Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - October 7, 2020 G-01 PHAGENDA ITEM Gml CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION TM AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing to Consider Adopting a Resolution Approving the Planning Commission's Recommendation to Amend the Safety Element of the City of Lodi General Plan to Implement the Provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -Year Flood Protection MEETING DATE: October 7, 2020 PREPARED BY: Community Development Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: Public Hearing to Consider Adopting a Resolution Approving the Planning Commission's Recommendation to Amend the Safety Element of the City of Lodi General Plan to Implement the Provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -Year Flood Protection. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: California Senate Bill (SB) 5 (Machado) (and subsequently adopted legislation (SB 1278)) requires the City to amend its General Plan and Zoning regulations to address flooding that has a 1 -in -200 chance of occurring in any given year (i.e., a 200 -year storm event). The intent of the legislation is to strengthen the link between flood management and land use. SB 1278 required that SB 5 -related General Plan amendments be adopted by July 2015 and Zoning changes be adopted by July 2016. Based on the very limited portions of the City of Lodi fall within the 200 -year flood zone, and that the land within the 200 -year flood zone was already developed and therefore generally exempt from 200 -year flood zone restrictions, the City of Lodi did not proceed with adopting provisions related to SB 5 and SB 1278. Based upon more recent analysis, it has been determined that the City is required to adopt general plan and zoning code amendments pursuant to SB 5 and SB 1278. Based on this determination, the firm Kjeldsen Sinnock Neudeck Inc. (KSN) was retained to delineate the 200 -year floodplain in the City of Lodi. The proposed actions would amend the 2010 General Plan Safety Element to apply the findings of KSN's floodplain mapping ("Mokelumne River Hydraulic Analyses: Summary of Methodology and Results", dated December 19, 2018 on file with the Public Works Department), implement the requirements of SB 5 related to 200 -year flood protection, and update provisions of the Safety Element of the City's General Plan to meet current requirements of the State of California General Plan Guidelines. The provisions of SB 5 and 200 -year flood protection are supplementary to existing flood protection policies implemented by the City. The City will continue to implement existing provisions related to the 100 -year floodplain. It is noteworthy that the 200 -year floodplain does not have a direct relationship with Federal flood insurance requirements; the insurance requirements only apply to the Federally -mapped 100 -year floodplain. APPROVED: 1 5 epen Schw ue , City Manager October 7, 2020 Page 2 ANALYSIS: SB 5 required the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to prepare criteria that local agencies could use to make findings related to urban level of flood protection (State Criteria). As provided in the State Criteria, the provisions of SB 5 apply to urban areas of the Sacramento -San Joaquin Valley (including the City of Lodi) that are either covered in the FEMA 100 - year floodplain or are within watersheds of more than 10 square miles, and where the potential flood depth is more than three feet. Under SB 5, affected jurisdictions must determine that an Urban Level of Flood Protection will be achieved prior to approving most types of development within the 200 -year floodplain. The term 200 - year floodplain refers to areas anticipated to be inundated in a storm that has a 1 -in -200 chance of occurring in any given year (200 -year storm event). Specific actions requiring a determination of Urban Level of Flood Protection include: • Entering into a Development Agreement for all types of property development. ■ Approving a discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement for all development projects. ■ Approving a ministerial permit for all projects that would result in construction of a new residence. • Approving a tentative map consistent with the Subdivision Map Act for all subdivisions. • Approving a Parcel Map for which a tentative map is not required consistent with the Subdivision Map Act for all subdivisions. The City Council considered various policy issues related to the 200 -year floodplain at its June 4, 2019 Shirtsleeve session. In addition to providing background on 200 -year floodplain requirements, staff requested Council direction on the following points: • Definition of 200 -Year Floodplain. The City is required to define a depth of inundation associated with the 200 -year floodplain. SB 5 established that areas inundated to a depth of three feet of more must be considered within the 200 -year floodplain. The City Council directed that this standard would be applied in Lodi. • Building Floor Elevation. For property located within the 200 -year floodplain, the City is required to establish a minimum building floor elevation. The City Council directed that building floors in the 200 -year floodplain must be at or higher than the anticipated water level of the 200 -year flood. ■ Consider Planned Improvements. In modeling the 200 -year floodplain, the City is allowed to consider planned projects that will provide additional flood protection (floodwall at Mills & Turner). The Council directed the 200 -year floodplain be modeled as currently exists and without the benefit of future improvements. The above direction was provided to KSN and applied in the modeling and mapping of the 200 -year floodplain in the City of Lodi. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: Amendments to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan (Attachment 2) would address hazards associated with a 200 -year storm event, including mapping of the 200 -year floodplain (see Attachment 3). Additionally, State law general plan requirements have October 7, 2020 Page 3 been revised since the adoption of the Lodi General Plan and various revisions to the Safety Elements are proposed to achieve consistency with State law. Amendments to the Safety Element include: • Discussion of 100 -year and 200 -year floodplains. • Addition of 200 -year floodplain map. • Summary of KSN study that defined the 200 -year floodplain ("Mokelumne River Hydraulic Analyses: Summary of Methodology and Results"). ■ Discussion of Agencies Responsible for Flood Protection. • Statement on Slope Instability/Liquefaction potential. ■ Discussion of hazards related to Climate Change. • Updated summary of Emergency Management. CONSULTATION: Senate Bill (SB) 18, requires a city or county to consult with Native American tribes prior to amendment of its general plan. On December 30, 2019, the City of Lodi requested that the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) identify tribes with traditional lands or cultural places in the City of Lodi. Based upon the NAHC's response, the City notified six tribes of the proposed General Plan amendment. No requests for consultation were received, thereby concluding the City's tribal consultation requirements under SB 18. Government Code §65302.5 requires that the City provide a copy of the draft Safety Element and any technical studies associated with the draft Safety Element to the California Geologic Survey (CGS) for review and comment prior to adoption of the Safety Element. A draft of the Safety Element was submitted to CGS on July 24, 2020, and minor comments and corrections provided by CGS were incorporated into the draft Safety Element. As a follow up communication, the City provided CGS an amended copy of the draft Safety Element and associated background and technical information on July 8, 2020. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires analysis of agency approvals of discretionary "projects." A "project," under CEQA, is defined as "the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment." The amendment of the General Plan and Municipal Code is a project under CEQA. Proposed amendments to the Safety Element respond to SB 5 flood risk legislation and address requirements for the General Plan Safety Element as established under the General Plan Guidelines as adopted by the California Office of Planning and Research (OPR). The amendments implement new limits and requirements related to development in the 200 -year floodplain. The General Plan establishes the policy direction for land use development within the City. The General Plan is comprised of nine elements or chapters, including Chapter 8 — Safety. A comprehensive update of the General Plan was adopted in 2010 and the Lodi General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2009022075), was certified in 2010. The proposed amendments to the Safety Element of the General Plan and Lodi Municipal Code (proposed amendments) will implement flood management requirements established under SB 5 and SB 1278. Additionally, the proposed amendments will address requirements of the State General Plan Guidelines for Safety Elements that have been adopted by the State of California since the 2010 adoption of Lodi's General Plan. October 7, 2020 Page 4 State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations) requires that when an EIR has been certified for an adopted project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, that one or more of the following exists: 1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; Analysis: The proposed amendments will not result in any increases to the density or intensity of allowed uses allowed under the General Plan or allow any uses not currently allowed under the City's General Plan. The proposed amendments do not represent a significant change to the General Plan with regard to environmental effects and would not require amendment of the General Plan EIR. 2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; Analysis: The policies and programs of the City's General Plan and the analysis of environmental effects of the General Plan EIR remain valid. No changes in circumstances have occurred since certification of the EIR that would result in new significant environmental effects or an increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects related to the proposed amendments. 3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with exercise of reasonable diligence at the time of the previous EIR was certified as complete shows any of the following: a. The project will have one or more significant impacts not discussed in the previous EIR; b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, butthe project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternative. Analysis: The proposed amendment to the City's General Plan will not result in changes to the physical environment that were not previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, new information identified since certification of the General Plan EIR does not have the potential uncover any new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts that would result from adoption of the General Plan amendment. Based upon the above analysis, the City of Lodi has determined that, consistent with Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, no modifications to the General Plan EIR would be necessary for it to adequately address the impacts of the proposed Project. Therefore, no further CEQA review is required. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: The Planning Commission, on August 26, 2020, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed amendments to the Safety Element of the City of Lodi October 7, 2020 Page 5 General Plan. Following its consideration and discussion of the proposed amendments the Planning Commission voted unanimously 6-0 to recommend that the City Council find the amendments are not subject to review under CEQA and to adopt the proposed amendments to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan. Planning Commission Resolution No. 20-13 is Attachment 4 to this council communication. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: Legal Notice of the Public Hearing to Adopt a Resolution Approving the Planning Commission's Recommendation to Amend the Safety Element of the City of Lodi General Plan to Implement the Provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -Year Flood Protection was published in the Lodi News Sentinel on September 5, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable. Respectfully Submitted, JJohnla Monica Comm}jjnity Development Dire for Concur, Janice D. Magdich City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lodi Amending the Safety Element of the City of Lodi General Plan with Exhibit A — Amended Safety Element. 2. Map of the F200 Overlay District. 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 20-13. 4. 2010 Safety Element RESOLUTION NO. 2020- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AMENDING THE SAFETY ELEMENT IN THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE BILL (SB) 5 AND SB 1278 RELATED TO 200 -YEAR FLOOD PROTECTION WHEREAS, on October 7, 2020, the City Council of the City of Lodi held a duly noticed public hearing, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65402.(a); and WHEREAS, the project proponent is City of Lodi, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240; and WHEREAS, in 2007, the State adopted Senate Bill (SB) 5 (Machado) (and follow-on legislation (SB 1278)), which requires the City to amend its General Plan to address flooding that has a 1 -in -200 chance of occurring in any given year (i.e., a 200 -year storm); and WHEREAS, the City staff retained the services of Kjeldsen Sinnock Neudeck Inc. (KSN) to prepare a hydraulic flood model of the City in keeping with the guidance provided DWR (State Criteria); and WHEREAS, based upon the results of the KSN modeling ("Mokelumne River Hydraulic Analyses: Summary of Methodology and Results", dated December 19 2018) and a review of the requirements of SB 5 and SB 1278, staff has identified specific changes necessary to the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi General Plan was adopted in April 2010, and since 2010 various new requirements for the Safety Element of the General Plan have been issued under the General Plan Guidelines, as adopted by the California Office of Planning and Research; and WHEREAS, implementation of SB 5 standards and procedures requires amendments to the City of Lodi General Plan Safety Element to meet the requirements of the General Plan Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City provided a draft of the proposed revision to the Safety Element to the City's General Plan to the California Geologic Survey for review, and received initial comments on July 23, 2020, that have been incorporated into the draft General Plan Safety Element; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi requested that the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) identify tribes with traditional lands or cultural places in the City of Lodi, and on January 10, 2020 notified six tribes as identified by the NAHC of the proposed Lodi General Plan amendment. Upon receiving no requests for consultation the City concluded tribal consultations required by SB 18; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi General Plan was last updated and adopted in 2010 and the Lodi General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2009022075), was certified in 2010; and WHEREAS, no amendment to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan has the potential to increase the density or intensity of development or allow any uses that were not analyzed by the General Plan EIR or currently allowed under the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162 identifies that when an EIR has been certified for an adopted project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, that one or more of three stated criteria exists; and WHEREAS, on August 26, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi held a duly noticed and required public hearing, on the proposed General Plan amendment and recommended on a unanimous vote of 6-0 that: 1) the City Council determine the proposed amendments to the City's General Plan are exempt from review under CEQA, subject to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and 2) the City Council amend the Safety Element of the City's General Plan as proposed; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby determines that the proposed amendments to the Lodi General Plan are exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) subject to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines based on the following findings: 1. The proposed amendments to the Safety Element will not result in any increases to the density or intensity of allowed uses allowed under the City's General Plan or allow any uses not currently allowed under the General Plan. The proposed amendments to the Safety Element do not represent a significant change to the General Plan with regard to environmental effects and would not require amendment of the City's General Plan EIR. 2. The policies and programs of the City's General Plan and the analysis of environmental effects of the City's General Plan EIR remain valid. No changes in circumstances have occurred since certification of the City's General Plan EIR that would result in new significant environmental effects or an increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects related to the proposed amendments. 3. The proposed amendments to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan will not result in changes to the physical environment that were not previously analyzed in the City's General Plan EIR. Therefore, new information identified since certification of the City's General Plan EIR does not have the potential uncover any new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts that would result from adoption of the proposed amendments to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby amends the Safety Element of the City's General Plan as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Dated: October 7, 2020 -------------------- -------------------- I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2020- was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held October 7, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS -- NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — JENNIFER CUSMIR City Clerk 2020- EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element The Safety Element identifies the natural and manmade hazards that exist within the city. It seeks to mitigate their potential impacts, through both preventative and response measures, to ensure the continued health and safety of Lodi community members. This Element addresses flooding and drainage; potentially hazardous materials and operations; seismic and geologic hazards; fire hazards; and emergency management. Potential health hazards related to air quality are addressed in Chapter 7: Conservation. Storm drain infrastructure related to flooding and drainage is discussed in Chapter 3: Growth Management and Infrastructure. 