in the area would cumulatively increase the demand on utility providers and infrastructures in the project area. None of the various public services or utilities analyzed would experience significant impacts that could not be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. As such, no significant cumulative impact would result. A water analysis has determined that there is enough water to serve the proposed projects. Additionally, there is enough capacity within the City's wastewater system to serve the project site. The proposed project would require the construction of connections to the water system, wastewater system, and storm drainage facilities. The project applicant would be required to pay its fair share to construct any improvements needed to serve the project, and would tberefore not contribute to a cumulative impact. 6.12 Public Services Development of the proposed project, in conjunction with planned future area development would cumulatively increase the demand on public services in the project area. None of the public services analyzed would experience significant unavoidable impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures. The proposed project includes a potential site for a future fire station and the City will fund additional fire department staff via the General Fund and other available revenue from the project. The project would result in need fnradditional police staff to meet service ratios. However, the police department currently does not meet service ratios, and the need for additional staff would result in a fiscal impact, not as a significant environmental impact. In addition to paying applicable school impact fees, acreage is provided within the SW Gateway site for school facilities. It is assumed that other cumulative projects would he required to pay school mitigation fees, which would reduce the cumulative impact to school services to a less -than -significant level. LSA 4S60C)ATE5, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 LODE ANNEXATION EER 6.13 Visual Resources The proposed project would transform an area that is currently land in agricultural use to residential and public uses. This development would be considered similar in type and density to development immediately adjacent to the west. Removing land in agricultural production and replacing it with residential development would result in a significant and unavoidable visual impact. However, the City of Lodi General Plan identifies the project sites as areas to be developed. As such, the project site would not result in a significant cumulative visual impact. 6.13 Energy Implementation of the proposed project would result in an increase in energy consumption. Demolition and construction activities associated with the project would result in the nonreversible use of energy resources such as fuel and bound energy in the form of constructionmaterials. The installation of the new electrical substation, located on a parcel adjacent to the north portion of the SW Gateway site and south of Kettleman Lane, would be designed to accommodate the additional electrical demand of the proposed project. Energy conservation standards contained in the California Code of Regulations (Title 24) for new residential and commercial development would ensure that the new development would be designed to reduce wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary use of electricity. Energy consumed for transportation would be subject to the fuel efficiency standards for vehicles in California, which are designed to reduce wasteful and inefficient energy use in private vehicles. The project would include pedestrian and bicycle design elements to further reduce the consumption of energy for transportation. The inclusion of parks and schools within walkable distances from the resi- dential areas within the project sites would reduce vehicle miles traveled associated with the imple- mentation of the proposed project. The proposed project would result in an increase in demand for energy, but established State and fed- eral standards are in place to curtail wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary use of energy. SECTION 7: FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 7.1 Project Alternatives The Draft EIR included four alternatives: the No Project/No Build Alternative, the Agricultural Residential Alternative, the Reduced Density Alternative, and the lncreascd Iugh ND6;ty Alternative. Each of these alternatives focuses on the development of the Westside and SK Gateway project sites; it is assumed for each of these alternatives that the Other Areas to be Annexed would not be developed at this time. The City Council hereby concludes that the Draft EIR sets forth a reasonable range of alternatives to the SW Gateway Project so as to foster informed public participation and informed decision making. The City Council finds that the alternatives identified and described in the Draft EIR were considered and further finds them to be infeasible for the specific economic, social, cr other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA section 21081(c). N:LId�r�far+lfvlQ.bIKYCartl nu���mo6l 29 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 1046 LODI ANNEXATION EIR 7.1.1 No Project/No Build Alternative. The No Project/No Build alternative assumes that the project parcels would generally remain in their existing conditions and would not be subject to development. Under this alternative, the project parcels would not be incorporated into the City of Lodi, and existing agricultural use of the project site would continue. There would be no structures constructed on the project parcels, and all existing structures would remain. The schools, aquatic center, parks, and park basins would not be built. Findings. The No Project/No Build alternative would not achieve any of the objectives for the SW Gateway project. This alternative would not result in the significant unavoidable environmental impact related to implementation of the project. However, the No Project/No Build alternative would not result in the construction of any housing or recreational facilities. Therefore, the City rejects the No Project/No Build alternative. 7.12 Agricultural Residential Alternative. The Agricultural Residential alternative would retain the agricultural character of the project site, and would provide residential housing at a density of 1 unit per 20 acres. A density bonus would be granted which would allow 1 additional unit per 10 acres. This would result in 40 units on the SW Gateway site. Agricultural uses would still occur on the project site, but the acreage would be reduced so as to accommodate the 40 units. The SW Gateway parcels would be annexed by the City of Lodi. This alternative would not include the construction of any schools on the project site. The aquatic center and some park area would be incorporated into the project site. However, no park/basins would be included on the project sites. Findings. The Agricultural Residential alternative would not achieve the following objectives of the proposed SW Gateway project: Southwest Gateway Project. ■ Develop a diversity of high quality housing types to meet housing needs within the City of Mi. • Provide affordable housing options within the City of Mi. • Develop a school site that would serve future residents of the proposed project as well as other Lodi residents. Devel6p an 116pen spay! podaatrianAinypla spina" within the project site that connects to recreational and pedestrian amenities further south of the project site. ■ Provide adequate basin capacity for storm water detention. The alternative would result in the creation of significantly fewer housing units and recreational facilities. Additionally, this alternative would not provide school sites or the same amount of recreational facilities. Therefore, the City rejects the Agricultural Residential Alternative. 7.13 The Reduced Density Alternative. The Reduced Density alternative would reduce the density of the SW Gateway project. The SW Gateway site would have approximately 681 low density homes, which would average three units per gross acre. The SW Gateway site would include approximately 30 acres of parks and park/basins, but would not include a school site. N:N4nYc doc (I1117AM 30 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 200f LODI ANNEXATION EIR Findin es. The Reduced Density Alternative would not achieve the following objectives for the SW Gateway project: • Develop a diversity of high quality housing types to meet housing needs within the City of Lodi, • Provide affordable housing options within the City of Lodi. • Develop a school site that would serve future residents of the proposed project as well as other Lodi residents. Provide adequate basin capacity for storm water detention. When compared to the proposed project, the Reduced Density alternative would result in a reduction in the number of units and number of school sites. Therefore, the City rejects the Reduced Density Alternative. 