HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - No. 2008-187RESOLUTION NO. 2008-187
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF LODI APPROVING THE GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR THE REYNOLDS RANCH PROJECT
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed
public hearing, as required by law, on the requested General Plan Amendment in
accordance with the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the project proponent is Dale Gillespie on behalf of the San Joaquin
Valley Land Company LLC, 1420 S. Mills Ave., Suite K, Lodi, CA 95242; and
WHEREAS, the properties are located at the southwest corner Cr East Harney Lane
and State Route 99; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan designation is Neighborhood Community
Commercial, Office, Planned Residential Drainage Basin Park, and Public Quasi Public;
and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department prepared an Addendum to
the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), consistent with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, consistent with CEQA, an initial study was conducted to analyze
potential impacts associated with proposed changes to the project, which initial study
demonstrated that none of the circumstances articulated in CEQA Guidelines section
15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR were present; and
WHEREAS, pursuantto CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164 an addendum
to the previously certified EIR was prepared, which includes and incorporates the initial
study analyzing the proposed project changes, and is attached to this Resolution and
incorporated herein ("Addendum"); and
WHEREAS, on August 27, 2008, the City of Lodi Planning Commission held a duly
noticed hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment, which was continued to
September 10, 2008, at which time the Commission recommended approval of the
proposed Amendment; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval cf this request have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND as follows by the City Council of the City of
Lodi, based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes without limitation, the
City of Lodi General Plan, the City of Lodi Municipal Code, the previously certified EIR,
the Addendum to the EIR and the initial study for the project changes included and
incorporated into the Addendum, all reports, minutes, and transcripts prepared for the
September 10, 2008, Planning Commission meeting, and all reports, minutes, and
transcripts prepared for the September 17, 2008, City Council meeting:
The City Council has considered the previously certified EIR and the Addendum
and finds that changes to the project, which adjust and redistribute land uses on the
site, do not require major revisions to the previously certified EIR or preparation of a
subsequent EIR for the following reasons:
(a) Proposed project changes will not result in any new significant impacts or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts.
As described in the Addendum, which incorporates the initial study for the
modified project, the modified project is still a mixed-use development, similar
to the type of project considered in the previously certified EIR. While specific
land uses have been adjusted and redistributed, mitigation identified in the
previously certified EIR will apply to the project changes, such that these
changes will not create any new or substantially more severe significant
environmental impacts.
(b) There are no changes in circumstances under which the project will be
undertaken that will result in any new significant impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. Though
the project has been modified, the circumstances under which the project will
be undertaken have not changed, therefore, there are no new or substantially
more severe significant impacts that will result from any change in
circumstances.
(c) The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance that
shows that the project will have any significant impacts not discussed in the
previously certified EIR, or that significant impacts previously examined will
be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR, or that
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would
in fact be feasible, or that mitigation measures or alternatives that are
considerably different from those analyzed in the previously certified EIR
would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment.
(d) Accordingly, no subsequent EIR is required for approval of this project, and
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164, an addendum is appropriate for
approval of the project.
2. The City Council has considered the proposed General Plan Amendment and finds
the proposed Amendment appropriate for the following reasons:
(a) Approval of the General Plan Amendment is consistent with the general
goals, policies, and standards of the City of Lodi's General Plan, because the
General Plan contemplates future development of the project site.
(b) Approval of the General Plan Amendment to designate the project site a
combination of Neighborhood Community Commercial, Office, Drainage
Basin Park, and Public Quasi Public would not conflict with other existing
plans or policies of the General Plan and serves sound planning practice. For
example, the proposed amendments are consistent with the General Plan's
Land Use Element, in that the Amendments facilitate managed growth and
support development of commercial and office uses (Land Use Goals A, E,
F). The proposed Amendments are also consistent with the General Plan's
Housing Element, in that they would facilitate development of a range of
housing types and densities (Housing Goal A), including senior -citizen
housing (Housing Policies A.11, A.16). The proposed Amendments are also
consistent with the General Plan's Parks, Recreation, and Open Space
Element, in that the Amendments provide for park space and trails (Parks
Goal A).
(c) The project site is physically suitable for the proposed General Plan
designations, in that the site is generally flat and is not within an identified
natural hazard area.
(d) Approval of the General Plan Amendment will not be materially detrimental to
other properties or land uses in the area, will not cause an unnecessary
hardship or practical difficulty, will not be detrimental to the health, morals,
comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the project area or to
property or improvements in the project area, and is not contrary to the
general public welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DETERMINEDAND RESOLVED that the City of Lodi
City Council hereby approves the proposed General Plan Amendment.
Dated: September 17, 2008
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2008-187 was passed and adopted by the
City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held September 17, 2008, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Hansen, Johnson, and Katzakian
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS— Hitchcock and Mayor Mounce
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS— None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
Lt94 FqW I
2008-187
Sol
EIR Addendum
Submitted to
City of Lodi I August 19, 2008
D E S I G N, COMMUNITY & ENVIRONMENT
EIR Addendum
Submitted to
City of Lodl August 19, 2008
D E S I G N, COMMUNITY & ENVIRONMENT
1625 SHATTUCK AVENUE, SUITE 300 TEL: 510 848 3815
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94709 FAX: 510 848 4315
35 SOUTH VENTURA AVENUE TEL: 805 643 7700
VENTURA, CALIFORNIA 93001 FAX: 805 643 7782
in association with
Illingworth & Rodkin
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 1
REPORTSUMMARY............................................................................................................... 15
INITIALSTUDY.......................................................................................................................... 45
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Regional Location Map, City of Lodi........................................4
Figure 1-2 Local Location Map, City of Lodi.............................................5
Figure 1-3 Previous Site Plan......................................................................7
Figure 1-4 Revised Site Plan........................................................................ 8
List of Tables
Table 1-1 2006 Project Land Uses..............................................................9
Table 1-2 2008 Modified Project Land Uses...............................................9
Table 1-3 Change in Residential Land use................................................10
Table 2-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ........................17
INTRODUCTION
A. Background
In 2006, the Lodi City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) for a 220 -acre mixed use residential, commercial, and office project
known as Reynolds Ranch (hereafter, "the Project"). The project consisted of
a combination of uses including residential, retail, office, senior care, public
use and office space. Detailed information on each use is provided in section
D of this chapter.
This chapter describes the purpose and content of this report and gives a de-
scription of the Project. This chapter also compares the original Project, as
analyzed in the 2006 EIR, and the proposed modifications that are now under
review. Proposed modifications include conversion of residential uses to sen-
ior and senior assisted living uses and consequently, omission of the park and
school, a general reconfiguration of housing units and a change in street con-
figuration; these changes will be addressed in detail later in this document.
Completion of the Initial Study checklist in Chapter III of this document has
led to the conclusion that the modifications would not result in new poten-
tially significant impacts beyond those already identified in the 2006 Certified
EIR. As a result, an Addendum to the existing EIR has been prepared in ac-
cordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section
15162, described below.
B. Introduction
The primary purpose of this report is to conduct an Initial Study of the pro-
posed modifications to the Project to determine whether an EIR Addendum
or Supplemental EIR should be prepared. Chapter I presents an introduction
and description of the modified Project in relation to the original project.
Chapter II presents a summary table of the environmental impacts and related
mitigation measures, which references all Project -specific impacts from Table
2-1 of the EIR. In Chapter II, the summary table is followed by a brief sum-
mary of the analysis conducted previously in the 2006 EIR. Chapter III pre-
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
I N T R O D U C T I O N
sents the Initial Study checklist analysis of environmental impacts associated
with modifications to the Project. Because the Initial Study focuses solely on
impacts associated with the modified Project, any impacts associated exclu-
sively with the Reynolds Ranch EIR have been removed from the summary
table included in Chapter 2 of this report.
The most applicable CEQA Guideline regarding analysis of the modified pro-
ject and the appropriate level of review is from Section 15162, which pro-
vides:
a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a
project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the
lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of
the whole record, one or more of the following:'
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require
major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the in-
volvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial in-
crease in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
In connection with the significant impacts previously identified in the EIR, a
supplemental EIR is not required unless there is substantial evidence to sup-
port a determination that the Project changes will require major revisions to
the EIR based on a substantial increase in the severity of these impacts. Un-
der CEQA, substantial evidence includes facts, reasonable assumptions predi-
cated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by facts. Unless the facts
support a conclusion that the Project changes would substantially increase the
severity of the previously -identified significant and unavoidable impacts in a
way that requires major revisions to the EIR, a supplemental or subsequent
EIR is not required.
' The California Environmental Quality Act, Title 14 California Code of
Regulations. Chapter 3 Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Envi-
ronmental Quality Act.
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
I N T R O D U C T I O N
Furthermore, Section 15164 of the 2007 CEQA Guidelines states that a lead
agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some
changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in
Section 15162 of the Guidelines calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR
have occurred. A review of the provisions set forth in Section 15162 and
15163 confirm that none of the conditions apply that would trigger the need
for a subsequent EIR or a supplement to an EIR. The Lead or Responsible
Agency may choose to prepare a supplement to an EIR rather than a subse-
quent EIR any of the conditions described in Section 15162 would require the
preparation of a subsequent EIR, only minor additions or changes would be
necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the
changed situation. Additionally, the supplement to the EIR need contain
only the information necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the
project as revised. As previously stated and as determined through the analy-
sis provided in Chapter III of this Addendum, the proposed modifications do
not constitute substantial changes or involve new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified signifi-
cant effects.
C. Project Location
The Project is located in the City of Lodi, California, which is approximately
15 miles north of Stockton and 35 miles south of Sacramento. Lodi, the
northernmost city in San Joaquin County, lies between the Sierra Nevada
Mountain range to the east and the San Francisco Bay to the west.
1. Regional and Local Location
Figure 1-1 shows the Project's location in a regional context. The project site
is bordered by Harney Lane to the north, Highway 99 to the east, Union
Pacific Railroad tracks to the west, and Scottsdale Road to the south. The
project area in relationship to the City of Lodi is displayed in Figure 1-2.
K
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
Sutter '
Lake Placer
--------------- '
- EI Dora
Yolo--�
i Davis Sacramento
Napa
Sono a 1
Sacramento
I � I
101
I ( I
I I
I
Amador
FairfieldSolano
99 -
-"-- � Lodi �'
-------- Calaveras
Marin
Stockton
z S J quin
Contra Costa
Oakland
S'an Fr_anei co --- -
Sdn Fran 'co
i
' Modesto
� I
A meda •
I
Fre ont
Stanislaus
Oregon Id h i -----------------------, 11
San Mateo (�
{ (I
Nevada Z
San Jose
A %
\\
*Lodi lara
i
erced
Santa Cruz
o �
e �\
t
t 0 10 20 Miles
_ .nit NORTH
FIGURE I - I
REGIONAL LOCATION MAP, CITY OF LODI
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
Mile Rd.
interstate
Railroad
City Limits
County_CA_Clipped t
NORTH 0 0.7 1.4 Miles
FIGURE 1-2
LOCAL LOCATION MAP, CITY OF LODI
Peltier Rd
99
0
C
N
O
O�
L
It
T
1
Ln
t
L
7
L°
0
J
Woodbridge Rd
Ln
L
Turner Rd.Turner
Rd.
N
o
c
Elm St.
D (v Lock ford St. 2)
U
Pine St. Pine St
E
Lodi Av.
N
J
++
N
aVine
St. =
N
o Vine St.
HWY 12
J
an Joaqui
C-
�0 0
v� Kettleman Ln.
12
3
=
u
Century Blvd.
_--
Harney Ln.
J
/lll
o
- �--------``-
�
= Reynolds Ranch Project
L
01
01
J
�I
Mile Rd.
interstate
Railroad
City Limits
County_CA_Clipped t
NORTH 0 0.7 1.4 Miles
FIGURE 1-2
LOCAL LOCATION MAP, CITY OF LODI
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
I N T R O D U C T I O N
2. Surrounding Development
Directly to the north of the project, Harney Lane is presently developed with
single family residential uses and one industrial use. There is limited residen-
tial with heavy agricultural uses to the east and south of the project site. The
project site has direct freeway access to State Route 99 along Harney Lane.
D. Project Description
The Project would consist of 22 parcels totaling 225.9 acres. Proposed uses
would include senior care, senior housing, high density residential, medium
density residential, low density residential, existing residential, office, public,
a hotel, park and trails, pond, mini storage, and retail uses. The original site
plan, as analyzed in the 2006 EIR, is shown in Figure 1-3. The modified site
plan is illustrated in Figure 1-4. In this section, each of the original Project
components is described, followed by a description of the Project proponents'
proposed modifications.
The major components of the modified Project include residential uses, com-
mercial uses, a hotel and parking. The acreages associated with the original
site plan are provided in Table 1-1. Acreages associated with the modified
project are provided in Table 1-2.