8.1 FLOODING AND DRAINAGE Flood Zones Figure 8-1 shows areas within the 100 -year floodplain zones. The map uses Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)100-year floodplain data produced by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The FIRM is the only official mapping for the purposes of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations and coverage areas. Additional flood risk data, including 200 -year flood data shown in Figure 8-2, described below, is not approved by FEMA for use in relation to the NFIP. Based on revised flood risk evaluations prepared by the Fedef ' Emer-geney Management Age�FEMA) for the City of Lodi and San Joaquin County, effective October 19, 2009, flood hazards are a constraint to development only in two areas of the city: the area immediately adjacent to the Mokelumne River along the city's northern boundary, and the area around the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility, the City's wastewater treatment facility, in the southwest corner of the Planning Area. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element As shown on Figure 8-1, these areas lie within Zon _"_F', meaning that t'i^; are subject to a 1% annual (100 -year) flood. Flooding depths in this area are generally greater than three feet. No new development is planned within either of these areas. Most of the city and the Planning Area lie within areas desi agn ted Zone X500 r• a,,ser-;bes lands that are subject to the 0.2% annual (500 -year) flood zone or that lie within the 100 -year flood zone, but with flooding depths less than one foot. This suggests that these areas have a low susceptibility to major flooding, but would be inundated during a 500 -year flood event. The remaining portions of the city and Planning Area are classified as Zone X, meaning that they lie outside the 500 -year flood zone. 200 -Year Floodplain Figure 8-2 shows areas within the 200 -year floodplain which are subject to urban level of flood protection requirements with flood depths of 3 --feet or greater. This map identifies areas where higher standards of development and flood protection may be required before issuance of building permits. Figure 8-2 was developed using data provided by DWR, supplemented by a floodplain study Mokelumne River Hydraulic Analyses: Summary of Methodology & Results, December 19, 2018 prepared by the firm of Kjeldsen, Sinnock Neudeck, Inc. (KSN). This report provides the technical basis for mapping the extents of the 200 -year floodplain within the City of Lodi. The primary source of potential flooding for Lodi is the Mokelumne River which flows along the City's northern border. The 200 -year floodplain resulting from the Mokelumne River within the City was modeled based on several data sources, including a review of the Mokelumne River watershed and a review of existing flood data. The Mokelumne River is formed by the confluence of the North Fork Mokelumne River and the Middle Fork Mokelumne River in the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada. It flows from this confluence along the Amador and Calaveras County Line down through Pardee and Camanche Reservoirs past Lockeford and Lodi until its eventual discharge into the San Joaquin River near Bouldin Island. The watershed iseg nerally divided into two sub -watersheds: the Upper Mokelumne River and the Lower Mokelumne River with Pardee and Camanche Reservoirs between the two sub -watersheds. The Upper Mokelumne River is primarily federally managed wilderness with some commercial timber land and protected watershed areas managed by the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). The Lower Mokelumne River is part of the rich agricultural region of the Central Valley with grapes being the major crop grown in the waterahec3. The anticipated 200 -year flood event in Lodi is caused by the Mokelumne River rising out of its banks and inundating a wide, flat developed area. Various scenarios were modeled using a combined one-dimensional/two-dimensional hydraulic model. Due to the nature of the flooding anticipated in the Lodi area, the HEC -RAS v.5.0.5 was selected as hydraulic model for the flooding anal Lodi has reliable historical data along four points of the Mokelumne River from past floods- in 1955, 1986, 1997, and 2017. This data was combined with East Bay Municipal Utility District's EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element hydrologic and stream flow data along the Mokelumne River to calibrate the model for this analysis. Due to the significantly higher elevations in the high-water mark elevations observed during the 1955 flood event as compared to the three other events, the 1955 flood event was selected as the primary flood to which the hydraulic model was calibrated. Based upon the analysis described above, and as described in greater detail within the KSN report, areas subject to flooding greater than three feet in depth within the City were mapped as presented in Figure 8.2. Consistent with the requirements of Senate Bill 5 (SB 5), no construction may occur within the delineated 200-vear flood nlan unless the Citv finds and determines that urban level of flood protection requirements have been satisfied. Dam Inundation Large quantities of water stored in reservoirs along the Mokelumne, Calaveras, and Stanislaus River systems pose a potential threat to inhabitants of the Planning Area. Flooding could occur as a result of releases from reservoirs upstream of the Planning Area. Partial or complete failure of a dam along any of these rivers, especially the Mokelumne River, could cause inundation in the Planning Area. Dams that pose a direct threat to the Planning Area include Camanche, Camanche South and North Dikes, and Pardee Dam. The entire Planning Area would be inundated in the event of a failure of any of these dams, except for the Camanche North Dikes Dam, whose failure would just flood the Planning Area north of Kettleman Lane. iW:l:n:11r_I Draft General Plan Safety Element FIGURE 8-1: 100 -YEAR AND 500 -YEAR FLOOD ZONES Zone A: Area subject to 1 % annual chance flood, Base Flood Planning Area Elevations not determined ...ti Spheres of Influence Zone AE: Area subject to 1 % annual chance flood, Base Flood `_::_ Elevations determined City Limits Zone X (500): Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; or areas of 1 % Urban Reserve annual chance flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile Zone X: Areas determined to be outside of 0.2% annual chance flood. *:,4:11:11r_I Draft General Plan Safety Element FIGURE 8-2: 200 -YEAR FLOOD ZONES Flood Depths Less than 3' Planning Area Flood Depths of 3' or More Spheres of Influence i 200 -Year Flood Study Boundary � City Limits Urban Reserve EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element Flood Protection Berms along the Mokelumne River were privately built and vary in height. Upstream of SR -99, the adjacent agricultural lands are protected against floods up to the 50 -year currents by low discontinuous berms. Berm overtopping here from larger flood events (e.g. the 100 -year flood) would not, however, cause inundation in the Planning Area. Berms west of SR -99 are higher and provide protection from flows slightly greater than the 100 -year event. Should a major storm event cause berms to be over topped or if a berm or dam fails, flooding would occur. Flooding can also occur when runoff exceeds the capacity of local systems and cannot drain adequately. As long as berms are not over -topped and maintain their structural integrity, flooding is considered to be very unlikely. San Joaquin County has prepared a Dam Failure Plan that identifies hazards to the county from dams and reservoirs. The Dam Failure Plan also identifies actions that will be taken to respond to flood -related emergencies in the event that flooding occurs. These actions would include implementation of the Standardized Emergency Management System and the County's Multi - Hazard Emergency Plan (see Section 8.5: Emergency Management for details).' Although major flooding is not anticipated, as existing agricultural and open space lands are converted to urban uses, there will be an increase in stormwater runoff from additional impervious surfaces. To minimize those impacts, General Plan policies seek to manage stormwater runoff, through the permitting process, good stormwater management practices (e.g. porous materials, cisterns, bioswales, etc.), and the construction of open spaces and drainage basins (see Chapter 6: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space). Agencies Responsible for Flood Protection Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA is a federal agency whose mission is to reduce the loss of life and property from natural and human -made disasters through a comprehensive, risk-based emergency management system. One of the agency's responsibilities is to maintain flood zone maps. California Department of Water Resources DWR implements the California Water Code, regulates activities in California's floodwa encourages preventive flood control maintenance, and operates some flood control projects. Central Valley Flood Protection Board and Plan The Central Valley Flood Protection Board developed and adopted the CVFPP in 2012 and continues to oversee the plans implementation. The CVFPP provides conceptual guidance to reduce the risk of flooding; for about one million people in California and $70 billion in infrastructure, homes, and businesses with a goal of providing 200 -year flood protection to urban areas. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element 8.2 Potentially Hazardous Materials and Operations This section focuses on human -made hazards associated with the exposure to hazardous materials, as well as fire, transportation, and utility corridor hazards. Hazardous wastes generated by both residents and businesses within the Planning Area contribute to environmental and human health hazards that have become an increasing public concern. However, proper waste management and disposal practices can minimize public concern over toxicity and the contamination of soils, water, and the air. Hazardous Materials As of May 2009, the State Water Resources Control Board reported an inventory of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) and other (non -fuel) cleanup sites. The majority of the LUST sites have been remediated, with only nine sites listed as still "open' for remediation, monitoring, or assessment. These sites are described in a table in Appendix C and shown in Figure 8-23. The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) is responsible for managing California's solid waste stream. The CIWMB works in partnership with local government, industry, and the public to reduce waste disposal and ensure environmentally safe landfills are maintained. Table 8-1 and Figure 8-32 describe solid waste, recycling, and landfills facilities (including closed facilities). TABLE 8-1: SOLID WASTE AND/OR RECYCLING FACILITIES AND LANDFILL SITES IN THE PLANNING AREA SITE �DDRESS r Solid Waste and Landfill Lodi City Landfill N of Awani Dr. and Mokelumne River Dr. Central Valley Waste Services 1333 E. Turner Rd. Valley Landscaping 1320 East Harney Ln. Recycling Centers Pinos Recycling Co. 741 S Cherokee Ln. Tokay Recycling Center 60 S Cluff Ave. Tomra Pacific Inc/Apple Market 1320 W Lockeford St. Diaz Recycling 845 S Central Ave. Nexcycle/Save Mart #209 610 W Kettleman Ln. 2430 W Kettleman Ln. Tomra Pacific Inc/Food 4 Less Nexcycle/Safeway #1648 12449 W Kettleman Ln. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element FIGURE 8-32: POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES Potentially Hazardous Operations Airports and Airstrips Airport -related hazards are generally associated with aircraft accidents, particularly during takeoffs and landings. Airport operation hazards include incompatible land uses, power transmission lines, wildlife hazards (e.g. bird strikes), and tall structures (e.g. traffic control towers). (Note that noise impacts are discussed in Chapter 9: Noise.) Existing public use airports within or adjacent to the Planning Area include: • Kingdon Airpark: seven miles southwest of downtown Lodi; • Lodi Airpark: five miles southwest of downtown Lodi, near the intersection of Armstrong and Lower Sacramento roads (inside the Planning Area); and • Ten private airstrips within or adjacent to the Planning Area. The 2009 San Joaquin County Airport Land Use Plan provides information on existing and future operations, potential hazards, and land use compatibility. According to the Plan Kingdon Airpark is planning to extend its runway to permit more flights and aircraft types (i.e. from solely accommodating single-engine planes to allowing business jets and turboprop aircraft). No future improvements are anticipated at the Lodi Airpark. Given the distance of these airports from the city's boundaries, the airports do not present substantial hazards to people or property in Lodi. The Plan's land use compatibility matrix and compatibility zone map is shown in Figure 8-43. The southeast portion of Lodi, south of Century Boulevard, lies with in Zone 8: Airport Influence Area, which does not have any land use restrictions. A portion of the Urban Reserve General Plan area, along the north side of Hogan Lane, lies within Zone 7: Traffic Pattern. This classification prohibits outdoor stadiums and non-residential uses with densities greater than 450 persons per acre, and requires at least 10% open space. FIGURE 8-43: AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY ZONES Railroads Potential hazards associated with railroads include collisions and train derailment. Either of these incidents can lead to human injury or death as well as causing various environmental impacts. The Federal Railroad Administration regulates railroad safety and provides oversight to the use of railroads. Lodi is served by two national rail lines, Union Pacific Railroad and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe. The city is also served by a local railroad, Central California Traction, which runs contiguous to industrial areas. Daily passenger service via Amtrak is available from Lodi to San Francisco, Los Angeles, Sacramento and points between. A more detailed discussion of railroad operations and infrastructure may be found in Chapter 5: Transportation. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element Utility Corridors One of the primary causes of disruption to underground natural gas pipelines, which are present in the Planning Area, is external force damage that occurs during excavation activities. Such damage can create pipeline leaks or ruptures and lead to hazardous health and safety conditions. However, a national program is in place to prevent accidental pipeline damage caused by excavation. For areas adjacent to an underground utility pipeline, the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Pipeline Safety requires that individuals contact the state "One -Call" center prior to beginning excavation. Advanced planning, effective use of these one -call systems, accurate locating and marking of underground facilities, and the use of safe - digging practices can all be effective in reducing underground facility damage and potentially hazardous conditions. 8.3 SEISMIC AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS In general, geologic and seismic hazards do not pose a substantial risk to development in Lodi or to overall public safety. The Central Valley is filled with a thick sequence of sediments eroded from the Sierra Nevada range to the east. The most recent deposits in the region are floodplain deposits, consisting of clay, silt, and some sand. Seismicity The Planning Area is located 65 miles east of the Bay Area and lies within Seismic Risk Zone 3. Earthquakes in Seismic Risk Zone 3 pose a lesser risk than those experienced in Zone 4 (such as the San Francisco Bay Area). The Planning Area may be affected by regionally occurring earthquakes; however, impacts resulting from such an event are not likely to be severe. Figure 8-54 identifies active and potentially active faults in and around the Planning Area. Regional Faults Lodi s nearest active fault is the Greenville Fault, located approximately 34 miles south of the Planning Area? The Maximum Moment magnitude of the maximum probable earthquake on the Greenville Fault is estimated to be 6.9.3 Other faults close to the Planning Area exhibiting historic displacement (activity within the last 200 years) are the Concord -Green Valley and Hayward Faults located approximately 45 miles west-northwest and 56 miles west of the Planning Area, respectively. Portions of the Calaveras Fault zone also have been rated as being active within the last 200 years; those portions are located approximately 46 miles southwest of the site. The nearest Quaternary fault (2 million years ago to present) to the Planning Area showing evidence of activity within the past 1.6 million years is the San Joaquin Fault located approximately 24 miles southwest of the Planning Area.4 The nearest mapped fault trace, the Stockton Fault, is not considered an active fault. Seismic Structural Safety The greatest geologic hazard in Lodi is the structural danger posed by ground shaking from earthquakes originating outside of the area. During a high intensity event, some damage could occur to well -made structures and chimneys; some towers could fall; and poorly constructed or weak structures could be heavily damaged. The susceptibility of a structure to damage from ground shaking is related to the underlying foundation material. A foundation of rock or very firm material can intensify short -period motions, which affect low-rise buildings more than tall, EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element flexible ones. A deep layer of saturated alluvium can cushion low-rise buildings, but it can also accentuate the motion in tall buildings. Other potentially dangerous conditions include, but are not limited to: building architectural features that are not firmly anchored, such as parapets and cornices; roadways, including column and pile bents and abutments for bridges and overcrossings; and above -ground storage tanks and their mounting devices. The risk of surface fault rupture is considered low due to the substantial distance from the active Hayward and Calaveras Fault zones and the type of ground shaking expected from those faults. The California Geologic Survey (CGS) prepared mapping that defines hazard levels associated with ground shaking, Earthquake Shaking Potential for California, 2016, and designates Lodi and surrounding lands as having low potential for earthquake-inducedrg ound shaking. Other Geologic Hazards Additional geologic hazards that may exist within the Planning Area include soil erosion and settlement. The Planning Area is primarily flat and thus the risk of unstable soils or landslides is considered relatively low. Soil Erosion Soil erosion is the process whereby soil materials are worn away and transported to another area either by wind or water. Rates of erosion can vary depending on the soil material and structure, placement, and the general level of human