7.14 Increased High -Density Alternative. This alternative would change the mix of housing units on the SW Gateway parcels. These parcels would have low density units at a density of 3 dwelling units per acre, and high density units at a density of 25 dwelling units per acre. The SW Gateway site would include the following components: 459 low density units (153 acres); 1,000 high density units (40 acres); one school site; and 30 acres of parks and parkthasins. Findings. The Jncreased High -Density alternative would meet all the objectives and would result in a total of 1,459 units on the SW Gateway parcels. However, this alternative would not provide any medium density housing options. The Housing Element discusses the desire for a mixed of residential land uses, which this alternative would not provide. Therefore, the City rejects the Jncreased High - Density alternative. 7.2 Environmentally Superior Alternative CEQA requires the identification of the environmentally superior alternative in an EIR. Of the four alternatives analyzed above, the No Project/No Build alternative is considered the environmentally superior alternative in the strict sense that the environmental impacts associated with its implementa- tion would be the least of all the scenarios examined (including the proposed project). While this alternative would be environmentally superior in the technical sense that contribution to these afore- mentioned impacts would not occur, this alternative would not meet many of the project objectives. In cases like this where the No Project/No Build alternative is the environmentally superior alterna- tive, CEQA requires that the second most environmentally superior alternative be identified. The Agricultural Residential alternative would be considered the second most environmentally superior alternative. Under this alternative, there would be a reduction in potential land use impacts as the majority of the site would remain in agricultural production. tris alternative would result in signifi- cantly fewer trips, and associated air quality emission, than compare to the proposed project. As there would be limited development on the site, the potential impact to biological resources and water quality would be reduced. Additionally, this alternative would create significantly reduced demand on public services and utilities than the proposed project. However, this project would not meet the pro- ject objectives of providing increased residential opportunities is the City of Lodi, as well as provid- ing parks and public facilities. +rnuNooML,Wh.eMFW.�r (I 1/17roo6) 31 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 1006 LODI ANNEXATION FIR Findings. The City finds that the Agricultural Residential alternative would be environmentally superior to the project, but would not provide increased residential opportunities in the City of Lodi or provide parks and public facilities. Additionally, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make this alternative infeasible. Therefore, the City rejects these alternatives, and further adopts the specific ovemding considerations found in Section 8. SECTION S; STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable risks when determining whether to approve a project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable! CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project accep- table when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record.-' In accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that the mitigation measures identified in the Final E1R and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, when implemented, avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant effects identified in the Draft and Final EIR. To the extent any mitigation measures recommended in the HR and/or proposed project could not be incorporated, such mitigation measures are infeasible because they would impose restrictions on the project and would prohibit realization of specific economic, social, and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts. The City Council further finds that except for the proposed project, all other alternatives set forth in the. EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of project objectives and/or of specific economic, social and other benefits the City Council finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives. Nonetheless, several significant impacts of the project are unavoidable even after incorporation of all feasible m'tigation measures. The significant unavoidable impacts are identified and discussed in Section 4 of these Findings. The City further specifically finds that notwithstanding the disclosure of the significant unavoidable impact, there are specific overriding economic, legal, social, and other reasons for approving this Fr im, Those KUM are as follows: a. The project will develop a diversity of high quality housing types to meet housing needs within the City of Lodi. b. The project will provide affordable housing options within the City of Lodi c. The project will provide park areas and recreational uses and funding therefore that help meet park standards within the City of Lodi. ° CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093(a) S CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093(b) rQ��ul7gEOd) 32 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS NOVEMBER 2006 LCD] ANNEXATION EIR d. The project will included a school site that would serve future residents of the proposed project as well as other Lodi residents. e. The project will develop an "open space pedestrian/bicycle spine" within the project sites that connects to potential recreational and pedestrian amenities further south of the project site. f. The project will provide adequate basin capacity for storm water detention. g. The project will ensure orderly development pursuant to LAFCO standards. h. The project will avoid creation of a County island. i. The project will facilitate future residential development of these parcels within the City's jurisdiction. The project will generate revenue for the City. The City finds that property taxes from residential areas are important to the City's revenues in order to maintain and provide services to the community. In addition, the Community Facilities District (CFD) created for this project would insure that the City is not overburdened by public services associated with this project. On balance, the City finds that there are specific considerations associated with the project that serve to ovemde and outweigh the project's significant unavoidable effects. Therefore, pursuant to CBQA Guidelines Section 15093(b), the adverse effects of the project are considered acceptable. ATTACHMENT B MITIGATION MONITORINGAND REPORTING PROGRAM ATTACHNIENT B MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM This Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP) lists the mitigation measures recommended in the Lodi Annexation EIR for the proposed projects and identifies monitoring schedule, mitigation responsibility, and monitoring procedures. Monitoring and reporting details are only provided for mitiga- tion measures necessary to avoid or reduce significant impacts of the project. Table I presents the mitigation measures identified for the project. Each mitigation measure is numbered with a symbol indicating the topical section to which it pertains, a hyphen, and the impact number. For example, CULT -3 is the third mitigation measure identified in the Cultural and Paleontological Resources analysis. The first column of Table 1 provides the mitigation measure(s) as identified in Chapter N of the Do& EIR for the proposed project. The second column identifies the monitoring schedule. The third column, "Mitigation Responsibility," identifies the party(ies) responsible for carrying out the required action(s). The fourth column, "Monitoring Procedures," identifies the party(ies) ultimately responsible €orensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented. N:1AAiNgiteooe 111I171ZI106j LSA ASSOCIATES. INC NOVEMBER 2606 Table 1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR r4A&Ana*MmCLMX%C .dK000NCON*3.0..dFMhdee(I MMMO Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Resrmnsibility Initials A. LAND USE AGRICULTURE AND PLANNING POLICY I,ll 1; Toreduce agriculturallresidential land use incompati- Prior to approval of Applicant he project applicant shall pre- bi lities, the following shall be required VentativeMap(s) and are: a. The applicant shall inform and notify Prospective buyers recordation of the Final ) A disclosure notification in writing, prior to purchase, about existing and on-going MaP(5) regarding the existing agri- agricultural