Residential Uses
This section compares the original project's residential components with the
proposed modification. As shown in Table 1-3, the original project proposed
1,084 residential units in over 102.9 acres. Under the modified project, total
number of residential units will remain at 1,084. As shown in Table 1-3, the
makeup of residential units will change slightly from the original project and
the total residential area would be reduced to 77.8 acres.
2. Commercial Uses
This section compares the original project's commercial components with the
proposed modifications now under consideration.
C ITY O F LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
Source:Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Final Environmental Impact Report. 2006, page 2.0-8.
FIGURE 1-3
PREVIOUS SITE PLAN
"PROJECT LEVEL' ANALYSIS
1
(OFFICE 5 RETAIL • IWAC)
"PROGRAM LEVEL" ANALYSIS
skin
"E
(RESIDENTIAL, SCHOOL, PARK$,
f
.
PUBLIC FACILITIES. MINI-STORWE-t1WAC)
i
iA.Z.�
1
i
aw
NORTH
Source:Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Final Environmental Impact Report. 2006, page 2.0-8.
FIGURE 1-3
PREVIOUS SITE PLAN
MDR i
10.1t AC y 9
POND
9.0t ACRE
J-� L ��-
HARNEY LANE
TABLE 7-7 2006 PROJECT LAND USES
Use
Retail/
nunrc.l
40.5 acres
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
Use
High Density Senior
Residential
I NTR0 D U C TI 0 N
Size
acre
Office
20.1 acres
High Density Residential
9.1 acres
Mini Storage
5.3 acres
Medium Density Residential
63.9 acres
Public/
Quasi Public
1 acre
Law Density Residential
20.6 acres
School
14 acres
Interchange/Ramp
4.5
Park, n .c -1 .7 acres Internal Streets -17.
Detention B .sin 8 acre s TOTAL
Source: WiLldan, Reynolds Ranch Pro)ect EIS August 2006, page .0-19.
TABLE 7-2 2008 MODIFIED PROJECT LAND USES
220 acre
Use
Size
Use
Size
Retail
78.2 acres
Office
. .crc
error Housing
48.5 .cr
Public/ Quasi Public
1.0 .cr
High Density Residenti.l
9.2 acres
Mini Storage
5 acre s
Existing Residential
2.5 a.cr
Park, Open Space
12.3 .crcMedium
Density idents
10. 1 acres
Low Density Residential
10.0 .crc
Detention Basin
9 acre s
Interchange
------
Streets
-------
TOTAL
206 acres
Note: The total above does not include internal street acreage or highway interchange acreage.
The Senior Houses area wM include a niirnurn of 2.0 acres Park.
Source: Dale N. Gillespie, RPM company. Personal email cor=umcation with Peter Pirnejad, City of Lodi. June 3, 200S.
9
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
I N T R O D U C T I O N
TABLE 1-3 CHANGE IN RESIDENTIAL LAND USE
Note: Data that is N/A is unavailable because it was not provided during the synthesis of this
report or because the uses were not a part of the 2006 project. These housing designations found
in the modified project but not the 2006 project are Age Restricted Residential Housing : duet -
style residences for individuals who are 62 years and older, but do not desire an assisted living
arrangement or require nursing treatment., and Senior Housing/ Medical Care, which includes
both assisted living and skilled nursing treatment for individuals 62 years and older.
Source: Dale N. Gillespie, RPM Company. Personal email communication with Peter Pirnejad,
City of Lodi. June 3, 2008.
a. Original Project
The original proposed project consisted of 350,000 square feet of retail that
was contained in the northeast corner of the site plan.
b. Proposed Modifications
750,000 square feet of retail are designated by the modified plan. Addition-
ally, in the modified plan, retail would expand west of `A' Street. A gas sta-
H
2006 EIR
2006
Modified
Modified
Designation
Size
Density
Size
Density
Change
High Density
22 du/acre
22 du/acre
+.1 acre
Residential
9.1 acres
200 units
9.2 acres
202
+2 units
Medium
10.3
7 du/acre
53.8 acres
du/acre,
Density
63.9 acres
10.1 acres
71 SF
560 SF
Residential
631 SF
homes
homes
Homes
Low Density
5 du/acre
5 du/acre
12.1 acres
Residential
20.6 acres
103 units
8.5 acres
43 units
60 units
High Density
50 du/acre
Senior
3 acres
N/A
N/A
N/A
Housing
150 units
Senior
Housing with
N/A
N/A
11.3 acres
N/A
N/A
Medical Care
Age -
Restricted
N/A
N/A
38.7 acres
N/A
N/A
Senior
Residential
Note: Data that is N/A is unavailable because it was not provided during the synthesis of this
report or because the uses were not a part of the 2006 project. These housing designations found
in the modified project but not the 2006 project are Age Restricted Residential Housing : duet -
style residences for individuals who are 62 years and older, but do not desire an assisted living
arrangement or require nursing treatment., and Senior Housing/ Medical Care, which includes
both assisted living and skilled nursing treatment for individuals 62 years and older.
Source: Dale N. Gillespie, RPM Company. Personal email communication with Peter Pirnejad,
City of Lodi. June 3, 2008.
a. Original Project
The original proposed project consisted of 350,000 square feet of retail that
was contained in the northeast corner of the site plan.
b. Proposed Modifications
750,000 square feet of retail are designated by the modified plan. Addition-
ally, in the modified plan, retail would expand west of `A' Street. A gas sta-
H
tion and two fast-food restaurants with dri've-thru windows are included in the modified
projects.
3. Hotels
Whereas the previous concept did not include a hotel use, the proposed plan does. The
proposed hotel would cover a Z.6 -acre portion of the site. The hotel would provide 104
rooms.
4. Parking
a. original Project
The original parking ratio was anticipated to be consistent with the Municipal Code at a
ratio of 1 space per 250 square feet of building area.
b. Proposed Modification
The proposed parking ration will be in the order of magnitude of 1 space per 227 square
feet of building area.2
5. Vehicular and Pedestrian Circulation
a. original Project
The original project consisted of a proposed
"Loop Street". which would be internal to
the site and would give access to the existina Stockton
Ix
Street and the proposed "A
Street". Proposed "B Street", a through street, would bisect "Loop Street". "A Street"
would give access to both Harney Lane and Highway 99. This street configuration is
shown in Figure 1-3.
b. Proposed Modification
Under the modified project, the internal circulation plan will include "Loop Street"; "C
Street",, and "Main Street"' would be added, and would connect "A Street" to "B Street."'
"B Street." would be a cul-de-sac. This street configuration is shown in Figure 1-4.
2 Peter Pirne j ad, City of Dodi Co -Interim Commum*ty Development Iii re -
tor, email rr M ati with d Hid, I u t .
C IT
Y
OF
LODI
REYNOLDS
RANCH
FEIR
ADDENDUM
I NTR0DU
C T 1 0 N
tion and two fast-food restaurants with dri've-thru windows are included in the modified
projects.
3. Hotels
Whereas the previous concept did not include a hotel use, the proposed plan does. The
proposed hotel would cover a Z.6 -acre portion of the site. The hotel would provide 104
rooms.
4. Parking
a. original Project
The original parking ratio was anticipated to be consistent with the Municipal Code at a
ratio of 1 space per 250 square feet of building area.
b. Proposed Modification
The proposed parking ration will be in the order of magnitude of 1 space per 227 square
feet of building area.2
5. Vehicular and Pedestrian Circulation
a. original Project
The original project consisted of a proposed
"Loop Street". which would be internal to
the site and would give access to the existina Stockton
Ix
Street and the proposed "A
Street". Proposed "B Street", a through street, would bisect "Loop Street". "A Street"
would give access to both Harney Lane and Highway 99. This street configuration is
shown in Figure 1-3.
b. Proposed Modification
Under the modified project, the internal circulation plan will include "Loop Street"; "C
Street",, and "Main Street"' would be added, and would connect "A Street" to "B Street."'
"B Street." would be a cul-de-sac. This street configuration is shown in Figure 1-4.
2 Peter Pirne j ad, City of Dodi Co -Interim Commum*ty Development Iii re -
tor, email rr M ati with d Hid, I u t .
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
I N T R O D U C T I O N
6. Development Agreement Amendment
Though it has not been finalized at this time, it has been concluded that the
Development Agreement will not change the project description. Addition-
ally, the Development Agreement will be consistent with both the EIR and
the EIR Addendum. City staff and the applicant have indicated that they an-
ticipate no material changes to the Development Agreement beyond exten-
sion of payment time frames to accommodate the current housing cycle.'
7. General Plan
While the proposed project is inconsistent with the land use designations, it is
consistent with the overall General Plan vision.
a. Existing General Plan
The existing City of Lodi General Plan land use designation for the entire
project site, which lies within the City's Sphere of Influence, is Planned Resi-
dential Reserve. San Joaquin County's General Plan designation for the Pro-
ject Site is Agricultural.
b. General Plan Amendments
Like the original project, the modified project would also require a General
Plan Amendment. The proposed new land uses are Low Density Residential,
Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Senior High Density
Residential, Senior Graduated Care, Mini Storage, Public, Office and Retail;
these uses will be contained under the following zoning designations:
Neighborhood Commercial, Office and Planned Residential. Despite the
need for a General Plan Amendment, the project would be consistent with
the overall vision of the General Plan, which identifies the project site as an
area for future development.
4 Peter Pirnejad, City of Lodi Co -Interim Community Development Direc-
tor, email communication with Ted Heyd, DC&E. August 12, 2008.
12
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
I N T R O D U C T I O N
8. Park and Buffers
a. Original Project
The original project includes a 5.3 -acre neighborhood park.
b. Proposed Modifications
Under the modified plan, the park is reduced to 2.0 acres. This change does
not require the construction of additional parkland in the City of Lodi be-
cause the City currently has 5.5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents,
satisfying its goal of 2.5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents .5 More-
over, the conversion of residential to senior and senior assisted living uses
under the modified project reduces the need for and expected use of the
neighborhood parks.
9. Tentative Map and Development Plan
The applicant has submitted the tentative map to the City for review. The
map is consistent with the modified site plan, as shown in Figure 1-4. The
related development plan would comply with the applicable provision of the
2006 FEIR and this FEIR Addendum.
10. Wastewater Master Plan
Existing wastewater facilities on the project site are made up of rural septic
systems. The Reynolds Ranch wastewater collection system is planned to
connect to the South Wastewater Trunk Line when future area development
gives way to the completion of the trunk line. In the interim, Reynolds
Ranch will connect to the Century Boulevard trunk line, which may not
have the capacity to handle the peak flow of Reynolds Ranch at built out. A
detailed study will need to be conducted prior to completion of the Project.
Wastewater flow will be calculated using the 1991 City of Lodi Design Stan-
dards and pipes will be sized for peak flow conditions set forth by the Waste-
water Peaking Factor chart contained in the City's Design Standards.
5 Morimoto, David. Senior Planner, City of Lodi. Personal email commu-
nication with Leslie Wilson, Design, Community and Environment, July 14, 2008.
13
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
I N T R O D U C T I O N
11. Storm Drain Master Plan
A May 2008 study addressed the master storm drain pipe and facilities for
Reynolds Ranch. The storm drain master facility includes Collection System
A, Collection B and a detention basin with no planned park uses. Reynolds
Ranch is the first development project that will connect to the South Re-
gional Storm Drain Facilities, and a retention basin will be used until its ca-
pacity becomes inadequate to serve the project site. All storm drain pipes
should be designed for peak flow and should have a 1 -foot freeboard between
the top of curb and the hydraulic grade line.
14
II REPORT SUMMARY
This chapter is a summary of the findings from the Reynolds Ranch Project
EIR. The summary table from the 2006 certified EIR is included as a refer-
ence for the Initial Study Checklist in Chapter 3 of this report, since many of
the impacts and mitigation measures from the EIR will pertain to the pro-
posed modifications to the Project.
A. Significant Impacts
Under CEQA, a significant impact on the environment is defined as a sub-
stantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical con-
ditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, min-
erals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic signifi-
cance.
The project, as analyzed in the 2006 EIR, had the potential to generate envi-
ronmental impacts in a number of areas that may be significant:
♦ Air Quality
♦ Biological Resources
♦ Cultural Resources
♦ Hazards and Hazardous Materials
♦ Hydrology and Water Quality
♦ Land Use
♦ Noise
♦ Public Services
♦ Traffic and Circulation
♦ Utilities and Service Systems
B. Unavoidable Significant Impacts
As determined in the 2006 EIR, Impact 3.1.1 (B), the original project would
result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to operational emissions
of ozone precursors.
H,
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
REPORT SUMMARY
Chapter 3, Project Analysis, evaluates the modified Project to determine if
any changes to the previous determination would occur.
C. Summary Table
Table 2-1 below is a summary of all project -specific impacts and related miti-
gation measures as found in the Reynolds Ranch EIR. Only those impacts
and mitigation measures which pertain to the modified Project are included
here for reference.