activity. Soil containing high amounts of sand or silt can be easily eroded while clayey soils are less susceptible. The Tokay soils present in the Planning Area have a moderate potential for wind erosion. The Tujunga soils, found in more limited quantities in the Planning Area, have a severe potential for wind erosion if vegetative covering is removed. [FIGURE 8-54: REGIONAL FAULTS] Expansive Soils Expansive soils are largely comprised of clay, which expand in volume when water is absorbed and shrink when dried. Structural damage may result over a long period of time, usually resulting from inadequate soil and foundation engineering or the placement of structures directly on expansive soils. Several of the soil types located within the Planning Area are comprised of potentially expansive materials. However, the majority of the Planning Area either has not been measured for soil shrink -swell or has a low potential for soil shrink -swell. Settlement Settlement is the consolidation of the underlying soil when a load, such as that of a building or new fill material, is placed upon it. When soil tends to settle at different rates and by varying amounts depending on the load weight, it is referred to as differential settlement. Settlement commonly occurs as a result of building construction or other large projects that require soil stockpiles. Areas of the Planning Area that contain fill material may be susceptible to EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element settlement. If the fill materials are unconsolidated they have the potential to respond more adversely to additional load weights as compared to adjacent native soils. Slope Instability/Liquefaction Due to the relatively level terrain in and around the City of Lodi, potential for hazards associated with slope instability and/or landslides is very low. A review of CGS records (https:maps.consewrvation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/) determined that CGS has not yet evaluated risks associated with slope instability or liquefaction in the vicinity of the City of Lodi. 8.4 FIRE HAZARDS Both urban and wildland fire hazards exist in the Lodi Planning Area, creating the potential for injury, loss of life, and property damage. In the event of a fire, the Fire Department relies on sufficient water supply and pressure. The City's design standard for water transmission facilities is to provide 4,000 gallons per minute of flow at a minimum 45 pounds per square inch of pressure in pipes 8 inches and larger. Urban Fire Hazards Urban fires primarily involve the uncontrolled burning of residential, commercial, and/or industrial structures due to human activities. Factors that exacerbate urban structural fires include substandard building construction, highly flammable materials, delayed response times, and inadequate fire protection services. Wildland Fire Hazards The Planning Area is not characterized by substantial areas of wildlands. The topography of the area is relatively homogenous and steep slopes that could contribute to wildland fires are not common. Data provided by the California Department of Conservation Fire and Resource Assessment Program in 2007 indicate that less than one percent of the Planning Area has "Moderate" fire hazard potential. The remaining areas are classified as urban or non-wildland. No portions of the Planning Area are classified as having a "High" or "Very High" risk. 8.5 CLIMATE CHANGE As noted in the 2017 San Joaquin County LHMP, climate change is virtually certain to continue without immediate and effective global action. According to NASA, 2016 was on track to be the hottest year on record, and 15 of the 17 hottest years have occurred since 2000. Without significant global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes in its Fifth Assessment Synthesis Report (2014) that average global temperature increases are likely to exceed 1.5 C by the end of the 21st century, with consequences for people, assets, economies and ecosystems, including risks from heat stress, storms and extreme precipitation, inland and coastal flooding, landslides, air pollution, drought, water scarcity, sea level rise and storm surges. The 2018 Report: Indicators of Climate Change in California, prepared by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment documents chaneine climate indicators and the EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element potential resulting hazards. The impacts of climate change vary dramatically based upon the location evaluated with diverse impacts such as coastal flooding due to sea level rise, increased wildfire risk due to heat and drought and increased landslide potential due to increasingLy severe storms. In general, the City of Lodi is buffered from the more severe increased hazards of climate change due to location, topography and surrounding land uses. The most significant threats to the community and its residents will likely result from increasing sea levels and extreme heat events. The California Natural Resources Agency in a 2012 report estimated that sea levels along the California coast will rise between 3 and 5 feet by 2100. A combination of increased storm intensity and saltwater intrusion in the Sacramento -San Toaquin Delta resulting from higher sea levels could increase the risk for flood -caused levee failures, increasing flood risk and contaminating freshwater supplies stored and conveyed in the delta. Climate change has the potential create hazards to the community and its members. Warming temperatures and changes in precipitation can affect vector-borne pathogen transmission and disease patterns in California. West Nile Virus currently poses the greatest mosquito -borne disease threat. In 2006, heat -related deaths and illnesses were much higher than any other year because of a prolonged heat wave. While difficult to track, climate change can impact human well-being in many ways, including injuries and fatalities from extreme events, and respiratory stress from poor air quality (Mellilo et al., 20141. With regard to other hazards associated with climate change, Lodi faces relatively lower threats. The hazards of wildland fires impacting Lodi and its residents are reduced by the overall compact form of the urban community and the cultivated agricultural lands surrounding the City. The steep topo rg aphy and wooded slopes that have contributed to severe fire events in other parts of the state are not present in and around Lodi. Similarly, the local topography is gently rolling and not subject to landslides or land failure resulting from severe storm events. Reduced water supply resultingfrom rom prolonged droughts has the potential to impact Lodi. Water supply and service is discussed in Chapter 3 - Growth Management and Infrastructure, of this General Plan. 8.6-5 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Public Safety Departments The Lodi Police and Fire departments manage public safety in Lodi, with the Fire Department leading emergency preparedness and planning. The Fire Department provides a wide range of emergency and non -emergency services, including fire suppression, emergency medical services, hazardous materials response, technical rescue, fire prevention, public education, and related safety services. The Emergency Operations Center, located at the Police department building, serves as the center of the city's emergency operations. City operations remain in compliance with the National Incident EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element Management System, a comprehensive national approach to incident management, applicable to federal, state, and local governments and the Standardized Emergency Management System, which provides a strategy and framework to address multi -agency and multi -jurisdictional emergencies in California. As of 20052020, the Fire Department had 59-57 personnel, including 51 firefighters, company officers, or battalion chiefs. The city of Lodi has an Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating of Class 3. A Class 3 ISO rating indicates that the Fire Department is strategically placed throughout the City, and has adequate personnel, equipment, and expertise to serve the current population. In 2006, the most recent year of data availability, the department met the self- imposed National Fire Protection Associations response time criteria of 6 minutes for 90% of all calls. The Police Department's basic responsibility is to protect and serve the public and property within Lodi, through crime prevention, investigation, and other services. As of 20052020, the Police Department had 445-109 full-time employees and 120 volunteers, with 7-8-77 sworn officers. Emergency Planning The City has adopted San Joaquin County updated its Local Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2017. This document addresses County lands and is not a Multi-Turisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. San Joaquin County has also prepared an Emergency Operations Plan that addresses major hazards such as severe weather, flood and damn failure, drought and water shortage and electrical system de-energization. These plans This plan ideatifiesidentify measures to reduce the impacts of natural and manmade hazards and to facilitate the recovery and repair of structures if damage should occur from hazardous events. Adoption of the plan ensufes that Lodi is eligible f0f Eertain federal and State funds for- disaster- r-eeovel=y in ease of sueh all eve Evacuation Routes and Safety Standards The City of Lodi benefits from numerous points of access that range from State Highways (Highway 99 and Kettleman Lane/Highway 12) to minor roadways that extend into San Joaquin County lands that surround the City. Numerous roads extend to the north, south, east and west, providing multiple routes of exit in each direction from the City in the event of an emergency or catastrophic event. The City provides street standards for all street types, thus ensuring appropriate standards for emergency access and evacuation. For example, the standards specify roadway widths of 30 feet (curb -to -curb) for minor residential streets and 52 feet for major collector streets. 8.6 POLICIES GUIDING POLICIES S -G1 Ensure a high level of public health and safety. S -G2 Prevent loss of lives, injury, illness, and property damage due to flooding, hazardous materials, seismic and geological hazards, and fire. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element S -G3 Protect the public from disasters and provide guidance and response in the event a disaster or emergency. S -G4 Minimize vulnerability of infrastructure and water supply and distribution systems. IMPLEMENTING POLICIES Flooding and Drainage S -P1 Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program and ensure that local regulations are in full compliance with standards adopted by FEMA. S -P2 Cooperate with appropriate local, State, and federal agencies to address local and regional flood issues and dam failure hazards. S -P3 Require adequate natural floodway design to assure flood control in areas where stream channels have been modified and to foster stream enhancement, improved water quality, recreational opportunities, and groundwater recharge. S -P4 Cooperate with and encourage reclamation districts to institute a berm maintenance program to reduce berm failures and shall coordinate with appropriate State, federal, and local flood control agencies in planning efforts to ensure the continued protection of local and regional flood control systems. S-135 Continue to ensure, through the development review process, that future developments do not increase peak storm flows and do not cause flooding of downstream facilities and properties. Additionally, the City shall ensure that storm drainage facilities are constructed to serve new development adequate to storm runoff generated by a 100 -year storm. S-136 Prohibit new development, except for public uses incidental to open space development, within Zone A (100 -year flood zone) of the most current FEMA floodplain map (see Figure 8-1 for the most current map). S -P7 The City will update data on the 200 -year floodplain through an annual review. This updated information will be made available and referenced during the development review process for areas within the base case 200 -year flood map, as shown in Figure 8.2. S-138 The City will not: approve any discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement; approve any ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence; approve a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required; or enter into a development agreement for any protect located in the 200 -year floodplain unless it meets one or more of the flood protection findings established under Section 15.60.130.1) of the Lodi Municipal Code. S-1397 Site critical emergency response facilities—such as hospitals, fire stations, police offices, substations, emergency operations centers and other emergency service facilities and utilities outside of the 200 -year floodplain to minimize exposure to flooding and other hazards. S-13810 Update Zoning Ordinance and development review process as needed to reduce peak -hour stormwater flow and increase groundwater recharge. These may include provisions for: • Constructing parking areas and parking islands without curbs and gutters, to allow stormwater sheet flow into vegetated areas. 0 Grading that lengthens flow paths and increases runoff travel time to reduce the peak flow rate. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element • Installing cisterns or sub -surface retention facilities to capture rainwater for use in irrigation and non -potable uses. S -P-911 Update City street design standards to allow for expanded stormwater management techniques. These may include: • Canopy trees to absorb rainwater and slow water flow. • Directing runoff into or across vegetated areas to help filter runoff and encourage groundwater recharge. • Disconnecting impervious areas from the storm drain network and maintain natural drainage divides to keep flow paths dispersed. • Providing naturally vegetated areas in close proximity to parking areas, buildings, and other impervious expanses to slow runoff, filter out pollutants, and facilitate infiltration. • Directing stormwater into vegetated areas or into water collection devices. • Using devices such as bioretention cells, vegetated swales, infiltration trenches and dry wells to increase storage volume and facilitate infiltration. Diverting water away from storm drains using correctional drainage techniques. Hazardous Materials and Operations S-P3O-12Require that all fuel and chemical storage tanks are appropriately constructed; include spill containment areas to prevent seismic damage, leakage, fire and explosion; and are structurally or spatially separated from sensitive land uses, such as residential neighborhoods, schools, hospitals and places of public assembly. S-1334-13 Ensure compatibility between hazardous material users and surrounding land use through the development review process. Separate hazardous waste facilities from incompatible uses including, but not limited to, schools, daycares, hospitals, public gathering areas, and high-density residential housing through development standards and the review process. S -P3---14 Consider the potential for the production, use, storage, and transport of hazardous materials in approving new development. Provide for reasonable controls on such hazardous materials. Ensure that the proponents of applicable new development projects address hazardous materials concerns through the preparation of Phase I or Phase II hazardous materials studies, as necessary, for each identified site as part of the design phase for each project. Require projects to implement federal or State cleanup standards outlined in the studies during construction. S-P331S Regulate the production, use, storage, and transport of hazardous materials to protect the health of Lodi residents. Cooperate with the County and Lodi Fire Department in the identification of hazardous material users, development of an inspection process, and implementation of the City's Hazardous Waste Management and Hazardous Materials Area plans. Require, as appropriate, a hazardous materials inventory for project sites, including an assessment of materials and operations for any development applications, as a component of the development environmental review process or business license review/building permit review. S -P3416 Work with waste disposal service provider(s)to educate the public as to the types of household hazardous wastes and the proper methods of disposal and shall continue to provide opportunities for residents to conveniently dispose of household hazardous waste. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element S -P3-5-17 Continue to follow the County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan for guidelines on land use compatibility near airports, land use restrictions, and to ensure public safety. S-PI618 Support grade -separated railroad crossings, where feasible, and other appropriate measures adjacent to railroad tracks to ensure the safety of the community. S -P4419 Continue to mark underground utilities and abide by federal safe -digging practices during construction. Seismic and Geologic Hazards S -P-1-920 Ensure that all public facilities, such as buildings, water tanks, underground utilities, and berms, are structurally sound and able to withstand seismic activity. S -P47921 For buildings identified as seismically unsafe, prohibit a change in use to a higher occupancy or more intensive use until an engineering evaluation of the structure has been conducted and structural deficiencies corrected consistent with City building codes. S -P24-22 Require soils reports for new projects and use the information to determine appropriate permitting requirements, if deemed necessary. S -P2423 Require that geotechnical investigations be prepared for all proposed critical structures(such as police stations, fire stations, emergency equipment, storage buildings, water towers, wastewater lift stations, electrical substations, fuel storage facilities, large public assembly buildings, designated emergency shelters, and buildings three or more stories high) before construction or approval of building permits, if deemed necessary. The investigation shall include estimation of the maximum credible earthquake, maximum ground acceleration, duration, and the potential for ground failure because of liquefaction or differential settling. S -P2-224 Require new development to include grading and erosion control plans prepared by a qualified engineer or land surveyor. Fire Hazards S -P -132S Maintain a vegetation management program to ensure clearing of dry brush areas. Conduct management activities in a manner consistent with all applicable environmental regulations. Emergency Management Policies related to police and fire facilities are addressed in_Chapter 3: Growth Management and Infrastructure. S-P�426 Coordinate with local, State, and Federal agencies to establish, maintain, and test a coordinated emergency response system that addresses a variety of hazardous and threatening situations. Conduct periodic emergency response exercises to test the effectiveness of City emergency response procedures. Develop and implement public information programs concerning disaster response and emergency preparedness and develop mutual aid agreements and communication links with surrounding communities for assistance during times of emergency. S -P2527 Maintain and periodically update the City's Emergency Preparedness Plan, including review of County and State emergency response procedures that must be coordinated with City procedures. S -P2-628 Ensure that major access and evacuation corridors are available and unobstructed in case of major emergency or disaster. Continue to identify appropriate road standards, including minimum road widths and turnouts to provide adequate emergency access and evacuation routes. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element S -P2-729 Continue to use the San Joaquin County Hazard Mitigation Plan to reduce hazard risk and coordinate with the County on its update and implementation, consistent with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Disaster Act of 2000. The following definitions should be added to the General Plan Glossary upon adoption of the General Plan Safety Element. "100 -year Floodplain" means areas that have a 1 -in -100 chance of flooding in any given year using criteria consistent with, or developed by, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). As used in this chanter. the term shall be ascribed to all areas labeled as such on Figure 8- 1 of the General Plan Safety Element. "200 -year Floodplain" means areas that have a 1 -in -200 chance of flooding in any given year using criteria consistent with, or developed by, the Department of Water Resources. As used in this chapter, the term shall be ascribed to all areas labeled as such on Figure 8-2 of the General Plan Safety Element. "Ordinary High Water Mark" means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas. "Urban Level of Flood Protection" means the level of protection that is necessary to withstand flooding that has a 1 -in -200 chance of occurring in any given year using criteria consistent with, or developed by, the Department of Water Resources. "Urban level of flood protection" shall not mean shallow flooding (less than three feet in depth) or flooding from local drainage that meets the criteria of the national Federal Emergency Management Agency standard of flood protection. Proposed F-200 Overlay District Legend City Limits I=1 F-200 Overlay District �NJ 0.25 0.5 RESOLUTION NO. P.C. NO. 20-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING THAT THE LODI CITY COUNCIL IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE BILL (SB) 5 AND SB 1278 RELATED TO 200 -YEAR FLOOD PROTECTION BY AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT. CEQA STATUS: EXEMPT, SECTION 15162, SUBSEQUENT EIRS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing on August 26, 2020, as required by law, on the requested determination, in accordance with the California Government Code Section 65402.(a); and WHEREAS, the project proponent is City of Lodi, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240; and WHEREAS, in 2007, the State adopted Senate Bill 5 (Machado) (and follow-on legislation in SB 1278), which requires the City to amend its General Plan to address flooding that has a 1 -in -200 chance of occurring in any given year (i.e., a 200 -year storm); and WHEREAS, the City staff retained the services of Kjeldsen Sinnock Neudeck (KSN) to prepare a hydraulic flood model of the City in keeping with the guidance provided DWR (the State Criteria); and WHEREAS, based upon the results of this modeling and a review of the requirements of SB 5 and SB 1278, staff has identified specific changes necessary to the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi General Plan was adopted in April 2010 and various new requirements for the General Plan Safety Element have been under the General Plan Guidelines as adopted by the California Office of Planning and Research since 2010; and WHEREAS, implementation of SB 5 standards and procedures requires amendments to the Lodi General Plan Safety Element to meet the requirements of the General Plan Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City has provided the General Plan Safety Element to the California Geologic Survey for review and received initial comments on July 23, 2020 that have been incorporated into the draft General Plan Safety Element; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi requested that the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) identify tribes with traditional lands or cultural places in the City of Lodi and on January 10, 2020 notified six tribes as identified by the NAHC of the proposed Lodi General Plan amendment. Upon receiving no requests for consultation the City concluded tribal consultations subject to of SB 18; and WHEREAS, the Lodi General Plan was last updated and adopted in 2010 and the Lodi General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2009022075), was certified in 2010; and WHEREAS, no amendment under consideration has the potential to increase the density or intensity of development or allow any uses that were analyzed by the General Plan EIR or currently allowed under the General Plan; and WHEREAS, State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 identifies that when an EIR has been certified for an adopted project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, that one or more of three stated criteria exists; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi herby recommends that the Lodi City Council determine that the proposed amendments to the Lodi General Plan are exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) subject to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines based on the following findings: 1. The proposed amendments will not result in any increases to the density or intensity of allowed uses allowed under the General Plan or allow any uses not currently allowed under the General Plan. The proposed amendments do not represent a significant change to the General Plan with regard to environmental effects and would not require amendment of the General Plan EIR. 2. The policies and programs of the General Plan and the analysis of environmental effects of the General Plan EIR remain valid. No changes in circumstances have occurred since certification of the EIR that would result in new significant environmental effects or an increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects related to the proposed amendments. 3. The proposed General Plan amendment will not result in changes to the physical environment that were not previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, new information identified since certification of the General Plan EIR does not have the potential uncover any new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts that would result from adoption of the General Plan amendment. AND, BE IT FURTHER DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends that the Lodi City Council take the following actions: amend the General Plan Safety Element as provided in Exhibit A. Dated: August 26, 2020 I certify that P.C. Resolution No. 20-13 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on August 26, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Maciel, Martin, Olson, Slater and Chair Hicks NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT. Commissioners: Cummins ATTEST: a Secreta canning Commission f *WJr 2010 SAFETY ELEMENT the Safety Element identifies the natural and manmade hazards that exist within the city. It seeks to mitigate their potential impacts, through both preventative and response measures, to ensure the continued health and safety of Lodi community members. This Element addresses Hooding and drainage; potentially hazardous materials and operations; seismic and geologic hazards; fire hazards; and emergency management. Potential health hazards related to air quality are addressed in Chapter 7: Conservation. Storm drain infrastructure related to Hooding and drainage is discussed in Chapter 3: Growth Man- agement and Infrastructure. B-1 Drainage basins (top), Lodi Lake (middle), and the Woodbridge Irrigation Canal (bottom) help to drain stormwater. 8-2 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN 8.1 FLOODING AND DRAINAGE Flood Zones Based on revised flood risk evaluations prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the City of Lodi and San Joaquin County, effective October 19, 2009, flood hazards are a constraint to development only in two areas of the city: the area immediately adjacent to the Mokelumne River along the city's northern boundary, and the area around the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility, the City's wastewater treatment facility, in the southwest corner of the Planning Area. As shown on Figure 8-1, these areas lie within Zone AE, meaning that they are subject to a v/. annual (too -year) flood. Flooding depths in this area are generally greater than three feet. No new development is planned within either of these areas. Most of the city and the Planning Area lie within Zone X, which describes lands subject to the o.z% annual (50o -year) flood zone or that lie within the too -year flood zone, but with flooding depths less than one foot. This suggests that these areas have a low susceptibil- ity to major flooding, but would be inundated during a Soo -year flood event. The remaining portions of the city and Planning Area are classified as Zone X, meaning that they lie outside the Soo -year flood zone. Dam Inundation Large quantities of water stored in reservoirs along the Mokelumne, Calaveras, and Stanislaus River systems pose a potential threat to inhabitants of the Planning Area. Flooding could occur as a result of releases from reservoirs upstream of the Planning Area. Partial or complete failure of a dam along any of these rivers, espe- cially the Mokelumne River, could cause inundation in the Planning Area. Dams that pose a direct threat to the Planning Area include Camanche, Camanche South and North Dikes, and Pardee Dam. The entire Planning Area would be inundated in the event of a failure of any of these dams, except for the Camanche North Dikes Dam, whose failure would just flood the Planning Area north ofKettleman Lane. FIGURE 8-1: FLOOD ZONES _ 1 I � _ 1 1 I 1 1 mi S3ww w g or aM AVM N H CHAPTER 8: SAFETY 1 8-3 �_ o o v O v Y N C �E v > u o.E -c �o � E _0 v O ��,0 c c N -0p m u ,c 8 y RN O C ,.0 0O V Cl p^v r vc v voo ��� o -2 c Rr 1M E a o o O O Oa -+N L oZ — :�N O > c o O� a, O— E O N ¢ O� -0 -0 u N V Q= C) u u N W V L O` ¢ z� - ¢R xNn. X C N N N� NOfa I CHAPTER 8: SAFETY 1 8-3 Flood Protection Berms along the Mokelumne River were privately built and vary in height. Upstream of SR -99, the adjacent agricultural lands are protected against floods up to the 5o -year currents by low discontinuous berms. Berm overtopping here from larger flood events (e.g. the ioo-year flood) would not, however, cause inundation in the Planning Area. Berms west of SR -99 are higher and provide protection from flows slightly greater than the too -year event. Should a major storm event cause berms to be over topped or if a berm or dam fails, flooding would occur. Flooding can also occur when runoff exceeds the capacity of local systems and cannot drain adequately. As long as berms are not over -topped and maintain their structural integrity, flooding is con- sidered to be very unlikely. San Joaquin County has prepared a Dam Failure Plan that identifies hazards to the county From dams and res- ervoirs.' he Dam Failure Plan also identifies actions that will be taken to respond to flood -related emergencies in the event that flooding occurs. These actions would include implementation of the Standardized Emergency Management System and the County's Multi -Hazard Emergency Plan (see Section 8.5: Emergency Manage- ment for details).` Although major flooding is not anticipated, as existing agricultural and open space lands are converted to urban uses, there will be an increase in stormwater runoff from additional impervious surfaces. To minimize those impacts, General Plan policies seek to manage stormwater runoff, through the permitting process, good stormwater management practices (e.g. porous materials, cisterns, bioswales, etc.), and the construc- tion of open spaces and drainage basins (see Chapter 6: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space). ' San Joaquin County, 2.003, 8-4 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN 8.2 POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND OPERATIONS This section focuses on human -made hazards associated with the exposure to hazardous materials, as well as fire, transportation, and utility corridor hazards. Hazardous wastes generated by both residents and businesses within the Planning Area contribute to environmental and human health hazards that have become an increas- ing public concern. However, proper waste management and disposal practices can minimize public concern over toxicity and the contamination of soils, water, and the air. Hazardous Materials As of May 2009, the State Water Resources Control Board reported an inventory of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) and other (non -fuel) cleanup sites. The majority of the LUST sites have been reme- diated, with only nine sites listed as still "open" for remediation, monitoring, or assessment. These sites are described in a table in Appendix C and shown in Figure 8-2. The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) is responsible for managing California's solid waste stream. The CIWMB works in partnership with local government, industry, and the public to reduce waste disposal and ensure environmentally safe landfills are maintained. Table 8-I and Figure 8-2, describe solid waste, recycling, and landfills facilities (including closed facilities). TABLE 8-1: SOLID WASTE AND/OR RECYCLING FACILITIES AND LANDFILL SITES IN THE PLANNING AREA SITE ADDRESS Solid Waste and Landfill Lodi City Landfill N of Awani Dr. and Mokelumne River Dr. Central Valley Waste Services 1333 E. Turner Rd. Valley Landscaping 1320 East Harney Ln. Recycling Centers Pinos Recycling Co. 741 S Cherokee Ln. Tokay Recycling Center 60 S Cluff Ave. Tomra Pacific Inc/Apple Market 1320 W Lockeford St. Diaz Recycling 845 S Central Ave. Nexcycle/Save Mart #209 610 W Kettleman Ln. Tomra Pacific Inc/Food 4 Less 2430 W Kettleman Ln. N excycle/Saf eway #1648 2449 W Kettleman Ln. Source: California Integrated Waste Management Board, 2007. Plan policies seek to ensure the safe operation of storage tanks and poten- tially hazardous materials. Lodi is served by three solid waste facilities and multiple recycling centers. CHAPTER 8: SAFETY 1 8-5 FIGURE 8-2: POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES E. WOODBRIDGE RD W K`ODUBRrtICf Rif �' ...................� a = E. WINERY RD E. CLARKSBURG RD iURNFN Hf, �• � o IURr4[R RU � ••' ���".'� a z V iv,l� C W UICKEFORD a IN. fl M St B F..�CTOR ItD „I a W. PINE ST 0 0© E PINE ST a UIi(;F.Ni Rr3? � W. LODI AVE L. LODI M1VE 0 S"I' THURMAN st t: t TOKAY ST w � `z '' 21NDUSIMAI. N•V s.y.� W- VINf ST E. VINE ST _ y F•VINE Si Lu rllNUR qp s ." .EMAN IN �+ 0 ••'. •---[-KY �M� N. Z a � ALMOND DR u 3 1 c 1ILVD � W. C£NTURT E_ CENTURY BLVD Z I E ilil � � i ki W ru �V E.,HMNEY EN .............................�,..,.,,,........... ................... .................... .... z L... SCOT.... -....D f.HOGAN LN a"I .3 SCOTTSDALE RD 8-6 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN 11 W. ARMSTRONG RD YI' E. ARMSTRONG RD I 11 Leaking Underground .......... Urban Reserve " Storage Tanks (LUST)------- Sphere of Influence (2008) eS ® Other Cleanup Sites —•— City Limits (2008) Solid Waste Facilities MILE5 and Landfill Sites Recycling Facilities 8-6 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN Potentially Hazardous Operations Airports and Airstrips Airport -related hazards are generally associated with aircraft accidents, particularly during takeoffs and landings. Airport operation hazards include incom- patible land uses, power transmission lines, wildlife hazards (e.g. bird strikes), and tall structures (e.g. traffic control towers). (Note that noise impacts are discussed in Chapter 9: Noise.) Existing public use airports within or adjacent to the Planning Area include: • Kingdon Airpark: seven miles southwest of down- town Lodi; • Lodi Airpark: five miles southwest of downtown Lodi, near the intersection of Armstrong and Lower Sacramento roads (inside the Planning Area); and • Ten private airstrips within or adjacent to the Planning Area. The zoo9 San Joaquin County Airport Land Use Plan provides information on existing and future opera- tions, potential hazards, and land use compatibility. According to the Plan Kingdon Airpark is planning to extend its runway to permit more flights and aircraft types (i.e. from solely accommodating single-engine planes to allowing business jets and turboprop aircraft). No future improvements are anticipated at the Lodi Airpark. Given the distance of these airports from the city's boundaries, the airports do not present substantial hazards to people or property in Lodi. The Plan's land use compatibility matrix and compat- ibility zone map is shown in Figure 8-3. The southeast portion of Lodi, south of Century Boulevard, lies with in Zone 8: Airport Influence Area, which does not have any land use restrictions. A portion of the Urban Reserve General Plan area, along the north side of Hogan Lane, lies within Zone 7: Traffic Pattern. This classification prohibits outdoor stadiums and non-residential uses with densities greater than 450 persons per acre, and requires at least io% open space. Railroads Potential hazards associated with railroads include colli- sions and train derailment. Either of these incidents can lead to human injury or death as well as causing various environmental impacts. The Federal Railroad Adminis- tration regulates railroad safety and provides oversight to the use of railroads. Lodi is served by two national rail lines, Union Pacific Railroad and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe. The city is also served by a local railroad, Central Califor- nia Traction, which runs contiguous to industrial areas. Daily passenger service via Amtrak is available from Lodi to San Francisco, Los Angeles, Sacramento and points between. A more detailed discussion of railroad operations and infrastructure may be found in Chapter 5: Transportation. Utility Corridors One of the primary causes of disruption to underground natural gas pipelines, which are present in the Planning Area, is external force damage that occurs during exca- vation activities. Such damage can create pipeline leaks or ruptures and lead to hazardous health and safety conditions. However, a national program is in place to prevent accidental pipeline damage caused by exca- vation. For areas adjacent to an underground utility pipeline, the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Pipeline Safety requires that individuals contact the state "One -Call" center prior to beginning excava- tion. Advanced planning, effective use of these one -call systems, accurate locating and marking of underground facilities, and the use of safe -digging practices can all be effective in reducing underground facility damage and potentially hazardous conditions. CHAPTER 8: SAFETY 1 8-7 FIGURE 8-3: AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY ZONES ® Runway Protection Zone Inner Approach/Departure Zone ® Inner Turning Zone Outer Approach/Departure Zone Sideline Safety Zone Airport Property OO Traffic Pattern Zone ® Airport Influence Area Source: San Joaquin Council of Governments 8-8 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN ......••-•--. Urban Reserve --------- Sphere of Influence (2008) City Limits (2008) �e MILES 8.3 SEISMIC AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS In general, geologic and seismic hazards do not pose a substantial risk to development in Lodi or to overall public safety. 'Il -ie Central Valley is filled with a thick sequence of sediments eroded from the Sierra Nevada range to the east. The most recent deposits in the region are floodplain deposits, consisting of clay, silt, and some sand. Seismicity The Planning Area is located 65 miles east of the Bay Area and lies within Seismic Risk Zone 3. Earthquakes in Seismic Risk Zone 3 pose a lesser risk than those experienced in Zone 4 (such as the San Francisco Bay Area). The Planning Area may be affected by regionally occurring earthquakes; however, impacts resulting from such an event are not likely to be severe. Figure 8-4 iden- tifies active and potentially active faults in and around the Planning Area. Regional Faults Lodi's nearest active fault is the Greenville Fault, located approximately 34 miles south of the Planning Area.' The Maximum Moment magnitude of the maximum probable earthquake on the Greenville Fault is estimated to be 6.9 .3 Other faults close to the Planning Area exhib- iting historic displacement (activity within the last zoo years) are the Concord -Green Valley and Hayward Faults located approximately 45 miles west-northwest and 56 miles west of the Planning Area, respectively. Portions of the Calaveras Fault zone also have been rated as being active within the last zoo years; those portions are located approximately 46 miles southwest of the site. The nearest Quaternary fault (z million years ago to present) to the Planning Area showing evidence of activity within the past 1.6 million years is the San Joaquin Fault located approximately 24 miles southwest of the Planning Area.' The nearest mapped fault trace, the Stockton Fault, is not considered an active fault. Jennings, 1994. Pucrson ct al. 1996. ' Jennings 1994; Bartow 1991. Seismic Structural Safety The greatest geologic hazard in Lodi is the structural danger posed by groundshaking from earthquakes orig- inating outside of the area. During a high intensity event, some damage could occur to well -made structures and chimneys; some towers could fall; and poorly con- structed or weak structures could be heavily damaged. The susceptibility of a structure to damage from ground shaking is related to the underlying foundation material. A foundation of rock or very firm material can intensify short -period motions, which affect low-rise buildings more than tall, flexible ones. A deep layer of saturated alluvium can cushion low-rise buildings, but it can also accentuate the motion in tall buildings. Other poten- tially dangerous conditions include, but are not limited to: building architectural features that are not firmly anchored, such as parapets and cornices; roadways, including column and pile bents and abutments for bridges and overcrossings; and above -ground storage tanks and their mounting devices. The risk of surface fault rupture is considered low. The probability of soil liquefaction actually taking place in the Planning Area is considered to be a low to moderate hazard, due to the substantial distance from the active Hayward and Calaveras Fault zones and the type of ground shaking expected from those faults. Other Geologic Hazards Additional geologic hazards that may exist within the Planning Area include soil erosion and settlement. The Planning Area is primarily flat and thus the risk of unstable soils or landslides is considered relatively low. Soil Erosion Soil erosion is the process whereby soil materials are worn away and transported to another area either by wind or water. Rates of erosion can vary depending on the soil material and structure, placement, and the general level of human activity. Soil containing high amounts of sand or silt can be easily eroded while clayey soils are less susceptible. The Tokay soils present in the Planning Area have a moderate potential for wind erosion. The CHAPTER 8: SAFETY 1 8-9 FIGURE 8-4: REGIONAL FAULTS ti ~'I ' P1.ACF R Y O L 0-,C O U N T Y j U NTY �. oI}avis ' . Sricrar nento �.- • - ' ' N APA SACRAM ENTO j o �< Cin] U N T Y C O U N T Y 'IAMADOR ca Vaville' r,hJOM S O L A' N ±y Jk ' I O T }' . r o I.I r,:i i� • f \C O U NI T Y A�_ 4 \ l r. •lie — 1 �i ie J y Lod i s J �l ;Planning t. �� a•, Area r [3 VIN ,Yj f -•c -�_-`_. -•.-� �� ,i f � {`II. , ire•. l o I I'im,l.o° Iv]url l`n ro �'�� Ph5bij _ S, 'pS.in Antioch f r'a :Ppn l,innii rq�•,••.a-I QRCf, fJ. ` c air •.rn•I F Walnut CrL'+'_fr C O N T R A R• hl••;• C O S T A S-...1'O�A" Q U I N f �0ItNTY YS1 r' COUNTY Fr tncitcn `L r A, dl ... oe f 1 n ROr1lUf1 � _ r,inn f . TI, ` n,. _�]I hil M1ni�- �l?_ Iv •-�-SAN-\San l�...�r7rr� 1p0 \ Tif m A'r F O "'"l'+Inn * oLVvcrmvr •I •r��'` [. O U N T Y.�j . ..-. •�1 .ro. - 1 oz. F,,,n° � T' try` 4 a rilR,rar• °ry_ M E,45' A T` �l t .T n v S I. A_ l_1 SI'.b, Mu?ie7iv f G G [I,ri II�•i l.�•' , 1, IJ N1.� i COU NTY 4 :r r ti� 5 10 20 Active Fault (Historic Displacement) ` WILES Active Fault (Holocene Displacement) Potentially Active Fault (Quaternary Displacement) - Inactive Fault (Pre -Quaternary) 8-10 I LODI GENERAL PLAN Tujunga soils, found in more limited quantities in the Planning Area, have a severe potential for wind erosion if vegetative covering is removed. Expansive Soils Expansive soils are largely comprised of clay, which expand in volume when water is absorbed and shrink when dried. Structural damage may result over a long period of time, usually resulting from inadequate soil and foundation engineering or the placement of struc- tures directly on expansive soils. Several of the soil types located within the Planning Area are comprised of potentially expansive materials. However, the majority of the Planning Area either has not been measured for soil shrink -swell or has a low potential for soil shrink -swell. Settlement Settlement is the consolidation of the underlying soil when a load, such as that of a building or new fill material, is placed upon it. When soil tends to settle at different rates and by varying amounts depending on the load weight, it is referred to as differential set- tlement. Settlement commonly occurs as a result of building construction or other large projects that require soil stockpiles. Areas of the Planning Area that contain fill material may be susceptible to settlement. If the fill materials are unconsolidated they have the potential to respond more adversely to additional load weights as compared to adjacent native soils. 8.4 FIRE HAZARDS Both urban and wildland fire hazards exist in the Lodi Planning Area, creating the potential for injury, loss of life, and property damage. In the event of a fire, the Fire Department relies on sufficient water supply and pressure. The City's design standard for water transmis- sion facilities is to provide 4,000 gallons per minute of flow at a minimum 45 pounds per square inch of pressure in pipes 8 inches and larger. Urban Fire Hazards Urban fires primarily involve the uncontrolled burning of residential, commercial, and/or industrial structures due to human activities. Factors that exacerbate urban structural fires include substandard building construc- tion, highly flammable materials, delayed response times, and inadequate fire protection services. Wildland Fire Hazards The Planning Area is not characterized by substan- tial areas of wildlands. The topography of the area is relatively homogenous and steep slopes that could contribute to wildland fires are not common. Data provided by the California Department of Conserva- tion Fire and Resource Assessment Program in 2007 indicate that less than one percent of the Planning Area has "Moderate" fire hazard potential. The remaining areas are classified as urban or non-wildland. No portions of the Planning Area are classified as having a "High" or "Very High" risk. CHAPTER 8: SAFETY 1 8-11 8.5 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Public Safety Departments The Lodi Police and Fire departments manage public safety in Lodi, with the Fire Department leading emergency preparedness and planning. The Fire Department provides a wide range of emergency and non -emergency services, including fire suppression, emergency medical services, hazardous materials response, technical rescue, fire preven- tion, public education, and related safety services. The Emergency Operations Center, located at the Police department building, serves as the center of the city's emergency operations. City operations remain in compliance with the National Incident Manage- ment System, a comprehensive national approach to incident management, applicable to federal, state, and local governments and the Standardized Emergency Management System, which provides a strategy and framework to address multi -agency and multi -juris- dictional emergencies in California. As of zoo8, the Fire Department had 59 personnel, including 51 firefighters, company officers, or battalion ch iefs. The city of Lodi has an Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating of Class 3. A Class 3 ISO rating indicates that the Fire Department is strategically placed throughout the City, and has adequate personnel, equipment, and expertise to serve the current popula- tion. In 2oo6, the most recent year of data availability, the department met the self-imposed National Fire Protection Association's response time criteria of 6 minutes for 9o% of all calls. The Police Department's basic responsibility is to protect and serve the public and property within Lodi, through crime prevention, investigation, and other services. As of 2oo8, the Police Department had tt8 full-time employees and izo volunteers, with 78 sworn officers. 8-12 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN Emergency Planning The City has adopted the San Joaquin County Hazard Mitigation Plan This plan identifies measures to reduce the impacts of natural and manmade hazards and to facilitate the recovery and repair of struc- tures if damage should occur from hazardous events. Adoption of the plan ensures that Lodi is eligible for certain federal and State funds for disaster recovery in case of such an event. Evacuation Routes and Safety Standards The City provides street standards for all street types, thus ensuring appropriate standards for emergency access and evacuation. For example, the standards specify roadway widths of 30 feet (curb -to -curb) for minor residential streets and 52 feet for major collector streets. 8.6 POLICIES GUIDING i S -G1 Ensure a high level of public health and safety. S -G2 Prevent loss of lives, injury, illness, and property damage due to flooding, hazardous materials, seismic and geological hazards, and fire. S -G3 Protect the public from disasters and provide guidance and response in the event a disaster or emergency. S -G4 Minimize vulnerability of infrastructure and water supply and distribution systems. Flooding and Drainage S -Pi Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program and ensure that local reg- ulations are in full compliance with standards adopted by FEMA. S -P2 Cooperate with appropriate local, State, and federal agencies to address local and regional flood issues and dam failure hazards. cause flooding of downstream facilities and properties. Additionally, the City shall ensure that storm drainage facilities are constructed to serve new development adequate to storm runoff generated by a 100 -year storm. S -P6 Prohibit new development, except for public uses incidental to open space develop- ment, within Zone A (100 -year flood zone) of the most current FEMA floodplain map (see Figure 8-1 for the most current map). S -P7 Site critical emergency response facili- ties—such as hospitals, fire stations, police offices, substations, emergency operations centers and other emergency service facil- ities and utilities—to minimize exposure to flooding and other hazards. S -P8 Update Zoning Ordinance and develop- ment review process as needed to reduce peak -hour stormwater flow and increase groundwater recharge. These may include provisions for: S -P3 Require adequate natural floodway design to assure flood control in areas where stream channels have been modified and to foster stream enhancement, improved S -P9 water quality, recreational opportunities, and groundwater recharge. S -P4 Cooperate with and encourage reclama- tion districts to institute a berm maintenance program to reduce berm failures and shall coordinate with appropriate State, federal, and local flood control agencies in planning efforts to ensure the continued protection of local and regional flood control systems. S -P5 Continue to ensure, through the development review process, that future developments do not increase peak storm flows and do not • Constructing parking areas and parking islands without curbs and gutters, to allow stormwater sheet flow into vegetated areas. ■ Grading that lengthens flow paths and increases runoff travel time to reduce the peak flow rate. • Installing cisterns or sub -surface retention facilities to capture rainwater for use in irri- gation and non -potable uses. Update City street design standards to allow for expanded stormwater management tech- niques. These may include: • Canopy trees to absorb rainwater and slow water flow. • Directing runoff into or across vegetated areas to help filter runoff and encourage groundwater recharge. ■ Disconnecting impervious areas from the storm drain network and maintain natural drainage divides to keep flow paths dispersed. • Providing naturally vegetated areas in close proximity to parking areas, buildings, and CHAPTER 8: SAFETY 1 8-13 other impervious expanses to slow runoff, filter out pollutants, and facilitate infiltration. • Directing stormwater into vegetated areas or into water collection devices. • Using devices such as bioretention cells, vegetated swales, infiltration trenches and dry wells to increase storage volume and facilitate infiltration. • Diverting water away from storm drains using correctional drainage techniques. Hazardous Materials and Operations S -P10 Require that all fuel and chemical storage tanks are appropriately constructed; include spill containment areas to prevent seismic damage, leakage, fire and explosion; and are structurally or spatially separated from sensitive land uses, such as residential neighborhoods, schools, hospitals and places of public assembly. S -P11 Ensure compatibility between hazardous material users and surrounding land use through the development review process. Separate hazardous waste facilities from incompatible uses including, but not limited to, schools, daycares, hospitals, public gathering areas, and high-density residential housing through development standards and the review process. S -P12 Consider the potential for the production, use, storage, and transport of hazardous materials in approving new development. Provide for reasonable controls on such hazardous materials. Ensure that the pro- ponents of applicable new development projects address hazardous materials concerns through the preparation of Phase I or Phase II hazardous materials studies, as necessary, for each identified site as part of the design phase for each project. Require projects to implement federal or State cleanup standards outlined in the studies during construction. S -P13 Regulate the production, use, storage, and transport of hazardous materials to protect the health of Lodi residents. Cooperate with the County and Lodi Fire Department in the 8-14 1 LODI GENERAL PLAN identification of hazardous material users, development of an inspection process, and implementation of the City's Hazardous Waste Management and Hazardous Materials Area plans. Require, as appropriate, a hazardous materials inventory for project sites, including an assessment of materials and operations for any development appli- cations, as a component of the development environmental review process or business license review/building permit review. S -P14 Work with waste disposal service provider(s) to educate the public as to the types of household hazardous wastes and the proper methods of disposal and shall continue to provide opportunities for residents to con- veniently dispose of household hazardous waste. S -P15 Continue to follow the County Comprehen- sive Airport Land Use Plan for guidelines on land use compatibility near airports, land use restrictions, and to ensure public safety. S -P16 Support grade -separated railroad crossings, where feasible, and other appropriate measures adjacent to railroad tracks to ensure the safety of the community. S -P17 Continue to mark underground utilities and abide by federal safe -digging practices during construction. Seismic and Geologic Hazards S -P18 Ensure that all public facilities, such as buildings, water tanks, underground utilities, and berms, are structurally sound and able to withstand seismic activity. S -P19 For buildings identified as seismically unsafe, prohibit a change in use to a higher occupancy or more intensive use until an engineering evaluation of the structure has been conducted and structural deficiencies corrected consistent with City building codes. S -P20 Require soils reports for new projects and use the information to determine appropriate permitting requirements, if deemed necessary. S -P21 Require that geotechnical investigations be prepared for all proposed critical struc- tures (such as police stations, fire stations, emergency equipment, storage buildings, water towers, wastewater lift stations, elec- trical substations, fuel storage facilities, large public assembly buildings, desig- nated emergency shelters, and buildings three or more stories high) before construc- tion or approval of building permits, if deemed necessary. The investigation shall include estimation of the maximum credible earth- quake, maximum ground acceleration, duration, and the potential for ground failure because of liquefaction or differential settling. Require new development to include grading and erosion control plans prepared by a qualified engineer or land surveyor. Fire Hazards S -P23 Maintain a vegetation management program to ensure clearing of dry brush areas. Conduct management activities in a manner consistent with all applicable environmental regulations. Emergency Management Policies related to police and fire facilities etre addressed in Chapter 3: Growth Management and Infrastructure. S -P24 Coordinate with local, State, and Federal agencies to establish, maintain, and test a coordinated emergency response system that addresses a variety of hazardous and threatening situations. Conduct periodic emergency response exercises to test the effectiveness of City emergency response procedures. Develop and implement public information programs concerning disaster response and emergency preparedness and develop mutual aid agreements and commu- nication links with surrounding communities for assistance during times of emergency. S -P25 Maintain and periodically update the City's Emergency Preparedness Plan, including review of County and State emergency response procedures that must be coordi- nated with City procedures. S -P26 Ensure that major access and evacuation corridors are available and unobstructed in case of major emergency or disaster. Continue to identify appropriate road standards, including minimum road widths and turnouts to provide adequate emergency access and evacuation routes. S -P27 Continue to use the San Joaquin County Hazard Mitigation Plan to reduce hazard risk and coordinate with the County on its update and implementation, consistent with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Disaster Act of 2000. CHAPTER 8: SAFETY 8-15 Page intentionally left blank. 