activities in the immediate area in the form cultural activities which must of a disclosure statement. The notifications shall disclose be reviewed and approved by that the residence is located in an agricultural area sub- the Community Development ject to ground and aerial applications of chemical and Department and signed by early morning or nighttime farm operations which may each prospective owner: create noise, dust, et cetera. The language and format of ) Tentative maps that show such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the suitable design and ins (al - City Community Development Department prior to rec- lation of a landscaped open ordation of final rnap(s). Each disclosure statement shall space buffer area. fences, be recorded at the County Recorder's Office and ac- and/or walls that minimizc knowledged with the signature of each prospective conflicts between residential owner. Additionally, each prospective owner shall also uses and existing agricultural be notified of the City of Lodi and the County of S M operations; and Joaquin Right -to -Farm Ordinances. ) A detailed wall and fencing b. The conditions of approval for the tentative map(s) shall plan for review and approval include requirements ensuring the approval of a suitable by the Community Devel- design and the installation of a landscaped open space opment Department. buffer area, fences, and/or walls around the perimeter of the project site affected by the potential conflicts in land use to minimize conflicts between project residents, non- residential uses. and adjacent agricultural uses prior to occupancy of adjacent houses. c. Prior to recordation of the finalmap(s) for homes adja- cent to existing agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping. wall and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Devel- opment Department. r4A&Ana*MmCLMX%C .dK000NCON*3.0..dFMhdee(I MMMO 45A ASSOCIATES. INC. NOVEMBER 7006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNBXATION EIR .ax (unmuo6) Tate/ Miti ation Ma Loring Report Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility LU --2: Prior to issuance of a building 'rior to issuance of a Applicant 'The applicant shall either: permit after the first quarter of the build- wilding permit after ing permits for the SW Gateway project he first quarter of the (1) have been approved, or the approval of ombined SW Gateway Identify acrcage at parcel or tentative map that would result wilding permits have minimum ratio of 1 :1 in kind in the conversion of prime farmland -een approved. approximately a total of 241 acres within the Other Areas to be Annexed, f prime farmland for the SW the applicant shall provide and undertake iatewayproject and 39 acres for a phasing and financingplan (to be ap he Other Areas to be Annexed) proved by the City Council) for one ofcurrent] y not protected or within the following mitigation measures: easement) to protect in rpetuity as an agriculturaluse in (1) Identify acreage at a mini- location as determined mum ratio of 1;1 in kind (approxi- ppropriate by the City of Lod i in mately a total of 241 acres of prime onsultation with the Central farmland for the SW Gatewaypro- alley Land Trust; or j ect and 39 acres for the Other Ar- eas to be Annexed) (currentlynot (2) protected or within an easement) to With the City protect in perpetuity as an agricul- Council's approval, comply with tural use in a location as determined the requirements of the County appropriate by the City ofLodi in Agricultural MitigationprogTarn, consultation with the Central Valley which is currentlybeing Land Trust: or developed, if it is adopted by the County prior to this mitigation (2) With the City Council's ap- measure being implemented. proval. comply with the req u i re- ments of the County Agricultural Mtigation program which is cur- rently being developed, if it is adopted by the County priorto this mitigation measure being imple- mented (SU); or (3) Comply with the requirement of Exhibit K to the Development Agreement. .ax (unmuo6) Tate/ LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODr ANNEXATION EIR N:+Aen�Irrlan+a2Ellckai,wnoovi�finamananPlllneee plm2tl66) Mitigation Mo itoring Re ortin Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments nate/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials l - ; The applicant shall pay all fees associated with ternd- Prior to issuance of Applicant The applicant shall pay all fees nating a Williamson Act Contract. building permits for associated with terminating a structures on parcels Williamson Act contract with active Williamson Act Contracts 18 TRANS-[: Each of the following mitigation measures shall rior to Tentative Applicant T�e project applicant shall: be implemented to reduce the project's impact on the identi- ubdivision Map 1) Implement the identified fled 15 intersections: nova vehicle trip generation and la: Mitigation Measure AIR -2 identifies measures 7,C CO m• resulting emission desired by mended by the SJVAPCD's "Guidefor Assessing and the City: and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts to reduce vehicle trips 2) Prepare a Traffic Mitigation and associated air quality impacts. Implementation of Implementation and Financ- the same measures would also reduce associated traffic ing Plan (for review and impacts. The following are considered to be feasibleanc approval by the City/City effective in further reducing vehicle trip generation" Council) and implement the resulting emissions from the project and shall be imple- identified improvements. mented to the extent feasible and desired by the City: • Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastmcmTe that includes: sidewalks and pedestrian paths, direct pedestrian connections. street trees to shade side- walks, pedestrian safety des i gns/in frast rUeture, street furniture and artwork, street lighting and or pedestrian signalization and signage, • Providebicycle enhancing infrastructure: that in- cludes; bikeways/paths connecting to abikeway system secure bicycle parking. ■ Provide transit enhancing infrastructure that in- cludes: transit shelters, benches, etc., street light- ing, route signs and displays, and/or bus turn- outs/bulbs. • Pmvide park and ride lots. 'rho implementation of an aggressivetrip reduction Mgr with the appropriate incentives for non -auto travel can Ireducenmiect imnactsbv annroximatelv10 to 15nercent. N:+Aen�Irrlan+a2Ellckai,wnoovi�finamananPlllneee plm2tl66) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. N�)YEMSFrR 2OD6 Mitigalion Measures Such a reduction would hcfp minimize the project's y mpact. ik: The implementation of each of the improvements listed in Table IV,B-6 would reduce the impacts to the iden- tified 15 intersections to a less-than-significanfevet. To mitigatethese impacts, the project applicant shall prepare a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each ofthe physical improvements av d the timing and geometric changes listed in Table fV . B-6 for both the Existing + Project and Cumulative sowerios (cumulativeto address Impact TRANS -2) . whowill be responsible for implementing the improvement. the applicant's fair share contribution towards the improve- ment, how the improvement will be funded including a reimbursement program where appropriate: and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing con- struction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. The Plan may include an annual monitoring nroIrram of the intersections as amAhod for MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR Monitoring MitigationI MoNtoring Procedure I comments Date/ Schedule Resnonsibility Initials N;,,�,„ lara„e�l�lnmoasi 5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMAER 2005 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION ETR N:4Adetini�ian 'lttBTlm.dce111/17%D1051 Miti ation Mc iring Report Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Camments Date/ Mitioat.ian Mracurrc Schedule Responsibility Initials determiningthe schedule for implementingeach im- provement. The Plan shall take into account whether an improvement is already programmed and/or funded in a City or Countyprogram (i.e-, Lodi Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program San Joaquin County Regional Transportation Impact Fee. Measure K (existing or re- newal program), and San loaquin Council of G)vem- ments Regional Transportation Improvement program), If an improvement is included in one or more ofthese programs, the Plan needs to consider whether the pro- grams schedule for the improvementwill meet the needs of the project and if not identify alternatives. The Plan shall he submitted to City staff for renew and City Council approval prior to submittal of a Development Plan application. Implementation of Measure TRANS -la and TRANS -lb, would mitigate the project's impact an existing