The table is arranged in four columns 1) environmental impacts; 2) signifi-
cance prior to mitigation; 3) mitigation measures; and 4) significance after
mitigation. A series of mitigation measures is noted where more than one
mitigation may be required to achieve a less -than -significant impact.
D. Conclusion
In Table 2-1 of this report, two changes have occurred to impacts and related
mitigation measures from the previous analysis conducted in the Project EIR.
Changes are shown in ..-_:i e three g ffiede and have been made due to the
removal of the school from the project plans.
a
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
the buffer until the biologist confirms that all fledglings have left the
nest. In addition to the preconstruction survey, the biologist shall con-
duct weekly nesting surveys of the construction site during the clearing,
grubbing, and/or removal of vegetation phase, and any discovered ac-
17
Significance
Significance
Before
With
Significant Impact
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 2.1: (Wildlife Movement, Migration,
Significant
None required
and Nursery Sites) The proposed project
would not affect the regional movement of
wildlife, wildlife migration patterns, or nurs-
ery sites.
Impact 2.2: (Habitat Conservation Planning)
Significant
Mitigation 2.2 Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMHCP). This
Less than
The proposed project is located within the
includes payment of Open Space Conversion fees in accordance with
significant
area covered by the San Joaquin County
the fee schedule in-place at the time construction commences and im-
Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and
plementation of the Plan's "Measures to Minimize Impacts" pursuant to
Open Space Plan (SJMHCP) for develop-
Section 5.2 of the SJMHCP.
ment.
Impact 2.3(a): (Special -Status Species — Swain-
Significant
Mitigation 2.3 Clearing, grubbing, and/or removal of vegetation shall
Less than
son's Hawk) The proposed project has a low
not occur during the bird -nesting season (from February 1 - September
significant
potential to impact the Swainson's hawk by
31) unless a biologist with qualifications that meet the satisfaction of the
eliminating marginal foraging habitat and
City of Lodi conducts a preconstruction survey for nesting special -
marginal nesting habitat.
status birds including Swainson's hawk, western burrowing owl, white-
tailed kite, California horned lark, and loggerhead shrike. If discovered,
all active nests shall be avoided and provided with a buffer zone of 300
feet (500 feet for all raptor nests) or a buffer zone that otherwise meets
the satisfaction of the California Department of Fish and Game. Once
buffer zones are established, work shall not commence/resume within
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
the buffer until the biologist confirms that all fledglings have left the
nest. In addition to the preconstruction survey, the biologist shall con-
duct weekly nesting surveys of the construction site during the clearing,
grubbing, and/or removal of vegetation phase, and any discovered ac-
17
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
IN
Significance
Significance
Before
With
Significant Impact
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation
tive nest of a special -status bird shall be afforded the protection identi-
fied above. Clearing, grubbing, and/or removal of vegetation conducted
outside the bird -nesting season (from October 1- January 31) will not
require nesting birds surveys.
Mitigation Measure 2.2
Impact 2.3(b) Special -Status Species -Western
Significant
Mitigation Measure 2.1
Less than
Burrowing Owl) The proposed project would
Mitigation Measure2.2
significant
eliminate marginal habitat for the western
burrowing owl, including agricultural land
with ground squirrel burrows that could pro-
vide nesting opportunities for the western
burrowing owl. Construction of the proposed
project also has the potential to impact indi-
vidual burrowing owls, if any are present on-
site during the time of construction.
Impact 2.3(c): (Special -Status Species - White-
Significant
Mitigation Measure 2.1
Less than
Tailed Kite) The proposed project has the
Mitigation Measure2.2
significant
potential to eliminate potential nesting and
foraging habitat for the white-tailed kite. Ad-
ditionally, construction of the proposed pro-
ject has the potential to impact individual
white-tailed kites or their nests if any are pre-
sent onsite durine the time of construction.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
IN
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 2.3(d): (Special -Status Species - Cali-
Significant Mitigation Measure 2.1
Less than
fornia Horned Lark) The proposed project
Mitigation Measure2.2
significant
has the potential to eliminate potential forag-
ing and nesting habitat for the California
horned lark from the site. Additionally, con-
struction of the proposed project has the po-
tential to impact individual California horned
larks or their nests if any are present onsite
during the time of construction.
Impact 3.2.3(e): (Special -Status Species - Log-
Significant Mitigation Measure 2.1
Less than
gerhead Shrike) The proposed project has the
Mitigation Measure2.2
significant
potential to eliminate suitable nesting and
foraging habitat for the loggerhead shrike,
and construction of the proposed project has
the potential to impact individual loggerhead
shrikes or their nests if any are present onsite
during the time of construction.
Impact 3.2.3(0: (Special -Status Species - Ru-
Significant None required
Less than
fous Hummingbird) The proposed project has
significant
the potential to temporarily reduce the forag-
ing habitat for the Rufous hummingbird on-
site.
Impact 2.3(g): (Special -Status Species - Bats) Significant Mitigation Measure 2.2 Less than
The proposed project has the potential to significant
reduce the roosting and foraging habitat on-
site for the pallid bat and the greater western
mastiff bat.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
IN
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 2.4: The project site contains one tree
Significant
Mitigation Measure 2.3 Regardless of whether the project develops in
Less than
that is protected under San Joaquin County's
a manner that is subject to the San Joaquin County tree protection or-
significant
tree protection ordinance. This tree is a valley
dinance (San Joaquin County Code Division 15, Natural Resources
oak that would be classified as a "Heritage
Regulations; Chapter 9-1505, Trees), the proposed project shall comply
Oak Tree" by the County's ordinance. De-
with the ordinance's "Replacement" requirements (Section 9-1505.4)
velopment of the project site has the potential
and "Development Constraints" (Section 9-1505.5).
to either remove this tree or damage this tree
during construction.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact 3.1: (Historic Resources): The pro-
posed project would adaptively reuse the
Morse -Skinner Ranch House and water
tower, a significant historic resource listed on
the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP) and eligible for listing on the Cali-
fornia Register of Historical Resources
(CRHR). The proposed Development Plan
and subsequent development of the balance of
the 220 -acre project site could result in the
demolition of a Moose Lodge facility, 12 resi-
dences, and ancillary structures. None of
these structures are known or expected to be
historically significant per Section 15064.5 of
Significant Mitigation Measure 3.1: The Morse -Skinner Ranch House and water Less than
tank, including the one acre parcel on which it is situated, is listed on significant
the NRHP and it is therefore a historical resource eligible for the
CRHR. Any adaptive reuse of the Morse -Skinner Ranch property shall
comply with standards set forth by the Secretary of the Interior.
Mitigation Measure 3.2: The residences, barn, and Moose Lodge that
are situated within the 60 acres included in the Development Plan shall
be evaluated for the CRHR. Some of these resources, such as the Moose
Lodge, were clearly constructed within the last 50 years and are
unlikely to be eligible for the CRHR. However, some of the residences
may be more than 50 years old and their architectural significance shall
be evaluated by a qualified architectural historian. This process includes
the recording of the buildings and structures on Department of Parks
the State CEQA Guidelines. However, none and Recreation Historic Structures Forms (DPR 523). Any structures
of these structures have been evaluated by an that are found to be ineligible for the CRHR warrant no further con -
architectural historian for historic signifi- sideration. If any of those structures are determined to be CRHR eligi-
cance. As such, it cannot be precluded that ble, the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) shall be con-
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
20
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
the removal, alteration, or demolition of the-
se structures would not result in significant
impacts on historical resources.
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
sulted to determine the significance of the discovery, and any resources
that are CRHR eligible shall be treated in accordance with the Secretary
of Interior Standards.
Significance
With
Mitigation
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
21
Mitigation Measure 3.3: The CRHR eligibility of existing buildings
and structures within the 160 -acre Concept Plan shall be determined.
This will require the services of a qualified architectural historian. This
process includes the recording of the buildings and structures on De-
partment of Parks and Recreation Historic Structures Forms (DPR
523). Any structures that are found to be ineligible for the CRHR war-
rant no further consideration. If any of those structures are determined
to be CRHR eligible, the California Office of Historic Preservation
(OHP) shall be consulted to determine the significance of the discovery,
and any resources that are CRHR eligible shall be treated in accordance
with the Secretary of Interior Standards.
Impact 3.2: (Archaeological Resources) Al-
Significant Mitigation Measure 3.4: The Yokuts who inhabited the project area Less than
though not anticipated, grading and construc-
prehistorically left no apparent archaeological remains on the ground significant
tion activities onsite could encounter previ-
surface within the Study Area. Previous studies in the Central Valley
ously undiscovered archaeological resources.
have shown that archaeological sites are sometimes buried (Moratto
1984). If buried Native American archaeological resources are discov-
ered during the project activities, work shall stop immediately in the
vicinity of the discovery, until a qualified archaeologist that meets the
satisfaction of the City of Lodi determines the significance of the dis-
covery and develops plans to preserve the significance of any discovered
CRHR eligible resources. Such archaeological resource preservation
Dlans shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Citv of Lodi.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
21
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 3.3: (Paleontological and Unique
Significant
Mitigation Measure 3.5: Should paleontological resources be encoun-
multi -use trail to be utilized within the internal network of trails and
Geologic Features) Although not anticipated,
pedestrian access within the project shall be required for review and
tered during construction excavation, the project proponent shall halt
approval by the City's Public Works Department.
grading and construction activities could en-
excavation in the vicinity of the discovery and contact a qualified verte-
Less than
counter previously undiscovered paleon-
brate paleontologist to evaluate the significance of the find and make
significant
tological resources.
recommendations for collection and preservation of discovered paleon-
tological resources in a written report to the City of Lodi. Said recom-
mendations shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City of Lodi.
Impact 3.4: (Disturbance of Human Re-
Significant
No mitigation measures required. Public Health and Safety Code Sec-
Less than
mains) The project site is not known or ex-
tion 5097.98, as described in the discussion of Impact 3.3.4 on page 3.3-
significant
pected to contain human remains and, as
13, further reduces the potential for impacts to human remains.
such, the proposed project is not expected to
disturb human remains. In the unlikely event
that human remains are discovered onsite,
existing regulations ensure such remains are
handled appropriately.
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
Impact 10.1: The project will require road-
Significant Mitigation Measure 10.1: Prior to approval of the first tract or parcel Less than
way improvements as part project develop-
map with the Reynolds Ranch Project, a roadway improvement plan significant
ment for an internal roadway network as well
for "A," "B," and "Loop" Streets including a detail plan for an off-street
as address impacts resulting from increased
multi -use trail to be utilized within the internal network of trails and
travel demand on surrounding streets. As a
pedestrian access within the project shall be required for review and
result, identified transportation improve-
approval by the City's Public Works Department.
ments are needed to mitigate the potential
Droiect traffic impacts upon Droiect buildout.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
22
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 10.2: A development of this size and
Significant Mitigation Measure 10.2: Prior to approval of the first tract or parcel
Less than
scope will likely be developed over a period
map for Reynolds Ranch Project, the Public Works Department shall
significant
of time and in a phased manner. To accom-
review and approve a roadway phasing and improvement plan to ensure
ment during construction, operation of such
modate a phased development, necessary
that timing of new roadway construction and improvements will be
roadway improvements shall be provided to
provided as necessary to serve and support new development for "Year
support the pace of development. A compre-
2008 Pre -Project Plus Phase I Project Conditions." The phasing plan
hensive and coordinated approach will also be
shall also note completion and timing of roadway improvements by
needed to address concurrent development in
other adjacent development to coincide with proposed improvements
surrounding areas adjacent to the project.
on the same facilities by the proposed project.
Impact 10.3: Because the project has not
Significant Mitigation Measure 10.3: As part of the subdivision review process, a
Less than
identified a specific development plan (layout)
roadway improvement plan shall include, but not be limited to provid-
significant
for the residential, school, mini -storage and
ing, the following items: 1) identify all entry/access points for all future
public use facilities, an evaluation of the in-
development within the project area to ensure proper intersection con-
ternal roadway network by a qualified Traffic
trol and signage, 2) show adequate sight distance in consideration of
Engineer shall be necessary once a develop-
grading and landscaping at all intersections and drive entries, and 3)
ment plan can be defined to ensure that any
identify all bikeways, off-street multi -use trails and sidewalks within the
potential access or circulation conflicts can be
project area. Submittal of the above information is intended to address
addressed and minimized.
any potential for vehicle and pedestrian conflicts in the development of
the project roadway planand ensure safe and adequate access for all resi-
dents and businesses within the oroiect site.
Impact 10.4: Construction traffic will occur
Significant Mitigation Measure 10.4: Proponents of development onsite shall sub- Less than
over time during project development. Be-
mit a construction Traffic Control Plan to the Public Works Depart- significant
cause of existing and future residential land
ment for review and approval prior to commencing construction on the
uses located near or adjacent to the develop-
project and any related off-site improvements.
ment during construction, operation of such
heavy equipment vehicles need to be consid-
ered.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
23
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance
Before
Significant Impact Mitigation
Impact 10.5: The project serving a largely Significant
future residential population will require criti-
cal fire and police services. Emergency vehicle
access is considered a vital function as part of
ny future roadway network to accommodate
safe and efficient access for both future resi-
dents and critical ememencv services.