8-16 1 L001 GENERAL PLAN RESOLUTION NO. 2020-228 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AMENDING THE SAFETY ELEMENT IN THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE BILL (SB) 5 AND SB 1278 RELATED TO 200 -YEAR FLOOD PROTECTION WHEREAS, on October 7, 2020, the City Council of the City of Lodi held a duly noticed public hearing, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65402.(a); and WHEREAS, the project proponent is City of Lodi, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240; and WHEREAS, in 2007, the State adopted Senate Bill (SB) 5 (Machado) (and follow-on legislation (SB 1278)), which requires the City to amend its General Plan to address flooding that has a 1 -in -200 chance of occurring in any given year (i.e., a 200 -year storm); and WHEREAS, the City staff retained the services of Kjeldsen Sinnock Neudeck Inc. (KSN) to prepare a hydraulic flood model of the City in keeping with the guidance provided DWR (State Criteria); and WHEREAS, based upon the results of the KSN modeling ("Mokelumne River Hydraulic Analyses: Summary of Methodology and Results", dated December 19 2018) and a review of the requirements of SB 5 and SB 1278, staff has identified specific changes necessary to the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi General Plan was adopted in April 2010, and since 2010 various new requirements for the Safety Element of the General Plan have been issued under the General Plan Guidelines, as adopted by the California Office of Planning and Research; and WHEREAS, implementation of SB 5 standards and procedures requires amendments to the City of Lodi General Plan Safety Element to meet the requirements of the General Plan Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City provided a draft of the proposed revision to the Safety Element to the City's General Plan to the California Geologic Survey for review, and received initial comments on July 23, 2020, that have been incorporated into the draft General Plan Safety Element; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi requested that the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) identify tribes with traditional lands or cultural places in the City of Lodi, and on January 10, 2020 notified six tribes as identified by the NAHC of the proposed Lodi General Plan amendment. Upon receiving no requests for consultation the City concluded tribal consultations required by SB 18; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi General Plan was last updated and adopted in 2010 and the Lodi General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2009022075), was certified in 2010; and WHEREAS, no amendment to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan has the potential to increase the density or intensity of development or allow any uses that were not analyzed by the General Plan EIR or currently allowed under the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162 identifies that when an EIR has been certified for an adopted project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, that one or more of three stated criteria exists; and WHEREAS, on August 26, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi held a duly noticed and required public hearing, on the proposed General Plan amendment and recommended on a unanimous vote of 6-0 that: 1) the City Council determine the proposed amendments to the City's General Plan are exempt from review under CEQA, subject to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and 2) the City Council amend the Safety Element of the City's General Plan as proposed; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby determines that the proposed amendments to the Lodi General Plan are exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) subject to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines based on the following findings: 1. The proposed amendments to the Safety Element will not result in any increases to the density or intensity of allowed uses allowed under the City's General Plan or allow any uses not currently allowed under the General Plan. The proposed amendments to the Safety Element do not represent a significant change to the General Plan with regard to environmental effects and would not require amendment of the City's General Plan EIR. 2. The policies and programs of the City's General Plan and the analysis of environmental effects of the City's General Plan EIR remain valid. No changes in circumstances have occurred since certification of the City's General Plan EIR that would result in new significant environmental effects or an increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects related to the proposed amendments. 3. The proposed amendments to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan will not result in changes to the physical environment that were not previously analyzed in the City's General Plan EIR. Therefore, new information identified since certification of the City's General Plan EIR does not have the potential uncover any new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of impacts that would result from adoption of the proposed amendments to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby amends the Safety Element of the City's General Plan as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Dated: October 7, 2020 -------------------- -------------------- I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2020-228 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held October 7, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Chandler, Mounce, Nakanishi, and Mayor Kuehne NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None ' JENNIF -R CUSMIR City Clerk 2020-228 EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element The Safety Element identifies the natural and manmade hazards that exist Within the city. It seeks to mitigate their potential impacts, through both preventative and response measures, to ensure the continued health and safety of Lodi community members. This Element addresses flooding and drainage; potentially hazardous materials and operations; seismic and geologic hazards; fire hazards; and emergency management. Potential health hazards related to air quality are addressed in Chapter 7: Conservation. Storm drain infrastructure related to flooding and drainage is discussed in Chapter 3: Growth Management and Infrastructure. 8.1 FLOODING AND DRAINAGE Flood Zones Figure 8-1 shows areas within the 100 -year floodplain zones. The map uses Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 100 -year floodplain data produced by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The FIRM is the only official mapping for the purposes of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations and coverage areas. Additional flood risk data, including 200 -year flood data shown in Figure 8-2, described below, is not approved by FEMA for use in relation to the NFIP. Based on revised flood risk evaluations prepared by FEMA for the City of Lodi and San Joaquin County, effective October 19, 2009, flood hazards are a constraint to development only in two areas of the city: the area immediately adjacent to the Mokelumne River along the city's northern boundary, and the area around the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility, the City's wastewater treatment facility, in the southwest corner of the Planning Area. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element As shown on Figure 8-1, these areas are subject to a 1% annual (100 -year) flood. Flooding depths in this area are generally greater than three feet. No new development is planned within either of these areas. Most of the city and the Planning Area lie within areas designated Zone X (500) that are subject to the 0.2% annual (500 -year) flood zone or that lie within the 100 -year flood zone, but with flooding depths less than one foot. This suggests that these areas have a low susceptibility to major flooding, but would be inundated during a 500 -year flood event. The remaining portions of the city and Planning Area are classified as Zone X, meaning that they lie outside the 500 -year flood zone. 200 -Year Floodplain Figure 8-2 shows areas within the 200 -year floodplain which are subject to urban level of flood protection requirements with flood depths of 3 -feet or greater. This map identifies areas where higher standards of development and flood protection may be required before issuance of building permits. Figure 8-2 was developed using data provided by DWR, supplemented by a floodplain study Mokelumne River Hydraulic Analyses: Summary of Methodology & Results, December 19, 2018 prepared by the firm of Kjeldsen, Sinnock Neudeck, Inc. (KSN). This report provides the technical basis for mapping the extents of the 200 -year floodplain within the City of Lodi. The primary source of potential flooding for Lodi is the Mokelumne River which flows along the City's northern border. The 200 -year floodplain resulting from the Mokelumne River within the City was modeled based on several data sources, including a review of the Mokelumne River watershed and a review of existing flood data. The Mokelumne River is formed by the confluence of the North Fork Mokelumne River and the Middle Fork Mokelumne River in the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada. It flows from this confluence along the Amador and Calaveras County Line down through Pardee and Camanche Reservoirs past Lockeford and Lodi until its eventual discharge into the San Joaquin River near Bouldin Island. The watershed is generally divided into two sub -watersheds: the Upper Mokelumne River and the Lower Mokelumne River with Pardee and Camanche Reservoirs between the two sub -watersheds. The Upper Mokelumne River is primarily federally managed wilderness with some commercial timber land and protected watershed areas managed by the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). The Lower Mokelumne River is part of the rich agricultural region of the Central Valley with grapes being the major crop grown in the watershed. The anticipated 200 -year flood event in Lodi is caused by the Mokelumne River rising out of its banks and inundating a wide, flat developed area. Various scenarios were modeled using a combined one-dimensional/two-dimensional hydraulic model. Due to the nature of the flooding anticipated in the Lodi area, the HEC -RAS v.5.0.5 was selected as hydraulic model for the flooding analysis. Lodi has reliable historical data along four points of the Mokelumne River from past floods in 1955, 1986, 1997, and 2017. This data was combined with East Bay Municipal Utility District's EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element hydrologic and stream flow data along the Mokelumne River to calibrate the model for this analysis. Due to the significantly higher elevations in the high-water mark elevations observed during the 1955 flood event as compared to the three other events, the 1955 flood event was selected as the primary flood to which the hydraulic model was calibrated. Based upon the analysis described above, and as described in greater detail within the KSN report, areas subject to flooding greater than three feet in depth within the City were mapped as presented in Figure 8.2. Consistent with the requirements of Senate Bill 5 (SB 5), no construction may occur within the delineated 200 -year flood plan unless the City finds and determines that urban level of flood protection requirements have been satisfied. Dam Inundation Large quantities of water stored in reservoirs along the Mokelumne, Calaveras, and Stanislaus River systems pose a potential threat to inhabitants of the Planning Area. Flooding could occur as a result of releases from reservoirs upstream of the Planning Area. Partial or complete failure of a dam along any of these rivers, especially the Mokelumne River, could cause inundation in the Planning Area. Dams that pose a direct threat to the Planning Area include Camanche, Camanche South and North Dikes, and Pardee Dam. The entire Planning Area would be inundated in the event of a failure of any of these dams, except for the Camanche North Dikes Dam, whose failure would just flood the Planning Area north of Kettleman Lane. Q r - cn W Z O N 0 O O UL a W Z W 0 C) r LU UL a CD $ 0 m po N m m L C p 7 m L C m a0 p 0 N 0 O _ N N U U 0 0 C m m t E O N L U a `1 _ 7 G C p rr N O C 0 0 1 m O 0 o a N m A � � p p _N O L f/N1 O N C N N 7 N a N d O m N .. N O N p —0C p G N C ¢ N C O b L C `1 ¢w Q•° X m[2 X a� IVm c 7 t c a� c 0 c m o— N W C o o— N W c p c" N m p p N Q c W Z O N O O J LL Q W O O N N O W as a c M 7 o 0 m � a N M o a fA N O .� .t. a CL a Lj- D O m w a a °o 8 O N EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element Flood Protection Berms along the Mokelumne River were privately built and vary in height. Upstream of SR -99, the adjacent agricultural lands are protected against floods up to the 50 -year currents by low discontinuous berms. Berm overtopping here from larger flood events (e.g. the 100 -year flood) would not, however, cause inundation in the Planning Area. Berms west of SR -99 are higher and provide protection from flows slightly greater than the 100 -year event. Should a major storm event cause berms to be over topped or if a berm or dam fails, flooding would occur. Flooding can also occur when runoff exceeds the capacity of local systems and cannot drain adequately. As long as berms are not over -topped and maintain their structural integrity, flooding is considered to be very unlikely. San Joaquin County has prepared a Dam Failure Plan that identifies hazards to the county from dams and reservoirs. The Dam Failure Plan also identifies actions that will be taken to respond to flood -related emergencies in the event that flooding occurs. These actions would include implementation of the Standardized Emergency Management System and the County's Multi - Hazard Emergency Plan (see Section 8.5: Emergency Management for details).' Although major flooding is not anticipated, as existing agricultural and open space lands are converted to urban uses, there will be an increase in stormwater runoff from additional impervious surfaces. To minimize those impacts, General Plan policies seek to manage stormwater runoff, through the permitting process, good stormwater management practices (e.g. porous materials, cisterns, bioswales, etc.), and the construction of open spaces and drainage basins (see Chapter 6: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space). Agencies Responsible for Flood Protection Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA is a federal agency whose mission is to reduce the loss of life and property from natural and human -made disasters through a comprehensive, risk-based emergency management system. One of the agency's responsibilities is to maintain flood zone maps. California Department of Water Resources DWR implements the California Water Code, regulates activities in California's floodways, encourages preventive flood control maintenance, and operates some flood control projects. Central Valley Flood Protection Board and Plan The Central Valley Flood Protection Board developed and adopted the CVFPP in 2012 and continues to oversee the plan's implementation. The CVFPP provides conceptual guidance to reduce the risk of flooding for about one million people in California and $70 billion in infrastructure, homes, and businesses with a goal of providing 200 -year flood protection to urban areas. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element 8.2 Potentially Hazardous Materials and Operations This section focuses on human -made hazards associated with the exposure to hazardous materials, as well as fire, transportation, and utility corridor hazards. Hazardous wastes generated by both residents and businesses within the Planning Area contribute to environmental and human health hazards that have become an increasing public concern. However, proper waste management and disposal practices can minimize public concern over toxicity and the contamination of soils, water, and the air. Hazardous Materials As of May 2009, the State Water Resources Control Board reported an inventory of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) and other (non -fuel) cleanup sites. The majority of the LUST sites have been remediated, with only nine sites listed as still "open' for remediation, monitoring, or assessment. These sites are described in a table in Appendix C and shown in Figure 8-3. The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) is responsible for managing California's solid waste stream. The CIWMB works in partnership with local government, industry, and the public to reduce waste disposal and ensure environmentally safe landfills are maintained. Table 8-1 and Figure 8-3 describe solid waste, recycling, and landfills facilities (including closed facilities). TABLE 8-1: SOLID WASTE AND/OR RECYCLING FACILITIES AND LANDFILL SITES IN THE PLANNING AREA SITE ADDRESS Solid Waste and Landfill Lodi City Landfill N of Awani Dr. and Mokelumne River Dr. Central Valley Waste Services 1333 E. Turner Rd. Valley Landscaping 1320 East Harney Ln. Recycling Centers Pinos Recycling Co. ,741 S Cherokee Ln. Tokay Recycling Center 60 S Cluff Ave. Tomra Pacific Inc/Apple Market i 1320 W Lockeford St Diaz Recycling '845 S Central Ave. Nexcycle/Save Mart #209 610 W Kettleman Ln. Tomra Pacific Inc/Food 4 Less 12430 W Kettleman Ln. Nexcycle/Safeway #1648 '2449 W Kettleman Ln EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element FIGURE 8-3: POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES Potentially Hazardous Operations Airports and Airstrips Airport -gelated hazards are generally associated with aircraft accidents, particularly during takeoffs and Iandings. Airport operation hazards include incompatible land uses, power transmission lines, wildlife hazards (e.g. bird strikes), and tall structures (e.g. traffic control towers). (Note that noise impacts are discussed in Chapter 9: Noise.) Existing public use airports within or adjacent to the Planning Area include: • Kingdon Airpark: seven miles southwest of downtown Lodi; • Lodi Airpark: five miles southwest of downtown Lodi, near the intersection of Armstrong and Lower Sacramento roads (inside the Planning Area); and ■ Ten private airstrips within or adjacent to the Planning Area. The 2009 San Joaquin County Airport Land Use Plan provides information on existing and future operations, potential hazards, and land use compatibility. According to the Plan Kingdon Airpark is planning to extend its runway to permit more flights and aircraft types (i.e. from solely accommodating single-engine planes to allowing business jets and turboprop aircraft). No future improvements are anticipated at the Lodi Airpark. Given the distance of these airports from the city's boundaries, the airports do not present substantial hazards to people or property in Lodi. The Plan's land use compatibility matrix and compatibility zone map is shown in Figure 8-4. The southeast portion of Lodi, south of Century Boulevard, lies with in Zone 8: Airport Influence Area, which does not have any land use restrictions. A portion of the Urban Reserve General Plan area, along the north side of Hogan Lane, lies within Zone 7: Traffic Pattern. This classification prohibits outdoor stadiums and non-residential uses with densities greater than 450 persons per acre, and requires at least 10% open space. FIGURE 8-4: AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY ZONES Railroads Potential hazards associated with railroads include collisions and train derailment. Either of these incidents can lead to human injury or death as well as causing various environmental impacts. The Federal Railroad Administration regulates railroad safety and provides oversight to the use of railroads. Lodi is served by two national rail lines, Union Pacific Railroad and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe. The city is also served by a local railroad, Central California Traction, which runs contiguous to industrial areas. Daily passenger service via Amtrak is available from Lodi to San Francisco, Los Angeles, Sacramento and points between. A more detailed discussion of railroad operations and infrastructure may be found in Chapter 5: Transportation. *M11.3W-1 Draft General Plan Safety Element Utility Corridors One of the primary causes of disruption to underground natural gas pipelines, which are present in the Planning Area, is external force damage that occurs during excavation activities. Such damage can create pipeline leaks or ruptures and lead to hazardous health and safety conditions. However, a national program is in place to prevent accidental pipeline damage caused by excavation. For areas adjacent to an underground utility pipeline, the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Pipeline Safety requires that individuals contact the state "One -Call" center prior to beginning excavation. Advanced planning, effective use of these one -call systems, accurate locating and marking of underground facilities, and the use of safe -digging practices can all be effective in reducing underground facility damage and potentially hazardous conditions. 8.3 SEISMIC AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS In general, geologic and seismic hazards do not pose a substantial risk to development in Lodi or to overall public safety. The Central Valley is filled with a thick sequence of sediments eroded from the Sierra Nevada range to the east. The most recent deposits in the region are floodplain deposits, consisting of clay, silt, and some sand. Seismicity The Planning Area is located 65 miles east of the Bay Area and lies within Seismic Risk Zone 3. Earthquakes in Seismic Risk Zone 3 pose a lesser risk than those experienced in Zone 4 (such as the San Francisco Bay Area). The Planning Area may be affected by regionally occurring earthquakes; however, impacts resulting from such an event are not likely to be severe. Figure 8- 5 identifies active and potentially active faults in and around the Planning Area. Regional Faults Lodi s nearest active fault is the Greenville Fault, located approximately 34 miles south of the Planning Area.2 The Maximum Moment magnitude of the maximum probable earthquake on the Greenville Fault is estimated to be 6.9.3 Other faults close to the Planning Area exhibiting historic displacement (activity within the last 200 years) are the Concord -Green Valley and Hayward Faults located approximately 45 miles west-northwest and 56 miles west of the Planning Area, respectively. Portions of the Calaveras Fault zone also have been rated as being active within the last 200 years; those portions are located approximately 46 miles southwest of the site. The nearest Quaternary fault (2 million years ago to present) to the Planning Area showing evidence of activity within the past 1.6 million years is the San Joaquin Fault located approximately 24 miles southwest of the Planning Area.4 The nearest mapped fault trace, the Stockton Fault, is not considered an active fault. Seismic Structural Safety The greatest geologic hazard in Lodi is the structural danger posed by ground shaking from earthquakes originating outside of the area. During a high intensity event, some damage could occur to well -made structures and chimneys; some towers could fall; and poorly constructed or weak structures could be heavily damaged. The susceptibility of a structure to damage from ground shaking is related to the underlying foundation material. A foundation of rock or very firm material can intensify short -period motions, which affect low-rise buildings more than tall, flexible ones. A deep layer of saturated alluvium can cushion low-rise buildings, but it can also accentuate the motion in tall buildings. Other potentially dangerous conditions include, but are EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element not limited to: building architectural features that are not firmly anchored, such as parapets and cornices; roadways, including column and pile bents and abutments for bridges and overcrossings; and above -ground storage tanks and their mounting devices. The risk of surface fault rupture is considered low due to the substantial distance from the active Hayward and Calaveras Fault zones and the type of ground shaking expected from those faults. The California Geologic Survey (CGS) prepared mapping that defines hazard levels associated with ground shaking, Earthquake Shaking Potential for California, 2016, and designates Lodi and surrounding lands as having low potential for earthquake -induced ground shaking. Other Geologic Hazards Additional geologic hazards that may exist within the Planning Area include soil erosion and settlement. The Planning Area is primarily flat and thus the risk of unstable soils or landslides is considered relatively low. Soil Erosion Soil erosion is the process whereby soil materials are worn away and transported to another area either by wind or water. Rates of erosion can vary depending on the soil material and structure, placement, and the general level of human activity. Soil containing high amounts of sand or silt can be easily eroded while clayey soils are less susceptible. The Tokay soils present in the Planning Area have a moderate potential for wind erosion. The Tujunga soils, found in more limited quantities in the Planning Area, have a severe potential for wind erosion if vegetative covering is removed. [FIGURE 8.5: REGIONAL FAULTS] Expansive Soils Expansive soils are largely comprised of clay, which expand in volume when water is absorbed and shrink when dried. Structural damage may result over a long period of time, usually resulting from inadequate soil and foundation engineering or the placement of structures directly on expansive soils. Several of the soil types located within the Planning Area are comprised of potentially expansive materials. However, the majority of the Planning Area either has not been measured for soil shrink -swell or has a low potential for soil shrink -swell. Settlement Settlement is the consolidation of the underlying soil when a load, such as that of a building or new fill material, is placed upon it. When soil tends to settle at different rates and by varying amounts depending on the load weight, it is referred to as differential settlement. Settlement commonly occurs as a result of building construction or other large projects that require soil stockpiles. Areas of the Planning Area that contain fill material may be susceptible to settlement. If the fill materials are unconsolidated they have the potential to respond more adversely to additional load weights as compared to adjacent native soils. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element Slope Instability/Liquefaction Due to the relatively level terrain in and around the City of Lodi, potential for hazards associated with slope instability and/or landslides is very low. A review of CGS records (https:maps.consewrvation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/) determined that CGS has not yet evaluated risks associated with slope instability or liquefaction in the vicinity of the City of Lodi. 8.4 FIRE HAZARDS Both urban and wildland fire hazards exist in the Lodi Planning Area, creating the potential for injury, loss of life, and property damage. In the event of a fire, the Fire Department relies on sufficient water supply and pressure. The City's design standard for water transmission facilities is to provide 4,000 gallons per minute of flow at a minimum 45 pounds per square inch of pressure in pipes 8 inches and larger. Urban Fire Hazards Urban fires primarily involve the uncontrolled burning of residential, commercial, and/or industrial structures due to human activities. Factors that exacerbate urban structural fires include substandard building construction, highly flammable materials, delayed response times, and inadequate fire protection services. Wildland Fire Hazards The Planning Area is not characterized by substantial areas of wildlands. The topography of the area is relatively homogenous and steep slopes that could contribute to wildland fires are not common. Data provided by the California Department of Conservation Fire and Resource Assessment Program in 2007 indicate that less than one percent of the Planning Area has "Moderate" fire hazard potential. The remaining areas are classified as urban or non-wildland. No portions of the Planning Area are classified as having a "High" or "Very High" risk. 8.5 CLIMATE CHANGE As noted in the 2017 San Joaquin County LHMP, climate change is virtually certain to continue without immediate and effective global action. According to NASA, 2016 was on track to be the hottest year on record, and 15 of the 17 hottest years have occurred since 2000. Without significant global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes in its Fifth Assessment Synthesis Report (2014) that average global temperature increases are likely to exceed 1.5 C by the end of the 21st century, with consequences for people, assets, economies and ecosystems, including risks from heat stress, storms and extreme precipitation, inland and coastal flooding, landslides, air pollution, drought, water scarcity, sea level rise and storm surges. The 2018 ftort. Indicators of Climate Clwa e in California. prepared by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment documents changing climate indicators and the potential resulting hazards. The impacts of climate change vary dramatically based upon the location evaluated with diverse impacts such as coastal flooding due to sea level rise, increased wildfire risk due to heat and drought and increased landslide potential due to increasingly severe storms. In general, the City of Lodi is buffered from the more severe increased hazards of climate EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element change due to location, topography and surrounding land uses. The most significant threats to the community and its residents will likely result from increasing sea levels and extreme heat events. The California Natural Resources Agency in a 2012 report estimated that sea levels along the California coast will rise between 3 and 5 feet by 2100. A combination of increased storm intensity and saltwater intrusion in the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta resulting from higher sea levels could increase the risk for flood -caused levee failures, increasing flood risk and contaminating freshwater supplies stored and conveyed in the delta. Climate change has the potential create hazards to the community and its members. Warming temperatures and changes in precipitation can affect vector-borne pathogen transmission and disease patterns in California. West Nile Virus currently poses the greatest mosquito -borne disease threat. In 2006, heat -related deaths and illnesses were much higher than any other year because of a prolonged heat wave. While difficult to track, climate change can impact human well-being in many ways, including injuries and fatalities from extreme events, and respiratory stress from poor air quality (Mellilo et al., 2014). With regard to other hazards associated with climate change, Lodi faces relatively lower threats. The hazards of wildland fires impacting Lodi and its residents are reduced by the overall compact form of the urban community and the cultivated agricultural lands surrounding the City. The steep topography and wooded slopes that have contributed to severe fire events in other parts of the state are not present in and around Lodi. Similarly, the local topography is gently rolling and not subject to landslides or land failure resulting from severe storm events. Reduced water supply resulting from prolonged droughts has the potential to impact Lodi. Water supply and service is discussed in Chapter 3 - Growth Management and Infrastructure, of this General Plan. 8.6 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Public Safety Departments The Lodi Police and Fire departments manage public safety in Lodi, with the Fire Department leading emergency preparedness and planning. The Fire Department provides a wide range of emergency and non -emergency services, including fire suppression, emergency medical services, hazardous materials response, technical rescue, fire prevention, public education, and related safety services. The Emergency Operations Center, located at the Police department building, serves as the center of the city's emergency operations. City operations remain in compliance with the National Incident Management System, a comprehensive national approach to incident management, applicable to federal, state, and local governments and the Standardized Emergency Management System, which provides a strategy and framework to address multi -agency and multi -jurisdictional emergencies in California. As of 2020, the Fire Department had 57 personnel, including 51 firefighters, company officers, or battalion chiefs. The city of Lodi has an Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating of Class 3. A Class EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element 3 ISO rating indicates that the Fire Department is strategically placed throughout the City, and has adequate personnel, equipment, and expertise to serve the current population. In 2006, the most recent year of data availability, the department met the self-imposed National Fire Protection Association's response time criteria of 6 minutes for 90% of all calls. The Police Department's basic responsibility is to protect and serve the public and property within Lodi, through crime prevention, investigation, and other services. As of 2020, the Police Department had 109 full-time employees and 120 volunteers, with 77 sworn officers. Emergency Planning San Joaquin County updated its Local Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2017. This document addresses County lands and is not a Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. San Joaquin County has also prepared an Emergency Operations Plan that addresses major hazards such as severe weather, flood and damn failure, drought and water shortage and electrical system de- energization. These plans identify measures to reduce the impacts of natural and manmade hazards and to facilitate the recovery and repair of structures if damage should occur from hazardous events. Evacuation Routes and Safety Standards The City of Lodi benefits from numerous points of access that range from State Highways (Highway 99 and Kettleman Lane/ Highway 12) to minor roadways that extend into San Joaquin County lands that surround the City. Numerous roads extend to the north, south, east and west, providing multiple routes of exit in each direction from the City in the event of an emergency or catastrophic event. The City provides street standards for all street types, thus ensuring appropriate standards for emergency access and evacuation. For example, the standards specify roadway widths of 30 feet (curb -to -curb) for minor residential streets and 52 feet for major collector streets. $,6 POIICIFS GUIDING POLICIES S -G1 Ensure a high level of public health and safety. S -G2 Prevent loss of lives, injury, illness, and property damage due to flooding, hazardous materials, seismic and geological hazards, and fire. S -G3 Protect the public from disasters and provide guidance and response in the event a disaster or emergency. S -G4 Minimize vulnerability of infrastructure and water supply and distribution systems. IMPLEMENTING POLICIES Flooding and Drainage S -P1 Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program and ensure that local regulations are in full compliance with standards adopted by FEMA. EXH I BIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element S-132 Cooperate with appropriate local, State, and federal agencies to address local and regional flood issues and dam failure hazards. S -P3 Require adequate natural floodway design to assure flood control in areas where stream channels have been modified and to foster stream ;enhancement, improved water quality, recreational opportunities, and groundwater recharge. S -P4 Cooperate with and encourage reclamation districts to institute a berm maintenance program to reduce berm failures and shall coordinate with appropriate State, federal, and local flood control agencies in planning efforts to ensure the continued protection of local and regional flood control systems. S-135 Continue to ensure, through the development review process, that future developments do not increase peak storm flows and do not cause flooding of downstream facilities and properties. Additionally, the City shall ensure that storm drainage facilities are constructed to serve new development adequate to storm runoff generated by a 100 -year storm. S-136 Prohibit new development, except for public uses incidental to open space development, within Zone A (100 -year flood zone) of the most current FEMA floodplain map (see Figure 8-1 for the most current map). S -P7 The City will update data on the 200 -year floodplain through an annual review. This updated information will be made available and referenced during the development review process for areas within the base case 200 -year flood map, as shown in Figure 8.2. S -P8 The City will not: approve any discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement; approve any ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence; approve a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required; or enter into a development agreement for any project located in the 200 -year floodplain unless it meets one or more of the flood protection findings established under Section 15.60.130.D of the Lodi Municipal Code. S-139 Site critical emergency response facilities—such as hospitals, fire stations, police offices, substations, emergency operations centers and other emergency service facilities and utilities outside of the 200 -year floodplain to minimize exposure to flooding and other hazards. 