conditions to a less-than-significantlevel. However, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflictwith some of the General Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally some of the improvements identified are short-term solution! that the City may not choose to implement if a more signif- icant long-term improvement is being planned (i.e., recon- struction of the Kettleman UncJSR 99 interchange). As a result, the project's impact at some intersections may be significant and unavoidable if the City chooses not to imple- ment the recommended mitigation measure. TRANS -2: Implementation of Measure TRANS -la and 'rior in Tentative Applicant he project applicant shall: ;MANS-tb, would mitigate the project's contribution to lubdivision Map ) Implement the identified Cumulative conditionto a less-than-significantlevel at the pgroval vehicle trip generation and .19 intersections that would be significantly impacted in the resulting emission desired by ;2030 Cumulative condition. For the intersections that could the City; and be mitigated to a less -than significant level, the City may ) Prepare a Traffic Mitigation decide to not implement select improvements in order to Implementation and nc- avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to and d Plan for review and N:4Adetini�ian 'lttBTlm.dce111/17%D1051 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMeRR I806 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION ETR Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ ation Measures I Schedule I Responsibility Initials the automobile, which would conflict with some of the 13eneral Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally someofthe improvements identified are short- erm solutionsthat the City may not choose to implement if a ncre significant long-term improvement is being planned 'i.e., r:econstruction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 inter - C, AIR AIR -1 a: Consistent with Regulation VIII. Fugitive PM is Pmhihitionsofthe SNAPCD, the following amtmisare required to be implementedat all construction sites alld as specifications for the project. • Al I disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utiiized for construction purposes. shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, coveredwith atarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover. • All on-si to unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant, ■ All land clearing, grubbing. scraping, excavation. land leveling, grading. cut and fill, and demolition activities shall he effectivelyomtm l:ed of fugitive dust emissions utilizing applicationof water or by presoaking, • With the demolition ofbuildings up to six stories in height, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during demolition. • When materials arc transported off-site. all material shall he covered, or effectivelywetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. luring demolition, rading and construc- on approval by the Ci tylCi ty Council) and implement the identified improvements. Construction 'ity of Lodi Building Division Manager gaff, as appropriate, shall peri - dically consultwith construction ,presen tat i Yes to ensure they D m ply with this requirement. R%AdM bk*pVeZLMtKTa drCbLRwMWMahmKenee.ew(,vl7n=) 7 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. LODI ANNzxATION EIA NOVEMBER 3666 Mitization M 11 Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure comments ]Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule RtgDonsibility initials • All operations shall lin* or expeditiously Temove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accom- panied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust err& sions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.) • Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emis- sion utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabi- lizer/suppressant. • Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday. • Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Additional Control �Construction of the project requires the implementation of control measures set forth under Regulation VIII. The following additional control measures would further reduce construction emissions and should be implemented with the project: • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than I percent; • Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site; • Install wind breaks at windward side(s) of construction area; • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 20 mph (regardless of windspeed, an owher/operator must comply with Regulation VIII's 20 percent opacity limitation). N�yAdminiMretkrtl['[H1X+CwxIyYC INCpI�1� ,rpetlRhde� v IA7ime LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. NOVEMBER 3006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM - LODI ANNEXATION EIR N:ylAnInINAIImIC'[�11(lOnntl�8lRkds it 1117=0 Mitigation Merited Repord Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Continents Date! Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials • limit area excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time; • fnstall baserock at entryways for all exiting trucks, and wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment in designated areas before leaving the site; and • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 20 mph. AIR- lb: The following construction equipment mitigation measures are to be implemented at construction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions: • Use electric equipment for consttuction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -fired equipment; • Properly and routinely maintain all construction equip- ment, as recommended by the manufacturer manuals, to control exhaust emissions; • Shut down equipment when not in use for extended peri- ods of time to reduce emissions associated with idling emissions; • Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use; and • Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollut- ant concentrations; this may include Ceasing of construc- tion activity during the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways, and "Spare The Air bays" declared by the District. implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce construction period air quality impacts to a few -dm -significant level. N:ylAnInINAIImIC'[�11(lOnntl�8lRkds it 1117=0 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIA M44dtiMfR+�iort1O.ffilKlQaewl�waRBlRhdoc (llll7li006) _._. 10 "d tion M rina Reporti Monitoring . Mit1ption Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials Ails -2: The SNAPCD's "Guide for Assessing and Prior to tentative map Applicant City staff verifies that reduced Mitigating Air Quality impacts" identifies potential approval vehicle trip generation measures mitigation measures for various types of projects. The Guide have been incorporated into the identifies a number of measures to further reducing vehicle Tentative Map. trip generation and resulting emissions. The following measures shall be implemented to the extent feasible (it is noted that many of these features are already incorporated into the project). • Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructure that includes: sidewalks and pedestrian paths, direct pedestrian connec- tions, street trees to shade sidewalks, pedestrian safety designOnfrastructure. street furniture and artwork, street lighting and or pedestrian signalization and signage. • Provide bicycle enhancing infrastructure that includes: bikeways/paths connecting to a bikeway system, secure bicycle parking. • Provide transit enhancing infrastructure that includes: transit shelters, benches, etc., street lighting, route signs and displays, and/or bus turnouts/bulbs. • Provide park and ride lots. The plans for each phase of the proposed project shall implement these measures to the extent feasible and appropriate. The implementation of an aggressive trip reduction program with the appropriate incentives for non auto travel can reduce project impacts by approximately 10 to l5 percent. A reduction of this magnitude could reduce emissions, however, ozone precursors would still exceed the significance thresholds. There is no mitigation available with currently feasible technology to reduce the project's regional air quality impact by an additional 50 percent to a less -than - significant level. Therefore, the project's regional air quality impacts would remain si&ndficant and unavoidable. M44dtiMfR+�iort1O.ffilKlQaewl�waRBlRhdoc (llll7li006) _._. 10 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 3666 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EiR N:+Mknini�rin,1C[�KCo�1�0�[1Nco[rlVaoo�h.