Significance
With
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 10.5: The design of the internal circulation system Less than
and vehicular access will be subject to review and approval by the City significant
of Lodi's Police and Fire Departments prior to issuance any building
permits for the project.
Impact 10.6: Future land uses for the project Significant Mitigation Measure 10.6: Prior to map approval and issuance of build- Less than
will be required to provide adequate off-street ing permits, ensure that adequate parking demand is satisfied for all pro- significant
parking facilities. Available on -street parking posed uses (i.e. parks, commercial and residential development, etc.) in
on future roadways may be limited or, oth- accordance to the City of Lodi Zoning Ordinance.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Impact 11.1: (Increase in the Demand forEn- Significant None required
Less than
ergy) The proposed project would increase
significant
energy demand; however, the Lodi Electric
Utility has sufficient capacity available to
accommodate the increased demand, provided
the applicant pays the fair cost of expanding
the electrical infrastructure to meet the need
of the City's electrical system.
Impact 11.2: (Increase in the Demand for Significant None required
Less than
Natural Gas) The proposed project would
significant
increase the demand for natural gas; however,
PG&E has sufficient capacity available to
accommodate the increased demand.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
24
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 11.3: (Wastewater Treatment Re- Significant None required. Less than
quirements) The proposed project would gen- significant
erate wastewater; however, the wastewater
generated by the project would not exceed the
wastewater treatment capacity of the existing
treatment facilities.
Impact 11.4: (Increase in the Demand for Significant
Water Service) The proposed project would
increase water demand. The increased de-
mand could be accommodated by a water
supply system that includes two new ground-
water wells.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Mitigation Measure 11.1: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, a new well shall be added in the project to sup-
port water needs for the project area and shall be included in the first
phase of development. The triangular area by the Morse -Skinner Ranch
House is a recommended area, although other sites may prove accept-
able. A higher fire flow can be maintained by placing the well in the
east portion of the project where office and retail fire flows will be
higher.
Mitigation Measure 11.2: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, a second well shall be constructed as part of the
second phase of development as demands indicate the need. Alterna-
tively, since the project only necessitates a portion of a second well, the
well could be constructed offsite and the development pay its fair share
of the second well.
Mitigation Measure 11.3: Prior to improvement plan approval, a
looped water pipeline plan will be developed for the project that will
City system and a phasing plan for pipe installation. This plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
Mitigation Measure 11.4: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, the development shall be assessed its fair share
25
Less than
significant
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance
Before
Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
of the cost of developing additional water sources, including but not
limited to participation in acquiring additional water rights, develop-
ment and construction of surface water treatment or recharge the
groundwater system, construction of water transmission facilities, and
other related water infrastructure.
Mitigation Measure 11.5: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, as part of the design process, a detailed water
master plan shall be developed to identify facilities, phasing and other
facilities needed to insure that the water system for the project meets
the requirements of the City water system.
Mitigation Measure 11.6: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, the project proponents shall participate in a
financing mechanism to fund the required water infrastructure to serve
the demands of the project. Funding of water infrastructure in accor-
dance with Conditions of Approval for the project shall satisfy this
mitigation measure.
Potential project impacts would be lessened through the project's Infra-
structure Master Plan.
26
Significance
With
Mitigation
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Impact 11.5: (Increase in the Demand for Significant
Wastewater Service) The proposed project
would increase the demand for wastewater
service. The increased demand could be ac-
commodated by an onsite sewer system and
improvements to wastewater infrastructure in
the project vicinity.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Mitigation Measure 11.7: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, a detailed engineering analysis for the develop-
ment of a collection system that will serve the project area shall be pre-
pared. Said analysis shall include sizing of the pipe network, sizing of
the pump station modifications, and establishing timing for the pump
station modifications.
Mitigation Measure 11.8: To reflect the investment that has been made
by existing development and other potential developers, a financing
mechanism shall be developed and implemented to the satisfaction of
the City of Lodi to fund the modification of the pump station and the
station outfall force mains. Funding of the pump station in accordance
with Conditions of Approval for the project shall satisfy this mitigation
measure.
Mitigation Measure 11.9: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, and as part of the design process, a detailed
sewer master plan shall be developed to identify facilities, phasing and
other facilities needed to insure that the wastewater system meets the
requirements of the City sewer system. Public Works Department, the
project proponents shall participate in a financing mechanism to fund
the required sewer infrastructure to serve the demands of the project.
Funding of sewer infrastructure in accordance with Conditions of Ap-
proval for the project shall satisfy this mitigation measure.
Potential project impacts would be lessened through the project's
Infrastructure Master Plan.
27
Significance
With
Mitigation
Less than
significant
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
PUBIC SERVICES
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 9.1: (Schools) The project would add Significant No mitigation measures required. Less than
to the city's growing population; however, significant
the impact to schools would be less than sig-
nificant.
Impact 9.2: (Police Service) The project in-
volves the development of an office building,
retail commercial center, a mini -storage facil-
ity, residential structures, a wheel, and park-
land and, as a result, would increase the struc-
tures and population served by the Lodi Po-
lice Department.
Impact 9.3: (Fire Service) The project in-
volves the development of an office building,
retail commercial center, a mini -storage facil-
ity, residential structures, aseheel, and park-
land and, as a result, would increase the struc-
tures and population served by the Lodi Fire
Significant No mitigation measures required.
Significant Mitigation Measure 9.1: A fire station is proposed to be constructed as
part of the proposed project and will be constructed during Phase II
development of the site. This impact would be lessened through the
project's design, which includes a designated fire station site that is the
subject of Mitigation Measure 9.1.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Less than
significant
Less than
significant
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
LAND USE
Impact 7.1: The proposed project could re-
Significant Mitigation Measure 7.1: The notifications shall disclose that the resi-
Less than
sult in a land use conflict with surrounding
dence is located in an agricultural area subject to ground and aerial ap-
significant
land uses.
plications of chemical and early morning or nighttime farm operations
which may create noise, dust, etcetera. The language and format of
such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the City Commu-
nity Development Department prior to recordation of final maps. 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 tentative maps shall include require-
ments ensuring the approval of a suitable design and the installation of a
landscaped open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls around the pe-
rimeter 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
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
c. Prior to recordation of the final maps for homes adjacent to existing
agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed wall and
fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Development
29
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance
Before
Significant Impact Mitigation
Impact 7.2: The proposed project would re- Significant
sult in the conversion of approximately 200
acres of Prime Farmland to non-agricultural
uses.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 7.2: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the
applicant shall pay an Agricultural Land Mitigation fee to the City of
Lodi. Said fee is to be determined by the pending adoption of an ordi-
nance of the City establishing a fee mitigation program to offset the loss
of agricultural land to future development. In the event said ordinance
is not effective at the time building permits are requested, the applicant
shall pay a fee to the Central Valley Land Trust (Central Valley Pro-
gram) or other equivalent entity to offset the loss of the Prime Farm-
land. The City Council, acting within its legislative capacity and as a
matter of policy, shall determine the sufficiency of fees paid to mitigate
the loss of Prime Farmland. The loss of Prime Farmland caused by the
project is mitigated through implementation of Mitigation Measure 7.2.
The inclusion of Parcel 058-110-41 on the project site in an active Wil-
liamson Act Contract was formally protested by the City with the
County Board of Supervisors (Resolution 4449 adopted December 21,
1977). Additionally, the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Com-
mission adopted a formal resolution upholding the City's protest of the
conservation contract because the parcel is located within one mile of
the City limits.
IN
Significance
With
Mitigation
Less than
significant
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significance
Before
Significant Impact Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact 5.1: (On-site Hazardous Materials) Significant
Mitigation Measure 5.1: The City of Lodi shall not issue permits for
Less than
The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
construction activities on the project site unless the portion of the site
significant
determined that site conditions at certain lo-
involved in the requested permit has been deemed clear of recognized
cations on the project site constitute poten-
environmental conditions in writing by a California State registered
tially significant impacts or potential im-
Environmental Assessor with HAZWOPER 40 -hour OSHA certifica-
pediments to future development of the pro-
tion. Portions of the site require further hazardous material investiga-
ject site and, therefore, require mitigation.
tions to make a determination of the presence of recognized environ-
mental conditions. Such investigations shall be conducted in accor-
dance with the most recent American Society for Testing and arterials
(ASTM) standards, such as the ASTM's "Standard Guide or Environ-
mental Site Assessments: Phase I [or II] Environmental Site Assessment
Process". In total, the updated hazardous material investigations of the
site shall minimally evaluate the areas previously unaccessible to haz-
ardous material investigators, the southern -most barn on the eastern
portion of APN 058-110-41, the contents of the vault in the shed on the
southern portion of APN 058-110-04, the junction of the "water" basin
and its previous discharges must be determined, the exact location of
the 10 inch Kinder Morgan refined product pipeline, the areas adjacent
to the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way, and the onsite residential
structures and buildings which were previously inaccessible.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
91
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance
Before
Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Mitigation Measure 5.2: A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment
(ESA) shall be completed prior to the approval of individual develop-
ment plans within the project area. Said Phase II ESA report shall in-
clude subsurface investigations and recommended requirements shall
apply: remedial actions, if required, at specific locations as recom-
mended in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by
Kleinfelder, nc., or any subsequent updated report. The following addi-
tional requirements shall apply:
a. Soil sampling and analysis for pesticides shall only be conducted in
those areas of the site that are still agricultural; and
b. If levels of organochloride pesticides are found to be in excess of ap-
plicable residential or commercial Preliminary Remediation Goals/
Maximum Contaminant Limits (PRGs/MCLS) then an evaluation shall
be required to determine the depth and extent of these elevated concen-
trations.
Mitigation Measure 3.5.3: If subsurface structures are encountered
during site development or excavation onsite, care should be exercised
in determining whether or not the subsurface structures contain asbes-
tos. If they contain asbestos, it shall be removed, handled, transported,
and disposed of in accordance with local, state, and federal laws and
regulations.
Mitigation Measure 3.5.4: The wells onsite should not be used as a
water supply for any of the proposed land uses unless the water from
said wells is tested and found to meet state and federal drinking water
standards as confirmed by the Citv's water department.
32
Significance
With
Mitigation
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Mitigation Measure 3.5.5: An asbestos and lead paint assessment shall
be conducted for structures constructed prior to 1980, if they are to be
renovated or demolished prior to future development on the project
site. The following requirements apply:
a. A Certified Cal -OSHA Asbestos Consultant shall conduct said sur-
veys. If asbestos is detected, all removal shall be completed by a licensed
asbestos abatement contractor; and
b. Any lead paint that is detected and which is in poor condition shall
be removed prior to building demolition.
Mitigation Measure 3.5.6: All locations of underground storage tanks
(USTs) on the project site, where past releases are known or are sus-
pected, shall be subject to further investigation and analysis to confirm
or deny evidence of past releases (See Mitigation Measure 3.5.3). Said
investigations shall be conducted in accordance with Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and per Leaking Underground Storage Tank
(LUST) guidelines.
Mitigation Measure 3.5.7: Septic systems which are associated with
existing residences shall be removed and/or abandoned in accordance
with local, state, and federal regulations. Soil samples shall be collected
in the vicinity of said septic systems and leach lines to determine the
potential for hazardous materials discharged from the septic systems.
Any removal of septic systems shall be performed with oversight pro-
vided by the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department.
Mitigation Measure 3.5.8: Miscellaneous debris located throughout the
project site, and described in the Phase I ESA, shall be removed prior to
development activities. Any petroleum products and/or hazardous ma-
33
Significance
With
Mitigation
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance
Before
Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures
terials encountered should be disposed of or recycled in accordance
with local, state, and federal regulations.
Mitigation Measure 5.9: Various sized buckets and drums containing
petroleum products were noted at several locations on the project site in
the Phase I ESA. All such drums and buckets shall be removed from the
project site in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. In
addition, soil sampling shall be conducted at those bucket and drum
locations where staining was noted (See Mitigation Measure 3.5.3).
Mitigation Measure 5.10: The vault located in the storage shed along
the southern portion of APN 058-110-04 shall be investigated and its
nature determined prior to development activity occurring on the pro-
ject site.
Mitigation Measure5.11: Limited soils samples shall be taken along the
project site boundary adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-
way to determine the presence and levels of metals or hazardous mate-
rials associated with the railroad richt-of-way.