�ntEfRhdnc d11Jt7/7oo51 1 1 Mitigation Monitoring Re rtin Monitoring Schedule Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Rese2nsibility Comments Date/ initials Mitigation Measures 1). NOISE NON : Construction activities would need authorization During demolition, Construction City staff verifies that construc- under City issuance of construction permits before any work grading and con- Manager tion activities occur during the could commence on-site. Construction activities shall be struction allowed hours of construction limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday activities. through Sunday, consistent with the City's Ordinance. N01 -1b: All stationary noise generating constructirna equip- ment, such as air compressors and portable power gt--neratom shall be located as far as practical from existing residlences. By nutting the hours of construction timeframe and mini- mizing noise from stationary construction equipment, the project will not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels. N01 -2a: A 6 -foot -high sound wall shall be constructed along Prior to issuance of a Construction City staff shall verify that identi- the rear property line of all lots adjacent to Kettlenum Lane, certificate of occupancy Manager CTed mitigation measures have Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. been incorporated into the project plans. NOL -2b: Mechanical ventilation (such as air conditioning) shall be installed in the proposed residential units adjacent to Kettieman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane so that the windows can remain closed for prolonged periods of time. N01 -2c: Windows with a minimum STC rating of STC -32 shall be installed in all units directly exposed to KeWeman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Hamey Lane. NOP :A sound barrier with a minimum height of S feet is recommended for all upper floor outdoor use areas d3irectly adjacent to Kettleman Large, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. Should the City determine that sound wall and sound barriers am not appropriate or feasible for the proposed project, the impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. N:+Mknini�rin,1C[�KCo�1�0�[1Nco[rlVaoo�h.�ntEfRhdnc d11Jt7/7oo51 1 1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 1006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR N, Ystitl,dm (I M744 061 — 12 Midi tion Monitoring Reporting Monitoring Schedule Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Responsibility Comments Date/ Initials Mitigation Measures L CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES CULT -2: If prehistoric or historic archaeological materials During demolition, Construction City staff shall visit the site and are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 1 grading, and construe- Manager review findings should prehis- feet of the discovery shall be redirected and a qualified tion toric or historic archaeological archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and snake rec- materials be identified onsite. ommendations. It is recommended that adverse effects to such deposits be avoided by project activities. If such depos- its cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligi- bilit for listing on the California Register (i.e., it shall be deter- mined whether they qualify as historical or unique archano- logical resources under CEQA). If the deposits are not eligi- ble, avoidance is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided by adverse effects, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, thorough re- cording on Department of Parks and Recreation form 523 records (DPR 523) or data recovery excavation. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to FCB, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) 15126.4 C . ALT -3: Prior to the implementation of any future discre- tionary project within the Other Areas to be Annexed, a cultural resources field survey shall be conducted. If cultural Prior to any discre- tionary project within the Other Area to be Project Applicant City staff shall review field sur- vey results and shall verify proper documentation and action should resources are identified in the additional annexation parcels, Annexed cultural resources be identified. it is recommended that such resources be documented on the appropriate DPR 523 forms and that adverse effects to such resources be avoided by project activities. If impacts to cultural resources cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing in the California Register (i.e., it shall be determined whether they qualias historical or N, Ystitl,dm (I M744 061 — 12 LSA ASSOCIATES, TNC. NOVEMRER 2046 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EtR 13 N:Vldhdnhtr.U�1CI>S �e (mm�ooel Mitigation Monitoring Reoportfiln Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Datel Mitigation Measures Schedule wsibilit Initials unique archaeological resources under CEQA). If tbLe resources) is not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the resouroe(s) is eligible, adverse effects shall be avoided, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be miti- gated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, I3istoric American Buildings Survey (HAGS) documentation for built environment resources and data recovery excavation for archaeological sites. If data recovery excavation is appm- priate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data rrovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to the pro - jest applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central Cali%rnia Information Center CCR Title 1 3 15126.4 3 )(0). CULT 4: If human remains are encountered, work within 25 During demolition, Construction City staff shall review and verify feet of the discovery will be redirected and the Cour2ty Coro- grading and construc- Manager that proper documentation and ner notified immediately. At the same time, an arcl�t� geologist tion actions should human remains be will be contacted to assess the situation. If the hurr>atr re- identified• mains are of Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the site and provide recommendations fW the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. Upon completion of the assessment. the archaeologist shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results, and provide reoommendations for the treatment of the humor remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations of that MLD. '('he report shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Infonmatiori Center. It is anticipated that implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT -4 will reduce impacts to human remains to Esss-than- siLnificant levels. 13 N:Vldhdnhtr.U�1CI>S �e (mm�ooel LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 2666 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI AN14EXATION KIR 14 N:MMtls1FMM1 mle.ex a lni/ms) Mitigation Mor 'toring Re rti Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date! Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials CULT -5: If ground disturbing activity is anticipated below During ground dis- Project Pale- City staff shall verify that pre - the project area soil layer, the initial ground disturbance turbing activities below ontologist field monitoring preparation has below that depth in geologic units shall be monitored by a the project area soil occurred and that the recom- qualified paleontologist. Subsequent to monitoring this initial layer mendations have been incorpo- ground disturbance, the qualified paleontologist will make rated into the proposed project. recommendations regarding further monitoring based on the initial findings. This can include, but is not limited to, continued monitoring, periodic reviews of ground distur- bance below project area soil layers, or no further monitor- ing. Pre -field monitoring preparation by a qualified paleontolo- gist shall take into account specific details of project construction plans as well as information from available paleontological, geological, and geotechnical studies. Limited subsurface investigations may be appropriate for defining areas of paleontological sensitivity prior to ground disturbance. if paleontological resources are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until the paleontological monitor has evaluated the resources, prepared a fossil locality form documenting them, and made recommendations regarding their treatment. If paleontological resources are identified, it is recommended that such resources be avoided by project activities. Paleontological monitors must be empowered to halt construction activities within 25 feet of the discovery to review the possible paleontological material and to protect the resource while it is being evaluated. If avoidance is not feasible, adverse effects to such resources shall be mitigated. Mitigation can include data recovery and analysis, prepara- tion of a report and the accession of fossil material recovered to an accredited paleontological repository, such as the UCMP. Monitoring shall continue until, in the paleontologist's judgment, paleontological resources are no longer likely to be encountered. Upon project completion, a report shall be 14 N:MMtls1FMM1 mle.ex a lni/ms) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 3046 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR 15 N; EA1)t�se 111117MC61 Mita tion M rina Reporrflin Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials prepared documenting the methods and results of motritor- ing. Copies of this report shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi Planning Department, and to the repository where fossils are accessioned. P. GEOLOGY SO" AND SEISMICITY GE&I : Each project's conditions of approval shall require Prior to approval of Project The City staff shall verify that the the project be designed according to the most recent CBC grading plans Architect/ project meets the most recent and UBC Seismic Zone 3 requirements, applicable lo -cal Engineer CBC and UBC Seismic 3 re - codes, and be in accordance with the generally a=paed quirements, and that the design - standard for geotechnical practice for seismic design in level geotechnical investigation Northern California. recommendations are incorpo- rated into the construction and grading plans Cf,Q:lb:, Prior to the approval of grading plans, the project applicant shall perform design -level geotechnical inr►estiga- tions and incorporate all recommendations into the pxoject construction documents and gradin plans. gEQ:2 If the project includes buried metal c ompaacents, a Prior to issuance of a Project City staff shall verify that a corrosion engineer shall be retained to design corrosion building permit Engineer design corrosion protections protection systems appropriate for the project sites ttom be system has been incorporated into onoved by the Conrmunt Develo meet De t. the proposed projeM if required. GEO-3: Prior to issuance of a building permit for dv-- SW Prior to issuance of a Construction Prior to issuance of a building Gateway site, the project applicant shall include the over- building pertnit for the Manager/ permit, City staff shall verify that excavation and replacement of the undocumented fills in SW Gateway Project Project undocumented fill has been accordance with the earthwork, grading, filling and mmpa- Engineer removed from the project site in tion recommendations of the Preliminary Geotechnical accordance with the recor - Investigation of the Gateway Residential Developtee;nt in mendations of the Preliminary Lodi, preformed by Lowney Associates, November 12, 2004. Geotechnical Investigation of the Gateway Residential Devel- opment in LAdi, preformed by Lawny Associates, November 12, 2004. 15 N; EA1)t�se 111117MC61 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM NovEMDER 2696 LODI ANNEXATION RIK 16 it. dee 111117rmm Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Monitoring MitigationMonitoring Procedure Comments Date! Mitigation Measures Schedule R bilit Initials G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY RYD-1: Implementation of the following two-part r-nitiga- Prior to approval of Project Appli- City staff shall verify that the tion measure would reduce potential impacts associated with final grading and drain- cant/Project Master Utility Plan complies with increased peak runoff volumes to a less -than -significant age plana Engineer the City's storm water require - level: menta Ix. As a condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the projects, the Public Works depart- ment shall verify that the Master Utility Plan for the SW Gateway site will comply with the City's stormrvater requirements. j& Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the SW Gateway project and any subsequent development applications that may be proposed for the Other Areas to be Annexed, a hydraulic analysis shall be provided to the Public Works Department for veti8- cation that implementation of the proposed drainage plans would comply with the City's storm water re- uirements. HYU-2: The project proponent for each development project Prior to Constriction Project Appli- The City Public Works Depart - shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prtvention Phan cant/Project ment shall review and approve (SWPPP) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface Engineer the SWPPP and drainage plan water quality through the construction period of the project. prior to approval of the grading The SWPPP must be maintained on-site and made a-vailable plan. to City inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs designed to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum BMPs shall include practices to minimize the contact of comstmc- tion materials, equipment, and maintenance `supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants. paints, solvents, adhesives) with st6nrm water. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed central- ized a areas that kLzp these materials out of the rain. 16 it. dee 111117rmm MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGaAM LSA AS50CrATE&, INC. LODI ANNEXATION EIR NOVEMBER 3006 Miti tion -toring Re rtin Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials An important component of the storm water quality pota- tion effort is the knowledge of the site supervisors anal work- ers. To educate on-site personnel and maintain aware=ness of the importance of storm water quality protection, situ super- visors shall conduct regular tailgate meetings to discuss pollution prevention. The frequency of the meetings and required personnel attendance list shall be specified in the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall specify a monitoring program to be imple- mented by the construction site supervisor, which must include both dry and wet weather inspections. In addlition, in accordance with State Water Resources Control BoaYd Resolution No. 2001-046, monitoring would be required during the construction period for pollutants that may be present in the runoff that are "not visually detectable: in nm - off." RWQCB and/or City personnel, who may make unan- nounced site inspections, are empowered to levy consid- erable fines if it is determined that the SWPPP has not been properly prepared and implemented. BMPs designed to reduce erosion of exposed soil may include, but are not limited to: soil stabilization controls, watering for dust control, perimeter silt fences, placement of hay bales, and sediment basins. The potential for erosion is generally increased if grading is performed during t1he rainy season as disturbed soil can be exposed to rainfall and storm runoff. if grading must be conducted during the rainy season, the primary BMPs selected shall focus on erosion control; that is, keeping sediment on the site. End -of -pipe se=diment control measures (e.g., basins and traps) shall be used only as secondary measures. If hydroseeding is selected as the pri- mary soil stabilization method. then these areas shall be seeded by September 1 and irrigated as necessary to ensure that adequate root development has occurred prior to October 1. Entry and egress from the construction site shall be care- fully controlled to minimize off-site tracking of sediment. Vehicle and equipment wash -down facilities shall be designed to be accessible and functional during botlh dry and wet conditions. 17 M��{rya,matin^�np11C70[IN4�M\4nutliwplBlRhde[ (111!7!10!16) MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. LOCI ANNEXATION EIR NOVEMBER 3006 Monitoring Miti ation Moniterina Reporting Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Datel Mitigation Measures Schedule Resnondbilitv initials The City Public Works Department shall review and approve the SWPPP and drainage plan prior to approval of the grad- ing plan. City staff may require more stringent storm water treatment measures, at their discretion. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce the level of significance of this impact to a less -than -significant level. HYD -3: Each SWPPP shall include provisions for the proper Prior to construction Project The City Public Works Depart - management of construction -period dewatering. At mini- Engineer ment shall review and approve mum, all dewatering shall be contained prior to discharge to the SWPPP to ensure proper provisions for dewatering, and allow the sediment to settle out.' and filtered, if necessary to that protocol for dewatering is ensure that only clear water is discharged to the storm or followed. sanitary sewer system, as appropriate. In areas of suspected groundwater contamination (i.e., underlain by fill or mar sites where chemical releases are known or suspected to have occurred), groundwater shall be analyzed by a State -certified laboratory for the suspected pollutants prior to discharge. Based on the results of the analytical testing, the project proponent shall acquire the appropriate permit(s) from the RWQCB prior to the release of any dewatering discharge into the storm drainage system. Section IV.I, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIA, includes a discussion of the Remediation Action Plan (RAP) and Health and Safety Plan (HSP) for the site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HA7-4a. HAZ-413, HAZ-4c, HAZ-4d, and HAZ-4e would ensure the safety of construction workers from hazardous concentrations of Contaminants from soil and groundwater. Proper implementation of the mitigation measure described above would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level H. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-/: Implementation of these measures will reduce Prior to approval of Project Appii- City staff shall verify the pay- impants to western burrowing owl to a less than significant grading plans and prier disturbing cant/ Project anent of appropriate fees by the Biologist project applicants. City of Lodi level to ground activities staff, as well a qualified biolo- .La: Prior to approval of grading plans, the project proponent w 'ect cOn- gist, .shall review 18 x:+Adr,aeirew� eRrd�euvn�l LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 3046 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LOW ANNEXATION RIR eF: mlesxulmnaoa) 19 Mitigation Mo toting RetoWsortin Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Res ns! lity initials shall pay the appropriate fees to SJCOG, in accordance struction activities and periodi- with the SJMSCP conservation strategy, for conversion cally consult with construction of undeveloped lands. tepresentatives to ensure they No more than 30 days prior to any ground disturbing comply with this requirement activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for City of Lodi staff shall undertake burrowing owls. If ground disturbing activities are de- additional coordination with the layed or suspended for more than 30 days after the initial CDFG, if necessary. preeanstruction surveys, the site shall be resurveyed. All surveys shall be conducted in accordance with CDFG's Staff Report on Burrowing Owls (CDFG, 1995). is: If the preeonstruction surveys identify burrowing owls on the site during the non -breeding season (September 1 through January 31) burrowing owls occupying the pro- ject site shall be evicted from the project site by passive relocation as described in the CDFG's Staff Report on Surrowm Owls (CP170, 1"5). If the preconsttuction surveys identify burrowing owls on the site during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31) occupied burrows shall not be dis- turbed and shall be provided with a 75 meter (250 -foot) protective buffer until and unless the SJMSCP Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), with the concurrence of CDFG representatives on the TAC; or unless a qualified biologist approved by CDFG verifies through non-inva- sive means that either: 1) the birds have not begun egg laying, or 2) juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. Once the fledglings are capable of independent survival, the burrow(s) can be dextro eF: mlesxulmnaoa) 19 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR N:7AAnielvrloe k'fllhdx 11 k/17/10061 20 Miti ation MonKorin Re rtin Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule ResponsiW& Initials Bf0-2: Implementation of these measures will reduce im- Prior to approval of Project Appli- City staff shall verify the pay - pacts to nesting Swainson's hawk and other nesting raptors grading plans cant/ Project meet of appropriate fees by the to a less -than -significant level. Biologist project applicants. City of Lodi Prior to approval of grading plans, the project proponent staff, as well as a qualified biolo- shall pay the appropriate fees to SJCOG, in accordance gist, shall review project con - with the SJMSCP conservation strategy, for conversion struction activities and periodi- of undeveloped lands. cally consult with construction 2h: Removal of suitable nest trees shall be completed during representatives to ensure they comply with this requirement. the non -nesting season (when the nests are unoccupied). City of Lodi staff shall undertake between September I and February 15. additional coordination with the 2&: if suitable nest trees will be retained and ground dis- CDF0, if necessary. turbing activities will commence during the nesting =a - son (February lb through August 31), all suitable nest - trees on the site will be surveyed by a qualified biologist prior to initiating construction -related activities. Surveys will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of work. if an active nest is discovered, a 100 -foot buffer shall be established around the nest tree and delineated using orange construction fence or equivalent. The buffer shall be maintained in place until the end of the breeding season or until the young have fledged, as determined by a qualified biologist. In some instances, CDFG may approve decreasing the specified buffers with implementation of other avoidance and minimization measures (e.g.. having a qualified bi- ologist on-site during construction activities during the nesting season to monitor nesting activity). If no nesting is discovered, construction can begin as planned. Con- struction beginning during the non -nesting season and continuing into the nesting season shall not be subject to these measures. If future development of the Other Areas to be Annexed will result in the removal of suitable nest trees for Swain - son's hawk or other raptors, Mitigation Measures BIO -3a through 8I0 -3c shall be implemented. N:7AAnielvrloe k'fllhdx 11 k/17/10061 20 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMRRR 1006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODi ANNEXATION EIR 21 N;yEy��lrtbUNCO1�AB�aB�atBERbdoc(E E![7/Jt1(161 Mitigation Mo 'torina Reoportin Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date! Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials 1310-3: Implementation of the following mitigation wwmures Prior to construction Project Appli- City staff shall verify that wet - will reduce impacts to wetlands (i.e., vernal marsh) it) less- cant/ Project land impacts of been mitigated, than -significant levels. Biologist and that the applicant has 3_& Wetlands permanently impacted during construction acquired the appropriate regula- (approximately 0.02 acres) shall be mitigated through t xy puts' preservation, creation and/or restoration of the impacted resources at a minimum ratio of 1:1. If permits are re- quired by ACOE and/or RWQCB, specific mitig ation requirements, if different than described above. shall also become a condition(s) of project approval. 3¢: Prior to approval of grading plans, the applicant shall obtain any regulatory permits required from the ALOE andlor RWQCB. %: Prior to development of the Other Areas to be Annexed, a formal delineation shall be conducted in accordance with the 1967 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delirieation Manual (Routine Method). If wetlands or other jj urisdic- tional waters are identified on the site and will be af- fected by development, Mitigation Measures 11I40 -3a and BIO -3b shall bei lamented. L HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS H&7c I: Preparation and implementation of the required Prior to approval of Project Appli- City staff shall verify that an SWPPP (see Mitigation Measures HYD -2 and HYIP-3) final grading and drain- rant/Pmject SWPPP has been prepared and would reduce the potential impacts of hazardous materials age plaits Engineer implemented. releases during construction to a less -than -significant level. No additional miti 'an is required. H&a: As a condition of approval for grading plaers for SW Prior to approval of Project City staff shall verify that specific Gateway project site, the applicant shall be requirk to test grading Plans for the Engineer soil sampling and remediation the soils beneath the stained asphalt floor of the older storage SW Gateway project has occurred. building and complete any clean-up necessary to remediate site any identified contamination to an acceptable level. 