HYDROLOGY, DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 6.1: (Risk of Flooding as a Result of Significant Mitigation Measure 6.1: None required. Potential project impacts Less than
the Failure of a Levee or Dam): Failure of would be lessened by the existing Emergency Action Plan that would significant
water supply and/or flood control facilities be initiated by the East Bay Municipal Utility District.
along the Mokelumne River, including Pardee
Dam, Camanche Dam, and the Camanche
Dikes, could cause inundation of the project
site.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
34
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 6.2: (Stormwater Drainage System
Significant
Mitigation Measure 3.6.1: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
Less than
Capacity and Polluted Runoff): The proposed
lic Works Department, a detailed engineering analysis for the develop-
significant
project would replace the existing informal
ment of a stormwater collection system that will serve the project and
and/or non-existent drainage system onsite
potential future development between Reynolds Ranch and the Wood -
with an engineered drainage system. With
bridge Irrigation District (WID) canal shall be prepared. Said analysis
the proper design the proposed drainage sys-
shall include sizing of the pipe network and sizing of the detention ba -
tem will have adequate stormwater capacity
sins and pump station discharging to the WID canal.
and would not be a substantial source of pol-
luted runoff.
Mitigation Measure 3.6.2: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, the proposed pump station shall include provi-
sions for managing the discharge flow rate to serve the needs of the City
and to satisfy the terms of the discharge agreement.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Mitigation Measure 3.6.3: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, all drainage facilities shall be constructed in con-
formance with the standards and specifications of the City of Lodi.
Mitigation Measure 3.6.4: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, the detention basin shall include a low flow
facility to enhance water quality and to help manage nuisance flows.
Other water quality control features shall be incorporated into the pro-
ject design to improve water quality of the storm discharge to the satis-
faction of the City of Lodi Public Works Department.
Mitigation Measure 3.6.5: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Pub-
lic Works Department, as part of the design process, a detailed drainage
master plan shall be developed to identify collection and storage facili-
ties, phasing and other appurtenances needed to insure that the system
meets the requirements of the City drainage system.
35
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Impact 6.3: (Water Quality Standards or
Waste Discharge Requirements): The pro-
posed project has the potential to generate
water pollutants from construction and from
typical urban land uses. Complying with ex-
isting requirements ensures the project would
not affect the beneficial uses of any receiving
waters.
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 6.6: To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi Public
Works Department, the project proponents shall participate in a financ-
ing mechanism to fund the required drainage infrastructure to serve the
demands of the project. Funding of drainage infrastructure in accor-
dance with Conditions of Approval for the project shall satisfy this
mitigation measure.
Significant None required. Potential project impacts would be lessened through
the required compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimi-
nation System.
Impact 6.4: (Alteration of the Existing Significant None required. Potential project impacts would be lessened through
Drainage Pattern of the Site or Area, Includ- the project's Infrastructure Master Plan.
ing through the Alteration of the Course of a
Stream or River, in a Manner, Which Would
Result in Substantial Erosion or Siltation On
or Offsite) The proposed project would alter
the site's drainage pattern. However, the pro-
posed drainage of the site would not induce
erosion or siltation.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
IN
Significance
With
Mitigation
Less than
significant
Less than
significant
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 6.5: (Alteration of the Existing
Significant Mitigation Measures 6.1 - 6.6 Less than
Drainage Pattern of the Site or Area, Includ-
significant
ing through the Alteration of the Course of a
Stream or River, or Substantially Increase the
Rate or Amount of Surface Runoff in a Man-
ner Which Would Result in Flooding On or
Off -Site) The proposed project would alter
the site's drainage pattern. However, with
the proper design of the proposed drainage
system, the proposed drainage pattern change
would not result in flooding on or offsite.
Impact 6.6: (Groundwater) The proposed
Significant Potential project impacts would be lessened through project design fea- Less than
project would increase the amount of imper-
tures and the City's water supply strategy. significant
meable surfaces onsite and, as a result, reduce
the site's groundwater recharge potential. In
addition, the proposed project would increase
the use of groundwater as a water source and
contribute to the existing overdraft of the
groundwater basin.
NOISE
Impact 8.1: Construction of the proposed Significant Mitigation Measure 8.1: All construction shall require a permit and Less than
project would temporarily generate noise shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Staging areas shall be significant
above levels existing without the project. located away from existing residences, and all equipment shall use prop-
erly operating mufflers.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
37
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance
Before
Significant Impact Mitigation
Impact 8.2: Increased traffic would generate Significant
noise levels above levels existing without the
project.
Impact 8.3: Location of residential uses in
proximity to noise sources can result in expo-
sure to noise levels in excess of standards.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 8.3: Habitable second -story residential space, lo-
cated within 245 feet of the Harney Lane centerline, must have up-
graded structural protection including dual -paned windows and sup-
plemental ventilation (air conditioning) to allow for window closure, in
compliance with the City of Lodi Compatibility Standards.
Mitigation Measure 7.4: Outdoor recreational space within 145 feet of
the Harney Lane centerline must be shielded by solid perimeter walls of
6-7 feet in height or landscape berming, or any combination of the two
to achieve the desired noise attenuation.
Mitigation Measure 8.5: New residential development both north and
south of Harney Lane shall require installation of 6-7 foot high sound
walls or landscape berming, or any combination of the two to achieve
the desired noise attenuation. Current and future homes located across
Harney Lane will be masked from noise associated with major retail
uses by the already elevated ambient background freeway noise and by
setback distances of at>tnroximately 300 feet.
Significant Mitigation Measures 8.3 - 8.8.
Potential project impacts would be lessened through project design fea-
tures, including buffering of sensitive land uses from nearby noise
sources.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
CS
Significance
With
Mitigation
Less than
significant
Less than
significant
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Impact 8.4: The proposed project would Significant Mitigation Measure 8.6: Homes situated adjacent to the train tracks
place sensitive receptors in the vicinity of require either a setback distance of 430 feet or a 6 foot sound wall, land -
train noise. scape berming, or any combination of the two to mitigate train noise to
65 dB at the residential exterior and ground floor interior. This attenua-
tion may be achieved by the design of the mini -storage facility. An in-
terior noise analysis should be submitted in conjunction with building
plan check, to verify that structural noise reduction will be achieved in
a livable upstairs space, at the perimeter tier of homes by the specified
structural components (windows, walls, doors, roof/ceiling assembly)
shown on building plans. Disclosure of the presence of the tracks
should be included in all real estate transfer documents to anyone buy-
ing or leasing a property within 500 feet of the train tracks.
Significance
With
Mitigation
Less than
significant
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Potential project impacts would also be lessened through project design
features, including buffering of sensitive land uses from the UPRR.
Impact 8.5: Detention basin pump noise
Significant Mitigation Measure 8.7: A detention basin pump system will be re- Less than
could result in permanent increases in ambi-
quired to empty the detention basin. The planned proximity of homes significant
ent noise levels above levels existing without
to the basin would likely require substantial shielding if such pumps
the project.
were to operate at night. To the satisfaction of the City of Lodi, noise
levels at residences in proximity to any required basin pump system
shall be attenuated to meet the City's noise standards. Said attenuation
can be achieved through enclosing the pump system or using upgraded
sound ratin-a buildine materials in nearby residences.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 8.6: Agricultural noise resulting from
Significant
Mitigation Measure 8.8: Noisiest agricultural activities will have sub-
Less than
existing on-going agricultural operations in
stantial setback from onsite residences, particularly as the site is pro-
significant
the vicinity of the project site could impact
gressively developed. Buyer notification of the presence of possible
sensitive receptors onsite.
agricultural activity noise shall be made as part of any property transfer
documents.
Potential project impacts would be lessened through project design fea-
tures, including buffering of sensitive land uses from nearby agricultural
uses.
r.,.. aet Q n , ,.F -Seh .,.1 Uses n ., less thaft sig- T�7 ..,.,1 This impaet ..la he lessened
TAT, ise Sear -,.e. The pr-epese pfejeet.. thre..gh pr-ejeet ,1,...ig Fehr...-ef ineluding the ,.,1 1,.eati,... e f the
1..,1,..; the ...1,.,.,....ent ,.0 , ,.1,....,,ntea�, ,.1.,.,.1 . Ap ,.0 thesite awa-y C_,..-.. CA as and the
.1.,.,.1 seasitiAixe neeiseTT T
Impact 8.8: Potential to temporarily generate Significant No mitigation measures required. Less than
vibration and ground borne noise during con- significant
struction.
Impact 8.9: Operation of the project will Significant No mitigation measures required. This impact would be lessened Less than
result in new noise sources. through project design features, including the placement of sensitive significant
receptors removed from noise-eeneratine land uses.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
40
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
AIR QUALITY
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Impact 1.1 (A): (Construction Generated Air Significant
Pollutants) Construction of the proposed
project would generate air pollutants, includ-
ing equipment exhaust and fugitive dust.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
Mitigation Measure 1.1: In addition to implementing the "Dust Con-
trol Measures for Construction" required by San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), construction onsite shall im-
plement the "Enhanced and Additional Control Measures for Construc-
tion Emissions of PM -10" identified in Table 6-3 of the SJVAPCD's
Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. The measures
identified in Table 6-3 are as follows:
♦ 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 one
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 areas;
♦ Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 20
mph; and
♦ Limit area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction
activity at any one time. This impact would also be lessened
through project design features and compliance with SJVAPD
Regulation VIII.
41
Significance
With
Mitigation
Less than
significant
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 1.1 (C): (Operational Emissions of Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features and com- Less than
Particulate Matter) Operation of the pro- pliance with SJVAPD Rule 9510. significant
posed project would generate particulate mat-
ter.
Impact 1.1 (D): (Operational Emissions of Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features. Less than
Carbon Monoxide) Operation of the pro- significant
posed project would generate carbon monox-
ide (CO).
Impact 1.2: (Contribution to Cumulative Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features and com- Less than
Criteria Air Pollutants) The project would pliance with SJVAPD Rule 9510. significant
emit ozone precursors (NOx and ROG) at
levels that are significant as cumulatively con-
siderable net increases of non -attainment cri-
teria pollutants for the San Joaquin Valley Air
Basin.
Impact 1.3: (Exposure of Sensitive Receptors Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features, compli- Less than
to Air Pollution) The proposed project would ance with SJVAPD Regulation VIII and Rule 9510, and incorporation significant
generate air pollutants that could affect sensi- of Mitigation Measure 1.1.
tive receptors and the project involves siting
sensitive receptors in the vicinity of air pollu-
tion venerators.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
42
Significance
Significance
Before
With
Significant Impact
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Impact 1.1 (B): (Operational Emissions of
Significant
This impact would be lessened through project design features and com- Less than
Ozone Precursors) Operation of the proposed
pliance with SJVAPD Rule 9510. significant
project would generate NOx and ROG,
which are ozone precursors, in excess of the
SJVAPCD's yearly emission significance
thresholds.
Impact 1.1 (C): (Operational Emissions of Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features and com- Less than
Particulate Matter) Operation of the pro- pliance with SJVAPD Rule 9510. significant
posed project would generate particulate mat-
ter.
Impact 1.1 (D): (Operational Emissions of Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features. Less than
Carbon Monoxide) Operation of the pro- significant
posed project would generate carbon monox-
ide (CO).
Impact 1.2: (Contribution to Cumulative Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features and com- Less than
Criteria Air Pollutants) The project would pliance with SJVAPD Rule 9510. significant
emit ozone precursors (NOx and ROG) at
levels that are significant as cumulatively con-
siderable net increases of non -attainment cri-
teria pollutants for the San Joaquin Valley Air
Basin.
Impact 1.3: (Exposure of Sensitive Receptors Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features, compli- Less than
to Air Pollution) The proposed project would ance with SJVAPD Regulation VIII and Rule 9510, and incorporation significant
generate air pollutants that could affect sensi- of Mitigation Measure 1.1.
tive receptors and the project involves siting
sensitive receptors in the vicinity of air pollu-
tion venerators.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
42
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
REPORT SUMMARY
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONTINUED)
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 1A (Objectionable Odors) The pro- Significant This impact would be lessened through project design features. No Less than
posed land uses could be exposed to occa- further mitigation measures are required. significant
sional odors emitted by surrounding agricul-
tural operations.
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact
43
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH FEIR ADDENDUM
REPORT SUMMARY
44
III INITIAL STUDY
This chapter provides an evaluation of potential environmental impacts resulting from modifications to the Rey-
nolds Ranch Project and summarizes whether or not the mitigation measures shown in Table 2-1 would reduce
those potential environmental impacts to less -than significant.
A. Analysis
The following analysis uses the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial Study Checklist. The con-
clusions in the checklist are based, in part, on a review of the information presented in Table 2-1, to identify im-
pacts associated with the modified project.
Findings and Conclusion. There would be less than significant impacts in regard to land use from the modifications
to the Project.
a. The modified project would remain as a mixed-use development project. As identified in Impact 3.3.1 in the
2006 EIR, the project could result in the demolition of 12 residences, a Moose Lodge Facility and ancillary
45
Significant
Potentially Unless
Less Than
Significant Mitigation
Significant
Environmental Topic
Impact Incorporated
Impact No Impact
1. Land Use and Planning
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established community?