21 N;yEy��lrtbUNCO1�AB�aB�atBERbdoc(E E![7/Jt1(161 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMEER 2666 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR 22 NV�UIKMI�HlElCancl (1/117/J006) Mitiggation M ring Re .n Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials RAZ -3: Prior to the approval of any specific development moo' to approval of development projects Applicant/ Project City staff shall verify that the appropriate environmental inves- projects on the Other Areas to be Annexed, the project appli- mt shall provide the City with an environmental inwesti- on Other Areas to be I Engineer tigations. and remediation has gation, as necessary, to ensure that soils, groundwater. and Annexed occurred• buildings affected by hazardous material releases froze prior land uses, and lead and asbestos potentially present in build- ing materials, would not have potential to affect the cnvi- ronrnent or health and safety of future property owners or users. Implementation of the following five-part mitigation Prior to issuance of Applicant/ City staff shall verify that an reassure would reduce these risks to less-than-sigl!tificant demolition or building Project RMP has been prepared and levels. permits Engineer implemented. 44a: Prior to the issuance of any demolition or building per- mits for the project site, a Risk Management Plan (RMP) shall be prepared for the project site. At a minimum, the RMP shall establish soil mitigation and control specifi- cations for grading and construction activities at the site, including health and safety provisions for monitoring exposure to construction workers, procedures to be undertaken in the event that previously unreported cau- tammation is discovered, and emergency procaures and responsible personnel. The RMP shall also incluide pro- cedures for managing soils removed from the site to ensure that any excavated soils with contaminants are stored, managed, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations and permits. 'the RMP shall also include an Operations and Maintenance Plan component, to ensure that health and safety measures required for future construction and maintenance at the project site shall be enforced in perpetuity. The RMP shall include the following Mitigation Measures. 22 NV�UIKMI�HlElCancl (1/117/J006) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER D666 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI'ANNEXATION Elk 23 �Rbdoe [1lnrnnosl Mitirtatiomn M ling Re0orti Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibilitv Initials 4¢: Prior the approval of a building permit, soil sampling and boring shall be done in the historic circular depression area in the western portion of APN 058-040-02 in order to determine the quality of the fill and to determine if hazardous materials are present below the surface. If the soils investigation determines that hazardous materials are present, they shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. 4g. The soil samples collected from the equipment storage areas (and new the pesticide dispensers) were analyzed for Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TRPH). 61 and grease were detected at elevated concentrations in both samples collected from the equipment storage areas; 12,000 ppm of oil and grease were detected near the 55 -gallon waste oil drums east of the equipment stor- age buildings on APN 058-030-04 and at 38,000 ppm of oil and grease were detected near the waste oil drums in the southern portion of APN 058-030-04. Both concen- trations detected are above the CVRWQCB threshold concentrations based on protection of ground water quality. The stained area is approximately 10 feet in diameter. Prior to the approval of the building permit, oil and grease stained soil in this area shall be removed and disposed in accordance with the recommendations of the Phase IM. 44d: Six areas of APN 058-030-04 contain old equipment and various piles of debris and garbage, which can poten- tially leave lead based paint and other hazardous materi- als residue in the soils beneath the piles. No obvious soil staining was noticed beneath the piles of debris and gar- bage; however, soil beneath the piles could potentially contain lead based paint and other hazardous materials. 23 �Rbdoe [1lnrnnosl LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMAER 3646 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR N:+Aa,�wrd�ncauNc Mitt tion M toring Reperti Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials As a condition of approval for a demolition permit for the buildings located on APN 058-030-04, the trash and debris shall be removed. Soils beneath the debris piles shall be tested for lead based paint residues and other possible hazardous materials. If it is determined that lead based paint or other hazardous materials are present in the soils beneath the piles, these soils shall be removed by a qualified lead abatement contractor and disposed of in accordance with existing hazardous waste regulations. The truck scale observed on the eastside of APN 058- 030-04 could have soils contaminated with hydraulic fluid, which may contain PCBs. Truck scales often used hydraulic fluid, which can contain PCBs, which can be released during spills and leaks. As a condition of ap- proval for grading plans permit for the SW Gateway site, the soils shall be observed when the scales are removed to determine if there are indications of leakage. If it is determined that leakage has occurred, soils samples shall be collected for laboratory analysis. If it is determined that the soils are contaminated at levels beyond estab- lished threshold levels, the contaminated soils shall be removed in accordance with all applicable, regulations. HAZ-5: Prior to approval of any demolition or construction Prior to approval of any Construction City staff shall verify that apprao- permits, ASTs, pesticides, waste oil, equipment maintenance demolition or construc- Manager pTiate disposal of waste and chemicals, discarded trash and debris shall be removed from tion permits debris has occurred. the individual project site and disposed in accordance with applicable re ations. H&7,c : Prior to approval of any grading plans or construc- Prior to approval of Project City staff shall verify that wells tion permits for each individual project, the wells and septic demolition or construc- Engineer and septic systems have been system shall be properly abandoned in accordance with tion permits properly abandoned. applicable regulations. HA70: Prior to approval of any demolition or construction Prior to approval of Project City staff shall verify that geo- permits for the project site, a geophysical survey shall be demolition or construc- Engineer physical survey has occurred and performed locate the possible UST. Drilling and soil sam- tion permits that the necessary sampling and pling shall be conducted to determine if this UST may have removal for USTs has occurred. contained petroleum hydrocarbons that may have leaked and 1117nM) - 24 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LSA ASSOCIATES, ATE LODI ANNEXATION LIR2086 25 N:Udt�irhfien .,.e�em�f1I1,7/JOOd} Mitigation M 'toring Reportin Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials affected soil and ground water. Should the sampling indicate a release from the tank has occurred, additional investigation and remediation may be required by San Joaquin Coutnty EHD prior to case closure. If the UST is present, it shall be removed and backfilled with engineered fill prior to site development. HAZ-S: Implementation of the following two-part mitigation Prior to issuance of a Project Appli- City staff shall verify that an measure would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant demolition permit cant/ Project asbestos and lead-based paint level. Engineer survey has occurred and that the J&:As a condition of approval for a demolition permit for the materials have been abated per project site buildings, an asbestos and lead-based paint applicable regulations. survey shall be performed. if asbestos -containing; materi- als are determined to be present, the materials sba;ll be abated by a certified asbestos abatement contractor in accordance with the regulations and notification re- quirements of the San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Con- trol District. If lead-based paints are identified, then fed- eral and State construction worker health and safety regulations shall be followed during renovation M demo- lition activities. If loose or peeling lead-based paint are identified, they shall be removed by a qualified lead abatement contractor and disposed of in accordaince with existing hazardous waste regulations. 8b: As a condition of approval for grading plans for the project sites, an asbestos investigation of subsurface structures shall be conducted. If asbestos-contairling materials arc determined to be present, the materials shall be abated by a certified asbestos abatement contractor in accordance with the regulations and notification require- ments of the San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Control District. J. I7TILTfI)E'.5 Mere are no si ni cant UIM& immicts. K. MMLIC SERVICES There are nn s!Sniftwnt public sem*ys im wts. 25 N:Udt�irhfien .,.e�em�f1I1,7/JOOd} LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. NOVEMBER 3066 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LORI ANNEXATION EIR Sourm: LSA Associates, Inc., 2006. 26 N:ueiwn (Ifn7/lo0q