X
b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including, but not limited to the
X
general plan, specific plan, local coastal program,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
X
plan or natural community conservation plan?
Findings and Conclusion. There would be less than significant impacts in regard to land use from the modifications
to the Project.
a. The modified project would remain as a mixed-use development project. As identified in Impact 3.3.1 in the
2006 EIR, the project could result in the demolition of 12 residences, a Moose Lodge Facility and ancillary
45
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
structures.' The modified project would not result in a greater impact than that already identified in the
2006 EIR and would be reduced to a less -than -significant level through mitigation. Therefore, a less -than -
significant impact would occur.
b. Though the project would require a General Plan amendment, it is consistent with many principles of the
existing General Plan that promote walkability between uses, a jobs to housing ratio, and a varied housing
stock to meet the needs of a diverse population.
As stated in the 2006 EIR, one parcel located on the project site is active under the Williamson Act Con-
tract, however the project modifications do not result in any greater impact than already identified in the
2006 EIR. Conversion of the land to urban uses would not result in a policy conflict with the San Joaquin
County General Plan land use designation, however, because the entire project site has been annexed to the
City of Lodi, the parcel previously affected by the Williamson Act was removed from the Act 2 As regu-
lated by Mitigation Measure 3.7.2 of the 2006 EIR, the project is subject to a fee for the conversion of agri-
cultural land and mitigation set forth by the 2006 EIR is adequate to reduce project modifications to a less
than significant impact.
c. As stated in the 2006 EIR, the project site is within an open space preserve area identified in the San Joaquin
Multi Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan.' There are no other habitat conservation or
natural community conservation plans that apply to the project site. Mitigation Measures set forth by the
2006 EIR are adequate to reduce potential impacts of the modified project to less -than -significant levels.
Therefore, a less -than -significant impact would result from modifications.
2. Mineral Resources
Per Section 1.0 of the 2006 EIR, "there are no known mineral resources of value or any locally important mineral
resource recovery sites within the project area". Therefore, this topic was previously scoped out of the EIR study.'
Modifications to the Project will have no impact on mineral resources.
'Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.3-10.
2 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.7-20.
' Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page ES -7.
'Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 1.0-5.
46
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
Significant
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
3. Transportation/Traffic
Would the project:
a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial in- X
crease in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county con- X
gestion management agency for designated roads or
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in lo- X
cation that results in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design fea-
ture (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) X
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity ? X
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus X
Findings and Conclusion. Modifications to the Project result in the following impacts in regards to traffic and
transportation.
a. Per Mitigation Measure 3.10.2 of the 2006 EIR: prior to approval of the first tract or parcel map for the
Reynolds Ranch Project, the Public Works Department will review and approve the roadway phasing and
improvement plan to ensure that new roadway improvements will adequately support new development.'
The phasing plan shall also note the timing of roadway improvements by other adjacent development so
5 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.10-55.
47
C I
TY
O
F
approval
L
0 DI
access
to and from all portions of the
site
exists for
emergency service
REYNOLDSRANCH
EIR
ADDENDUM
I
I T I
L
STUDY
that these coincide with proposed improvements on the same roadway facilities for
the proposed project. 6 Because the area streets will not exceed carrying capacity,
impacts regarding traffic are less than significant.
b. Per Section 3.10.1 of the Z046 EIR, the City's accepted Level of Service LAS on
local streets and intersection is a LOS C. However, LOS D is an acceptable
condition for state route facilities. Project modifications would result in an increase
of 22,236 daily trips (from Z8,300 to 50,536) and 945 peak hour trips (from 2,072 to
2,996) to and from the project site. Assuming the proposed mitigations in the 2006
FEIR are implemented for the 2030 condition, the project traffic would not reduce
the LOS levels at any intersections or on any roads below the LOS for the 2030
condition without the project. Therefore,, the project modifications would have a
less -than -significant impact in relation to the LOS thresholds.
C. The modified project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in air traffic patterns. There are no
aviational uses on the project site and the modified project would not affect an
airport or private airstrip. Therefore, no impact would occur.
d. All roadways and intersections either within the development or interfacing with
existing, surrounding roads would comply with applicable design standards in
accordance with City code. Compliance would be ensured through the Public
Works Department's review of the project circulation plan. Although the built
project would likely be in close proximity to agricultural uses, the project
modifications would not create a conflict between vehicles entering and exiting the
site and the continued operation of farm equipment. Therefore no impact would
occur.
C. As required by Mitigation Measure 3.10.5 of the Z006 EIR, the design of the
internal circulation system and vehicular access would be subject to review and
approval by the City of Lodi's Police and Fire Department prior to issuance of any
building
permits
for the preject.9 This review
and
approval
would ensure that
adequate
access
to and from all portions of the
site
exists for
emergency service
responders under the modified project. Therefore, no impact would occur.
illdan,
Reynolds
Ranch Project EII ,
August,
2006, gage 3.10-57.
illdan,
Reynolds
Ranch h Project EII ,
August,
2006, page ES -24.
we
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
f. As required by Mitigation Measure 3.10.6 of the 2006 EIR, adequate parking demand must be satisfied for
all proposed uses (i.e. parks, commercial and residential development, etc.) prior to the issuance of construc-
tion permits.10 Furthermore, under the modified project, the number of spaces proposed would exceed the
City's parking requirement. Therefore, no impact would occur.
g. Bike lanes, pedestrian facilities, and five bus stops within the site are planned under the modified project.
Furthermore, as required by Mitigation Measure 3.10.3 of the 2006 EIR, the project's roadway improve-
ment plan is required to identify all bikeways, off-street multi -use trails and sidewalks within the project
area." Submittal of the above information is intended to address any potential for conflicts between vehi-
cles, pedestrians, and cyclists and thereby ensure safe and adequate access. Therefore, Mitigation Measure
3.10.3, already set forth in the 2006 EIR, is adequate to reduce the potential impacts associated with the
modified project to a less -than -significant level.
4. Aesthetics
As stated in Section 1.0 of the 2006 EIR, Aesthetics was scoped out of detailed review because the original project
did not constitute a specific plan development, but rather a combination of uses that would be fully defined
through a phased development plan. 12 The EIR determined that project aesthetics would be evaluated through a
future entitlement and environmental review process. This holds true for the modified project as well. The final
combination of land uses is not known at this point in the review process. Furthermore, project design details
that would allow for a complete evaluation of potential aesthetic impacts do not yet exist. As a result, aesthetics
would occur under a future CEQA review.
5. Population and Housing
Though the proposed project will generate population and housing, the focus of the 2006 EIR was the retail and
office components contained in Phase I of the development process. Housing and population will be studied in
detail in a future environmental assessment.13 The estimated population growth associated with the project is ac-
counted for in the growth projections set forth in the City of Lodi 1991 General Plan as well as the preliminary
projections for the General Plan Update, which is currently underway."
2008.
10 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page ES -24.
10 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page ES -23.
12 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 1.0-4
13 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 1.0-4.
14 Peter Pirnejad, City of Lodi Co -Interim Community Development Director, personal communication, August 5,
49
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
The modified project would result in the displacement of some single-family residential homes on Stockton Street.
These home owners will be fully compensated by the applicant for the fair market value of their homes, based on
an estimate provided by a third party appraiser.15 The acquisition of homes would be executed through a process
mutually agreed to by the applicant and the home owners. Eminent domain would not be exercised.
Significant
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
6. Air Quality
Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X
applicable air quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute sub-
stantially to an existing or projected air quality vio- X
lation?
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non -attainment under an applicable federal or state X
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X
concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial X
number of DeoDle?
Findings and Conclusions
a. The modified project uses would require a General Plan Amendment. The existing land use designation is
Planned Residential. The proposed new land uses are Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residen-
tial, High Density Residential, Senior High Density Residential, Senior Graduated Care, Mini Storage, Pub-
lic, Office and Retail; these uses will be contained under the following zoning designations: Neighborhood
Commercial, Office and Planned Residential. Despite the need for a General Plan amendment, the project
would be consistent with the overall vision of the General Plan, which identifies the project site as an area
" Dale Gillespie, RPM Company, communication with Peter Pirnejad, City of Lodi Co -Interim Community Devel-
opment Director, August 14, 2008.
50
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
for future development. Even with conversion of hosing to commercial uses, the project would not be in-
consistent with the General Plan because the General Plan identifies residential and residential supporting
uses as appropriate for this area.
Project consistency with the Air Quality Management Plan is determined on the basis of whether its pro-
jected growth is within the City of Lodi's most current growth projections, which are, in turn, factored into
the AQMP. The anticipated population growth for this project is within the regional population forecasts,
because the projections are within the Housing Element growth cap, adopted in 2004 as part of the General
Plan. Therefore, the modified project is not expected to conflict with the projections used to develop the
air quality management plan (AQMP). This would be a less than significant impact.
b. The modified project would increase the generation of short-term air pollutants from construction activities
and long-term air pollutants from vehicle emissions. Impact 3.1.1 (A) in the 2006 EIR identified impacts
that are less than significant, with mitigation, in regards to construction emissions. While the proposed
changes to the project will construct different types of units, the finding in the original EIR will remain the
same assuming all proposed mitigation measures are in place.16
Impact 3.1.1 (B) in the 2006 EIR identified potentially significant operational emissions of ozone precursors.
These impacts were found to be significant and unavoidable after all available mitigation measures were in
place. With the proposed changes to the project, trip generation will increase 78.6% in relation to estimated
trip volumes under the previous project concept. This could increase the production of NO. and ROG be-
yond the levels listed in the 2006 EIR. With all available mitigation measures stated in the current EIRP the
impact will remain significant and unavoidable.
Impact 3.1.1 (C) in the 2006 EIR identified impacts that are less than significant, with mitigation, in regards
to operational emissions of particular matter. Using the same mitigation measures outlined in the EIR18,
while the emissions will be increased over the levels in the EIR, the impact should be less than significant.
Impact 3.1.1 (D) in the 2006 EIR identified impacts that are less than significant in regards to operational
emissions of carbon monoxide. While the tons per year of emissions would be higher than outlined in the
16 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.1 - 12
17 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.1 - 14
1s Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.1 - 16
51
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
EIR19, the levels in the CO "hotspot" analysis should not change. This is because when a hotspot analysis is
conducted, the worst-case scenario is analyzed and this assumes highest volume for the peak hour at the
worst time of day with the worst-case meteorological conditions. The finding in the current EIR will re-
main the same. A less -than -significant impact would occur.
c. Per San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation VIII, Rule 9510, the modi-
fied project would not cause new significant impacts to the existing air quality standards. Impact 3.1.2 in
the 2006 EIR identified potentially significant cumulative impacts of criteria pollutants. These impacts were
found to be significant and unavoidable after all available mitigation measures were in place. This finding
will be the same with the modified project.
d. Residents of the proposed senior housing project would potentially be exposed to substantial pollutant con-
centrations. However, Impact 3.1.3 in the 2006 EIR identified impacts that are less than significant, with
mitigation, in regards to exposure of sensitive receptors to air pollution. There will be no change in this
finding with the modified project. A less than significant impact would occur.
e. The proposed uses under the modified project include residential, office and commercial (retail). None of
the proposed uses are known to generate offensive odors that could adversely affect a substantial number of
people on-site or in the near vicinity. The gas station is most likely to generate objectionable odors but
those would likely be localized and intermittent in nature. Impact 3.1.4 in the 2006 EIR identified impacts
that are less than significant in regards to objectionable odors. There will be no change in this finding with
the modified project. As a result, a less -than -significant impact would occur.
19 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.1 - 16
52
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
7. Noise
Would the project:
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise lev-
els in excess of standards established in the local X
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise lev- X
els?
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X
without the project?
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above X
levels existing without the project?
e. For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use X
airport, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private air-
strip, would the project expose people residing or X
working in the project area to excessive noise lev-
els?
Findings and Conclusions:
a. Impact 3.8.2 of in the 2006 EIR identifies a noise and land use compatibility impact for residential and out-
door recreational space within 145 feet of the Harney Lane centerline. The modified plan reduces the
amount of residential uses on Harney Lane to the area between the proposed mini -storage site to the LTRR
tracks. Retail development (which is considered to be less noise -sensitive) would replace the residential de-
velopment in this area. The modified project would not result in any new impacts beyond those already
identified above. A noise and land use compatibility threshold of a community noise exposure level
(CNEL) of 65 decibels (dB) or less was established for this project in the 2006 EIR. Mitigation Measures
53
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
3.8.3, 3.8.4, and 3.8.5 would be adequate to address the traffic noise impacts from Harney Lane with respect
to the 65 dB CNEL threshold, to a less than significant level.
Impact 3.8.4 identified a potentially significant noise and land use compatibility impact upon proposed resi-
dential development resulting from noise along the UPRR railroad line. The relationship of residential land
uses to the railroad tracks in the current plan is basically the same as the plan analyzed in the 2006 EIR. The
new plan substitutes low-density residential and senior housing for medium -density residential. This change
in land use does not change the conclusions because the City of Lodi noise and land use compatibility guide-
lines are the same for each of these residential densities and housing types. Mitigation Measure 3.8.6, as set
forth in the 2006 EIR, would be adequate to mitigate the impact of train noise with respect to the estab-
lished 65 dB CNEL threshold. A less than significant impact would occur.
Impact 3.8.5 in the 2006 EIR addressed the potential effects of noise from the detention basin pump upon
proposed residential development. Mitigation Measure 3.8.7, as set forth in the 2006 EIR, would be ade-
quate to address potential impacts resulting from the detention basin pump system. Impact 3.8.6 in the 2006
EIR identified the potential impact of ongoing agricultural noise upon future residents within the Specific
Plan. The relationship of the proposed residential uses to the site boundaries has not changed. Mitigation
Measure 3.8.8, as set forth in the 2006 EIR, would be adequate to address potential impacts resulting from
agricultural operation noise. Project modifications would not result in noise levels that are above the ac-
cepted noise standards for this project. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
Per Impact 3.8.8, in the 2006 EIR, project construction could temporarily cause groundborne vibration and
noise, however, levels are not expected to be excessive because the project would not involve large scale
demolition and excavation 20 This conclusion applies to the modified project as well. Should groundborne
vibration and noise occur, the intensity and frequency would not be such that off-site receptors would be
adversely affected. Under the modified plan, no residential development would be proposed within the 200 -
foot screening level setback distance to control ground borne vibration resulting from heavy rail trains.
The modified project would not result in any new impacts, and this impact would remain less than signifi-
cant.
c. Impact 3.8.9 and Section 3.8.6 Cumulative Impacts in the 2006 EIR discuss the potential impact of project -
generated traffic on noise levels in the surrounding areas. The modified project traffic report was reviewed
21 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.8-17.
54
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
to determine how changes in project traffic may affect traffic noise increases along the street network.21 The
analysis focused on Harney Lane where project traffic would potentially have the greatest impact offsite.
The modified project would not result in any new impacts along the offsite street network beyond those al-
ready identified in the 2006 EIR.
The modified project shows existing residential located along Stockton Street south of Harney Lane to re-
main. The land use plan analyzed in the 2006 EIR noise study showed new medium -density residential
along both sides of Stockton Street south of Harney Lane. Because the existing residential would remain
under the modified project, and was not identified as remaining under the original project, there was no
analysis of increased noise levels at these existing Stockton Street residences in the 2006 EIR. The connec-
tion of Stockton Street to the project's internal street network would occur when the residential develop-
ment moves forward. Until that time, Stockton Street would remain a cul-de-sac.ZZ Currently, the noise
environment at these existing residences results primarily from traffic on Harney Lane for those residences
located within about 200 feet of the centerline. Noise is also generated from railroad train operations on the
Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The existing CNEL along Harney Lane is approximately 68-69 dBA. The
existing CNEL resulting from railroad train operations is calculated to be about 57 dBA CNEL. This estab-
lishes the residual background noise level at these residences. Traffic projections from the 2008 traffic re-
port were used to estimate noise levels along Stockton Street in the future. The data indicate that the
CNEL along Stockton Street would be approximately 56 dBA CNEL at full buildout of the project site.
The medium -density residential component proposed west of the existing residential development would
provide attenuation of railroad train noise, which would benefit the existing homes. The Stockton Street
traffic noise would be substantially above the existing traffic noise for residences to the south along Stock-
ton Street not near Harney Lane. The overall noise levels from current railroad operations would not
change substantially. However, the character of the noise environment would change because it would be
dominated by local traffic as compared to distant traffic and distant railroad trains. An increase in retail uses
will contribute to an increase in ambient noise levels. However, because retail uses were already planned for
in this development project, the modifications cause a less -than -significant impact to the permanent ambient
noise levels.
d. In the 2006 EIR, Impact 3.8.1 states that the construction of the proposed project would temporarily gener-
ate noise above levels existing without the project. As required under mitigation measures 3.8.1 and 3.8.2,
2' Reynolds Ranch Draft Report, Traffic Impact and Planning Study, PRISM Engineering, March 21, 2008.
22 Personal conversation with Peter Pirnejad, City of Lodi Planning, August 2008.
55
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
construction would require a permit and would be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. for any
heavy equipment anticipated within 500 feet of any residence. Staging areas are to be located away from ex-
isting residences and all equipment shall use properly operating mufflers 23 Additionally, all stationary con-
struction equipment must be placed in a way so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors
nearest the project site.24 Temporary noise impacts would not substantially worsen under the modified pro-
ject and existing mitigation measures would be adequate to reduce potential impacts to a less -than -significant
level.
e. Because this project is not located in an airport land use plan, no impact would occur "
f. As stated in the 2006 EIR, the closest airport to the project site is the Lodi Airpark, which is approximately
3 miles to the southwest of the site. Because this project is not located near a private air strip, no impact
would occur.26
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
8. Biological Resources
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species iden-
tified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status spe-
cies in local or regional plans, policies, or regula- X
tions, or by the California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identi-
fied in local or regional plans, policies and regula- X
tions or by the California Department of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
" Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page ES -19.
24 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page ES -20.
21 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.5-5.
26 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.8-8.
56
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally pro-
tected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct re- X
moval, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory X
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wild-
life nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances pro-
tecting biological resources, such as a tree preserva- X
tion policy or ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conserva-
tion Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state X
habitat conservation olan?
Findings and conclusions:
a. Impacts 3.2.3(a) - 3.2.3(g) in the 2006 EIR identify potentially significant effects of the original project on
special status species .2' The modified project would not result in any new impacts beyond those already
identified above. Mitigation measures 3.2.1 and 3.2.2, as set forth in the 2006 EIR, would be adequate to ad-
dress potential impacts to special status species under the modified project. As a result, a less -than -significant
impact would occur.
b. The project site does not contain a riparian corridor or other sensitive natural community. 9 Therefore, the
modified project would have no impact on such resources.
27 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page ES -8.
29 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.2-17.
57
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
c. The project site does not contain any wetlands.30 Therefore, the project and its modifications would result
in no impact on such resources.
d. Due to the absence of water bodies on the project site, the modified project would not affect the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish species. Per Impact 3.2.1 of the 2006 EIR, the project would have a
less -than -significant impact on wildlife migratory patterns.31 There are no changes under the modified pro-
ject that would affect this conclusion. As a result, a less -than -significant impact would also occur under the
modified project.
e. Per Mitigation Measure 3.2.3, should project modifications affect or necessitate the removal of the Heritage
Oak tree on-site, a Review Authority- approved application is required, per San Joaquin County Code Divi-
sion 15 Chapter 9-1505. The modified project would not result in the removal of the one Oak tree in the
southwestern corner of the site.32 No impact would occur in that the modified project would not conflict
with the tree preservation ordinance or any other policies to protect biological resources.
f. As required by the San Joaquin County Multi -species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan
(SJMHCP) and stated by Mitigation Measure 3.2.2 in the 2006 EIR, development of this site includes the
payment of Open Space Conversion fees in accordance with the fee schedule in-place at the time construc-
tion commences and implementation of the Plan's "Measures to Minimize Impacts", pursuant to Section 5.2
of the SJMHCP.33 Through payment of the Open Space Conversion fee, the modified project would have a
less -than -significant impact.
3° Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.2-17.
31 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.2-18.
32 Peter Pirnejad, City of Lodi, email correspondence, August 7, 2008.
33 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page ES -8.
31 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.3-10.
E
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation
Significant
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated
Impact No Impact
9. Cultural Resources
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi-
cance of a historical resource as defined in
X
§ 15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi-
cance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
X
§ 15064.5?
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleon-
X
tological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those in-
X
terred outside of formal cemeteries?
Findings and Conclusions:
a. Impact 3.3.1 of the 2006 EIR identifies potentially significant impacts on resources of historical signifi-
cance. 3'
ignifi-cance.3' These potential impacts are addressed and mitigated to a less -than -significant level through the re-
quirements set forth in Mitigation Measures 3.3.1 - 3.3.3. The modified project would not result in any
new, potentially significant impacts beyond those already identified. Accordingly, the specified Mitigation
Measures would be adequate to reduce potential impacts under the modified project to a less -than -significant
level.
b. Impact 3.3.2 of the 2006 EIRidentifies potential significant impacts on archeological resources of historical
significance. These potential significant impacts are addressed and mitigated to a less -than -significant level
through the requirements set forth in Mitigation Measure 3.3.4.36 The modified project would not result in
any new, potentially significant impacts beyond those already identified. Accordingly, the specified Mitiga-
tion Measures would be adequate to reduce potential impacts under the modified project to a less -than -
significant level.
36 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.3-2.
59
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
c. The site does not contain unique geologic features and no paleotologic resources have been discovered on-
site." The modified project would not result in any new, potentially significant impacts beyond those al-
ready identified by Impact 3.3.3 the 2006 EIR. Mitigation Measure 3.3.5, set forth in the 2006 EIR would be
adequate to reduce potential impacts under the modified project to a less -than -significant level.
d. Impact 3.3.4 of the 2006 EIR identifies potentially significant impacts on human remains. These potentially
significant impacts would be addressed through requirements of Public Health and Safety Code Section
50.9798." The modified project would not result in any new, potentially significant impacts beyond those
already identified in the 2006 EIR. Thus, the project modifications would result in a less -than -significant im-
pact.
10. Geology and Soils
Based on the Initial Study completed for this project in 2006, potential impacts to Geology and Soils were scoped
out from detailed review in the 2006 EIR analysis. As stated in Section 1.0 of the EIR, the (original) project did
not include pursuit of approvals for site specific development, and evaluation of potential impacts under CEQA
would occur when detailed project information became available, including the exact location and nature of new
land uses.39 This applies to the modified project as well. Although there have been changes to the previously pro-
posed site plan, the level of project detail is still such that an evaluation of potential impacts will be appropriate at
a subsequent phase of the entitlement process.
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials? X
37 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.3-12 and 3.3.13.
38 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 3.3-16.
39 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August 2006, page 1.0-5.
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable up-
set and accident conditions involving the release X
of hazardous materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or X
proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a re- X
sult, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project result in a safety X
hazard for people residing or working in the
oroiect area?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety haz-
ard for people residing or working in the project X
area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically inter-
fere with an adopted emergency response plan X
or emergency evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urban-
ized areas or where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
Findings and Conclusions.
a. Whereas the previous project concept did not include a gas station on-site, the modified project does. The
construction and operation of a new gas station under the modified Project creates a potentially significant
1.1
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
hazard due to the routine transport and use of fuel and other automotive products. However, the transport
of fuel to the station and subsequent storage within underground tanks would be subject to existing hazard-
ous materials regulations. The use of automotive products, such as engine oil and window cleaner do not
represent a significant hazard due to the volumes of these substances that would be utilized on-site. Local-
ized spill of these materials may occur, but the volumes would not be such that a significant hazard exists.
No hazardous materials would be disposed of on on-site. For the reasons stated above, a less -than -significant
impact would occur under the modified project.
The transportation of fuel and subsequent storage under the modified project will be subject to existing haz-
ardous materials regulations. Additionally, a fire station will be constructed on-site in Phase II of the pro-
ject and will provide emergency assistance in the event of a spill. If necessary, a hazardous materials re-
sponse team could respond to a call on-site. Thus, the impact involving the potential release of hazardous
materials into the environment would be less than significant.
c. The nearest existing school to the project site is Montessori Villa Preschool, serving 30-60 children between
the ages of two and six.40 Montessori Villa is located on 2525 S. Stockton, immediately bordering the pro-
ject site. Lois E. Borchardt Elementary school is .3 miles from the project site and serves approximately 795
children in grades K-6 41 The impact of hazardous materials on school children would be less than significant
because operation of the gas station and transportation of fuel to it would be subject to existing hazardous
materials regulations. Furthermore, the gas station would be contained to the center of the project site so
that it is set away from the school and its receptors.42
d. As stated in Impact 3.5.1 of the 2006 EIR, there are sites within the project area that contained hazardous
materials and required mitigation 43 Mitigation Measure 3.5.1- 3.5.11, which are set forth in the 2006 EIR,
would be adequate to address potential impacts to hazardous materials on-site under the modified project.
As a result, a less -than -significant impact would occur.
40 Doe, Krista. Montessori Villa School. Personal communication with Leslie Wilson, DC&E. June 23, 2008.
41 Gibbons, Tina. Lodi Unified School District. Personal communication with Leslie Wilson, DC&E. June 23, 2008.
42 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.1-19.
43 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.5-9.
62
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
e. The project is approximately 3.1 miles away from the Lodi airpark. It is not located in an airport land use
plan and none of the area airports cause a safety hazard to the project site.44 Therefore, the modified project
would have no impact on air safety.
f. The project site is not located near a private airstrip." The safety of people residing or working on the pro-
ject site under the modified project would not be affected by air traffic. No impact would occur.
g. As required by Mitigation Measure 3.10.5 in the 2006 EIR, the design of the internal circulation system and
vehicular access would be subject to review and approval by the City of Lodi's Police and Fire Department
prior to issuance of any building permits for the project.46 This review and approval would ensure that ade-
quate access to and from all portions of the site would exist for emergency service responders. Therefore,
no impact to emergency response or evacuation would occur under the modified project.
h. The threat of wildland fires at the project site is considered very low because of its agricultural setting. The
2006 EIR found a less than significant project impact regarding the risk of wildland fires.47 Because project
modifications would not introduce new risks or increase existing hazards related to potential wildland fires,
a less -than -significant impact would occur.
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Environmental Topic Imnact Incornorated Imnact No Imnact
12. Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste dis-
44 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.5-5.
45 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.8-8.
46 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page ES -24.
41 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 4.0-11.
rN
63
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
64
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant
Mitigation Significant
Environmental Topic Impact
Incorporated Impact No Impact
b.
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
X
table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been granted)?
c.
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river, in a manner
X
which would result in substantial erosion or silta-
tion on- or off-site?
d.
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river, or substantially
X
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or
off-site?
e.
Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm-
X
water drainage systems or provide substantial ad-
ditional sources of polluted runoff?
f.
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
X
g.
Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary
X
or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood haz-
ard delineation map?
h.
Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area struc-
tures which would impede or redirect flood
X
flows?
i.
Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving flooding, in-
X
cluding flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam?
64
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
Significant
Impact
Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
J. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
X
Findings and Conclusion. Modifications to the project would result in a less -than -significant impact on hydrology and
water quality.
a. As identified in Impact 3.6.3 of the 2006 EIR, the project has the potential to generate nonpoint-source wa-
ter pollutants typical to urban land uses. The potential pollution would be mitigated through compliance
with Section 402 of the Clean Water Act and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES). In order to meet applicable requirements, the City of Lodi has implemented a stormwater man-
agement plan to address post -construction impacts.48
There is also the risk of water contamination associated with the construction of the project. These risks
include exposed soils and the potential spillage of construction fuels or equipment. Under NPDES re-
quirements, the contractor would be required to develop and implement a stormwater pollution plan
(SWPP) that will include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize potential impacts to water quality
during construction. Because these requirements would apply to the modified project, a less -than -significant
impact would occur.
b. As identified by Impact 3.6.6 of the 2006 EIR, the project involves the conversion of approximately of 220
acres of largely permeable farmland to impermeable surfaces. 50 Modifications to the project would not
cause a substantial increase in the project's impermeable surface area. The construction of a water retention
basin on-site will allow for stormwater percolation to occur. Mitigation Measures 3.6.1- 3.6.6, identified in
the 2006 EIR, address that stormwater drainage and collection will be constructed or improved to the City
" Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.6-14.
so Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.6-13.
12 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.6-14.
65
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
standards. These measures will be adequate to reduce the potential impacts under the modified project to a
less -than -significant impact.
c. The modified project would not alter the course of a stream or river. As addressed by Impact 3.6.4 of the
2006 EIR, the increase in permeable surfaces on the project site will change the drainage pattern in the area.
However, the changes would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Potential impacts
under the modified project would be reduced to a less -than -significant level through improvements identified
in the Infrastructure Master Plan, which includes the construction of a drainage basin on-site.52 Stormwater
generated on-site will be collected in the basin before it is transferred into the Water Irrigation District ca-
nal.
d. The modified project would not alter the course of a stream or river. As addressed by Impact 3.6.5 of the
2006 EIR, the increase in permeable surfaces on the project site will change the drainage pattern in the area
and increase the volume and velocity of stormwater runoff from the site.54 Mitigation Measures 3.6.1 — 3.6.6
in the 2006 EIR would reduce potential impacts to a less -than -significant level. Under the modified project,
the same mitigation measures would reduce the potential for on- or off-site flooding to a less -than -significant
level. this is considered a less than significant due to improvements that will be made through the Infrastruc-
ture Master Plan. These improvements include the construction of a drainage basin on-site.
e. While the project and its modifications would contribute to runoff, the requirements set forth in Mitigation
Measures 3.6.1-3.6.6 in the 2006 EIR,55 would reduce impacts to a less -than -significant level. These same
mitigation measures would apply to the modified project and also reduce potential runoff impacts to a less -
than -significant level.
f. The project modifications would not otherwise degrade water quality beyond the potential impacts dis-
cussed in responses a) and c). Therefore, the modified project would result in a less -than -significant impact.
g. The project site is not in a 100 -year flood hazard zone.sb Therefore, the project and its modifications would
have no impact.
" Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.6-15.
ss Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.6-13.
" Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.6-11.
:.
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
h. Because the project site is not located in a 100 -year flood hazard zone, proposed structures would not im-
pede or redirect flood flows." Therefore, no impacts would occur.
i. As stated by Impact 3.6.9 of the 2006 EIR, there is risk of inundation due to dam failure. The existing
Emergency Action Plan that would be initiated by the East Bay Municipal Utility District would lessen po-
tential risks under the modified project in the event of a dam break along the Lower Mokelumne River."
Therefore, a less -than -significant impact would occur.
j. Because the project is not located near a large body of water, there will be no impact from seiche. Similarly,
there would be no impact associated with a potential tsunami or mudflow due to the distance from the Pa-
cific Ocean and the relatively flat topography of the project site. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless
Less Than
Significant Mitigation
Significant
Environmental Topic Impact Incorporated
Impact No Impact
13. Public Services and Recreation
Would the project:
a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and re-
gional parks or other recreational facilities such that
X
substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
b. Include recreational facilities or require the con-
struction or expansion of recreational facilities
X
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Findings and Conclusions:
58 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.6-11.
" Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.6-20.
67
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
a. Fire: As identified by Mitigation Measure 3.9.1 in the 2006 EIR, a fire station would be constructed on-site
in Phase II of the development .6' The station and department staff operating from it would be adequate to
meet the service needs of the modified project. Because the station would be built on-site under the modi-
fied project, its construction would not result in any new, significant impacts beyond those already identi-
fied in the 2006 EIR. As a result, a less -than -significant impact would occur.
Police: The Lodi Police Department will provide service to the project. As stated in the 2006 EIR, the de-
mand for increased policing will be offset by the increase in tax base from the proposed retail and residential
uses. 6' This would also apply to the modified project. In addition, the project will involve the formation of
a Community Service District (CSD), the proceeds from which will be used to help finance additional po-
lice services, if necessary. Therefore, a less -than -significant impact would occur.
It may be that new police stations or expansions of existing stations are required in the future to adequately
serve the project, in combination with other projects. If and when the City initiates plans for a new or ex-
panded facility, an environmental evaluation would be conducted to address potential impacts.
Schools: As stated in Impact 3.9.2 of the 2006 EIR, the original project had the potential to cause over-
crowding at existing schools within the vicinity of the project.65 Under the modified project, the potential
for overcrowding still exists, however due the conversion of residential uses to senior and senior assisted liv-
ing uses under the modified project, it is not expected that as many families with school-age children will be
living on-site. Accordingly, it is expected that there would be a reduced demand on school capacity as a re-
sult of the modified project. It it is anticipated that when the project is at or near buildout, the necessary
financing will be available from the collection of developer fees to pay for any necessary expansions of exist-
ing schools or construction of new schools to accommodate students generated by the new development.
As a result, a less -than -significant impact would occur.
61 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.9-5.
63 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.9-4.
65 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.9-2.
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
The potential impacts associated with construction of a new school or expansion of existing schools at a fu-
ture phase of development would be analyzed under a separate CEQA analysis, when plans are set forth by
the school district.
Parks: Modifications to the original project do not create the need for additional parkland. Under the
modified project, 2 acres of parkland would be created within the project site. Creation of this parkland and
construction of related improvements would not result in any potential impacts to the environment beyond
those already discussed in the 2006 EIR and this Addendum. Although the original 5.4 acres66 of neighbor-
hood parkland would be reduced to 2 acres61 under the modified plan, these modifications would not create
the need for additional facilities on or off-site. The City currently has 5.5 acres of parkland for every 1,000
residents, satisfying its goal of 2.5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents.68 Furthermore, it is expected
that many of the future residents of the project currently reside within or near the City of Lodi and already
use its parks and recreational facilities. Therefore, project residents are not expected to represent an entirely
new (park) user population and it is not expected that all residents would regularly use the City's park and
recreational facilities. Lastly, due to the conversion of residential uses to senior and senior assisted living
under the modified project, it is expected that there would be a reduced demand for parkland both on and
off-site. The expected decrease in the number of families with children and adolescents would more than
likely translate to reduced demand for park facilities, especially those containing features such as ball fields
and playgrounds. As a result, a less -than -significant impact on parks would occur.
b. The project includes the construction of a two -acre park on the project site. Construction of the park will
not have an adverse physical effect on the environment beyond the effects already considered in this 2006
EIR and this EIR Addendum. Therefore, a less -than -significant impact would occur.
66 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 2.0-19.
61 Phillippi Engineering, Reynolds Ranch Land Plan, March 17, 2007.
68 Morimoto, David. Senior Planner, City of Lodi. Personal email communication with Leslie Wilson,
DC&E, July 14, 2008.
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH
INITIAL STUDY
Environmental Topic
E I R AD D EN DU M
14. Utilities and Infrastructure
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of X
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or X
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
d. Result in a determination by the wastewater treat-
ment provider which serves or may serve the project
that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's X
projected demand in addition to the provider's exist-
ing commitments?
e. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste X
disposal needs?
f. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X
regulations related to solid waste?
Findings and Conclusions.
a. Though the modified project would generate increased demand for wastewater treatment, the demand from
the project modifications will be adequately met by the improvements identified in the 2008 Waste Water
Master Plan. The project modifications would slightly increase the wet weather flow from 2.4 cubic feet per
second (cfs)69 to 2.5 cfs70; this is not considered a substantial wastewater increase and would not exceed the
existing or proposed wastewater processing capabilities. Therefore, the modified project would not exceed
wastewater treatment requirements, and the modified project would have less -than -significant impacts.
by Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.11-11.
70 City of Lodi, Reynolds Ranch Wastewater Master Plan, May, 29, 2008, page 11.
70
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
b. As stated in Impact 3.11.5 in the 2006 EIR, the project would increase the demand for sanitary wastewater
service. Mitigation Measures 3.11.7 - 3.11.10 set forth by the 2006 EIR, would require the construction of
new wastewater facilities.71 These improvements would take place either within the project site or areas
that have previously been disturbed through the installation of infrastructure or building construction. As a
result, construction of new wastewater facilities under the modified plan would cause less than significant
environmental effects.
c. Water supply demand would increase as a result of the modified project. The demand under the original
project was 501 acre fee per year (AFY) and would increase to 540 AFY under the modified project, which
represent a change of less than 10 percent. The City Public Works Director reviewed the increased water
demand levels associate with the modified project and concluded that it was not necessary to update the Wa-
ter Supply Assessment completed for the original project and presented in Appendix I of the 2006 EIR.'Z
Furthermore, Public Works determined that the increase in water supply demand does not warrant any ad-
ditional mitigation that has not already been considered in the 2006 EIR. Accordingly, the Mitigation
Measures 3.11.1 — 3.11.6, set forth from the 2006 EIR, are adequate to reduce impacts related to water sup-
ply to a less tan significant level.
d. See b) above.
e. As stated in the 2006 EIR, solid waste from the project would be transported to the North County Recy-
cling Center and Landfill. The landfill is projected to be open until 2035. It was determined in the 2006
EIR that the facility had adequate capacity to accommodate solid waste generated under the original project.
Although the modified project would likely generate an increased amount of waste due to the proposed in-
crease in retail uses, the North County landfill would still have adequate capacity to accommodate the pro-
ject's disposal needs.74 Therefore, a less -than -significant impact would occur.
f. As stated on page 3.11-10 of the 2006 EIR,75 the original project would have complied with applicable solid
waste regulations. Although the modified project would alter land uses on the site, compliance with Fed-
'1 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.11-13.
72 Sandelin, Wally, Director of Public Works, City of Lodi. Correspondence with Peter Pirneiad, Co -Interim Com-
munity Development Director, City of Lodi, June 24, 2008.
74 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.11-10.
71 Willdan, Reynolds Ranch Project EIR, August, 2006, page 3.11-10.
71
CITY OF LODI
REYNOLDS RANCH EIR ADDENDUM
INITIAL STUDY
eral, State and local statutes related to solid waste would be upheld under the modified project. Because the
modified project includes a gas station, conformance with applicable regulations related to the transport,
storage, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste would be followed. Therefore, no impact would oc-
cur related to the modified project's compliance with federal, State and local solid waste regulations statutes.
72