5-1310 Update Zoning Ordinance and development review process as needed to reduce peak -hour stormwater flow and increase groundwater recharge. These may include provisions for: • Constructing parking areas and parking islands without curbs and gutters, to allow stormwater sheet flow into vegetated areas. • Grading that lengthens flow paths and increases runoff travel time to reduce the peak flow rate. • Installing cisterns or sub -surface retention facilities to capture rainwater for use in irrigation and non -potable uses. S -P11 Update City street design standards to allow for expanded stormwater management techniques. These may include: • Canopy trees to absorb rainwater and slow water flow. • Directing runoff into or across vegetated areas to help filter runoff and encourage groundwater recharge. • Disconnecting impervious areas from the storm drain network and maintain natural drainage divides to keep flow paths dispersed. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element Providing naturally vegetated areas in close proximity to parking areas, buildings, and other impervious expanses to slow runoff, filter out pollutants, and facilitate infiltration. • Directing stormwater into vegetated areas or into water collection devices. • Using devices such as bioretention cells, vegetated swales, infiltration trenches and dry wells to increase storage volume and facilitate infiltration. • Diverting water away from storm drains using correctional drainage techniques. Hazardous Materials and Operations S-P12Require that all fuel and chemical storage tanks are appropriately constructed; include spill containment areas to prevent seismic damage, leakage, fire and explosion; and are structurally or spatially separated from sensitive land uses, such as residential neighborhoods, schools, hospitals and places of public assembly. S -P13 Ensure compatibility between hazardous material users and surrounding land use through the development review process. Separate hazardous waste facilities from incompatible uses including, but not limited to, schools, daycares, hospitals, public gathering areas, and high-density residential housing through development standards and the review process. S -P14 Consider the potential for the production, use, storage, and transport of hazardous materials in approving new development. Provide for reasonable controls on such hazardous materials. Ensure that the proponents of applicable new development projects address hazardous materials concerns through the preparation of Phase I or Phase II hazardous materials studies, as necessary, for each identified site as part of the design phase for each project. Require projects to implement federal or State cleanup standards outlined in the studies during construction. S -P15 Regulate the production, use, storage, and transport of hazardous materials to protect the health of Lodi residents. Cooperate with the County and Lodi Fire Department in the identification of hazardous material users, development of an inspection process, and implementation of the City's Hazardous Waste Management and Hazardous Materials Area plans. Require, as appropriate, a hazardous materials inventory for project sites, including an assessment of materials and operations for any development applications, as a component of the development environmental review process or business license review/building permit review. S -P16 Work with waste disposal service provider(s)to educate the public as to the types of household hazardous wastes and the proper methods of disposal and shall continue to provide opportunities for residents to conveniently dispose of household hazardous waste. S -P17 Continue to follow the County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan for guidelines on land use compatibility near airports, land use restrictions, and to ensure public safety. S -P18 Support grade -separated railroad crossings, where feasible, and other appropriate measures adjacent to railroad tracks to ensure the safety of the community. S -P19 Continue to mark underground utilities and abide by federal safe -digging practices during construction. Seismic and Geologic Hazards S -P20 Ensure that all public facilities, such as buildings, water tanks, underground utilities, and berms, are structurally sound and able to withstand seismic activity. EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element S -P21 For buildings identified as seismically unsafe, prohibit a change in use to a higher occupancy or more intensive use until an engineering evaluation of the structure has been conducted and structural deficiencies corrected consistent with City building codes. S -P22 Require soils reports for new projects and use the information to determine appropriate permitting requirements, if deemed necessary. S -P23 Require that geotechnical investigations be prepared for all proposed critical structures(such as police stations, fire stations, emergency equipment, storage buildings, water towers, wastewater lift stations, electrical substations, fuel storage facilities, large public assembly buildings, designated emergency shelters, and buildings three or more stories high) before construction or approval of building permits, if deemed necessary. The investigation shall include estimation of the maximum credible earthquake, maximum ground acceleration, duration, and the potential for ground failure because of liquefaction or differential settling. S -P24 Require new development to include grading and erosion control plans prepared by a qualified engineer or land surveyor. Fire Hazards S -P25 Maintain a vegetation management program to ensure clearing of dry brush areas. Conduct management activities in a manner consistent with all applicable environmental regulations. Emergency Management Policies related to police and fire facilities are addressed in Chapter 3: Growth Management and Infrastructure. S -P26 Coordinate with local, State, and Federal agencies to establish, maintain, and test a coordinated emergency response system that addresses a variety of hazardous and threatening situations. Conduct periodic emergency response exercises to test the effectiveness of City emergency response procedures. Develop and implement public information programs concerning disaster response and emergency preparedness and develop mutual aid agreements and communication links with surrounding communities for assistance during times of emergency. S -P27 Maintain and periodically update the City's Emergency Preparedness Plan, including review of County and State emergency response procedures that must be coordinated with City procedures. S -P28 Ensure that major access and evacuation corridors are available and unobstructed in case of major emergency or disaster. Continue to identify appropriate road standards, including minimum road widths and turnouts to provide adequate emergency access and evacuation routes. S -P29 Continue to use the San Joaquin County Hazard Mitigation Plan to reduce hazard risk and coordinate with the County on its update and implementation, consistent with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Disaster Act of 2000. The following definitions should be added to the General Plan Glossary upon adoption of the General Plan Safety Element. "100 -year Floodplain" means areas that have a 1 -in -100 chance of flooding in any given year using criteria consistent with, or developed by, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). As used in this chapter, the term shall be ascribed to all areas labeled as such on Figure 8-1 of the EXHIBIT A Draft General Plan Safety Element General Plan Safety Element. "200 -year Floodplain" means areas that have a 1 -in -200 chance of flooding in any given year using criteria consistent with, or developed by, the Department of Water Resources. As used in this chapter, the term shall be ascribed to all areas labeled as such on Figure 8-2 of the General Plan Safety Element. "Ordinary High Water Mark" means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas. "Urban Level of Flood Protection" means the level of protection that is necessary to withstand flooding that has a 1 -in -200 chance of occurring in any given year using criteria consistent with, or developed by, the Department of Water Resources. "Urban level of flood protection" shall not mean shallow flooding (less than three feet in depth) or flooding from local drainage that meets the criteria of the national Federal Emergency Management Agency standard of flood protection. Public Hearing to Consider Adopting a Resolution Approving the Planning Commission's Recommendation to Amend the Safety Element of the City of Lodi General Plan to Implement the Provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -Year Flood Protection. CEQA Status: Exempt, Section 15162, Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations. Public Hearing to Consider Introducing an Ordinance Approving the Planning Commission's Recommendation to Amend Lodi Municipal Code Title 15 — Buildings and Construction by Repealing and Reenacting Chapter 15.60 — Flood Damage Prevention in its Entirety; Amending Lodi Municipal Code Title 17 — Development Code by Repealing and Reenacting Section 17.14.040 — General Performance Standards it its Entirety; and Amending Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.28 — Overlay Zoning Districts by Repealing and Reenacting Section 17.28.030 — Flood Hazard (-F) Overlay Zoning Districts in its entirety; and Amend the Lodi Zoning Map to Establish the Flood Hazard (-F) — 200 Overlay District to Implement the Provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 Related to 200 -Year Flood Protection. CEQA Status: Exempt, Section 15162, Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations. Senate Bill (SB) 5 / SB 1278 200 -Year Floodplain Regulation Senate Bill (SB) 5 • Applies to Urban Areas in the Sacramento -San Joaquin Valley • Requires affected cities and counties to update General Plans and Zoning Codes to address 200 -year flood hazards SB 1278 • Follow on legislation that clarified timing and content for general plan and zoning code amendments 100 -Year Floodplain versus 200 -Year Floodplain 100 -Year Floodplain • Areas subject to inundation in a storm that has a 1 -in -100 chance of occurring in any given year. • Flood insurance and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) are based on the 100 -year flood plain. • City regulations already address requirements for building in the 100 -year floodplain — no changes proposed. 200 -Year Floodplain • Areas subject to inundation in a storm that has a 1 -in - 200 chance of occurring in any given year. • Limits on entitlements established under SB 5. • State set minimum standards of protection required for development of land in the 200 -year floodplain. City Council Shirt Sleeve Session The City Council received a presentation on June 4, 2019 and provided the following direction: Definition of 200 -Year Floodplain. The City Council directed that areas inundated to a depth of three feet of more be designated as within the 200 -year floodplain (consistent with SB 5 requirements). Building Floor Elevation. The City Council directed that building floors for new construction in the 200 -year floodplain must be at or higher than the anticipated water level of the 200 -year flood (consistent with SB 5 requirements). Consider Planned Improvements. The City Council directed the 200 -year floodplain be modeled as currently exists and without the benefit of future improvements. Defining the 200 -Year Floodplain • The extent of the 200 -year floodplain was determined by the firm Kjeldsen Sinnock Neudeck (KSN) • Analysis determined that the 200 -year floodplain in Lodi is relatively limited • Primary source of flooding during a 200 -year storm would be overtopping of the Mokelumne River Regulations for the 200 -Year Floodplain City must make a finding that an Urban Level of Flood Protection will be achieved before taking any of the following actions for projects in the 200 -year floodplain: • Entering into a development agreement • Approving an entitlement or permit for construction of a new residence • Approving a tentative map or parcel map for a subdivision of land The following projects are exempt from 200 -year floodplain regulations: • Remodel or construct an addition to an existing home • Reconstruct an existing home following a catastrophic event General Plan Safety Element • The General Plan Safety Element addresses a range threats to people and property in the City • SB 5 requires the General Plan to be updated to address 200 -year flood hazards • State of California General Plan Guidelines require the Safety Element to address specific topics — amended since the Lodi General Plan was last updated GP Safety Element Updates • Discussion of 100 -year and 200 -year floodplains • Addition of 200 -year floodplain map • Summary of KSN study that defined the 200 -year floodplain • Discussion of Agencies Responsible for Flood Protection • Statement on Slope Instability/Liquefaction potential • Discussion of hazards related to Climate Change • Updated summary of Emergency Management Lodi Municipal Code Amendments • Chapter 15.60 —Flood Damage Prevention - Establishes review requirements for projects in the 200 -year floodplain • Section 17.14.040 — General Performance Standards - References that all development shall comply with Chapter 15.60 • Chapter 17.28 -Established the -F-200 Overlay District (200 -year floodplain) • Zoning Map -Add the -F-200 Overlay District to the Zoning Map Required Consultations - General Plan Amendments SB 18 requires the City consult with Native American tribes prior to amending the General Plan. • On January 10, 2020, six tribes were notified of the proposed General Plan amendment and no requests for consultation were received. Having received no requests, the SB 18 consultation was concluded. Government Code 65302.5 requires the City provide a draft General Plan Safety Element to the California Geologic Survey (CGS) for review prior to adoption of the Safety Element. • During July 2020, the City consulted with CGS, provided the draft Safety Element for review, and incorporated revisions as requested by CGS. This concluded the CGS review of the Safety Element. CEQA Analysis • The proposed amendments to the General Plan and the Lodi Municipal Code constitute a project under CEQA • An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified in conjunction with the 2010 Lodi General Plan • Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations) when additional analysis is required after an EIR has been certified. • No circumstances requiring additional environmental analysis have been identified related to the proposed SB 5 amendments. • Based on the provisions of Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, no additional environmental review is required. ENEMA REVIEV Two Actions by the City Council: Approve an Amendment of the General Plan Safety Element Approve Amendments to the Lodi Municipal Code Amendments While closely related, these are separate actions and each requires a public hearing and decision by the City Council I move that the City Council determine the proposed General Plan amendment is not subject to CEQA. I further move that the City Council adopt a resolution to implement the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -Year Flood Protection by amending the General Plan Safety Element." I move that the City Council determine the proposed zoning code amendments are not subject to CEQA. I further move that the City Council introduce an ordinance to amend Title 17 — Development Code, of the Lodi Municipal Code, by repealing and reenacting the following Lodi Municipal Code Sections: 17.18.020 - Purposes of Residential Zoning Districts; 17.20.030 - Commercial Zoning District Land Uses and Permit Requirements; 17.20.040 — Commercial District General Development Standards; and, 17.22.030 - Mixed Use Zoning Districts Land Uses and Permit Requirements." DECLARATION OF POSTING NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF SENTATE BILL (SB) 5 AND SB 1278 RELATED TO 200 -YEAR FLOOD PROTECTION On Thursday, September 17, 2020, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a Notice of Public Hearing to consider adopting resolution approving Planning Commission's recommendation to amend General Plan Safety Element to implement provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -year flood protection (attached and marked as Exhibit A) was posted at the following locations: Lodi City Clerk's Office Lodi City Hall Lobby Lodi Carnegie Forum WorkNet Office I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on September 17, 2020, at Lodi, California. PAMELA M. FARRIS ASSISTANT CITY CLERK ORDERED BY: JENNIFER CUSMIR CITY CLERK KAYLEE CLAYTON ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK \\cvcfilv0l\administration$\Administration\CLERK\Public Hearings\AFFADAVITS\DECPOSTCDDI.doc CITY OF LODI "r Carnegie Forum 305 West Pine Street, Lodi NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Date: October 7, 2020 Time: 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Jennifer Cusmir City Clerk Telephone: (209) 333-6702 NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, October 7, 2020, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following item: a) Adopting a resolution approving the Planning Commission's recommendation to amend the General Plan Safety Element to implement the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -year flood protection. While social distancing measures are imposed due to COVID-19, Council chambers are closed to the public during meetings of the City Council. Members of the public may view and listen to the open session of the meeting at www.facebook.coi,ri/GityofLodi/ or httPs://zoom.usli/978546877097pwd=bEE3cy90KO9VVSzNMQW]sZFFNSIN6Zzo9. Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Community Development Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6711. All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk by emailing councilcomments lodii goy. All comments received prior to the close of the public hearing will be read into the record. Oral comments may be made at: htt s://zoom.us1/97854E877097 Mrd=bEE3c 9UKO9WSzNMQWIsZFFNSIN6ZzO9. If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the close of the public hearing. By Order of the Lodi City Council: f7 e r smi ity Clerk Dated: September 16, 2020 Approved as to form: Janice D. Magdich Janice D. Magdich City Attorney AVISO: Para obtener ayuda interpretative con esta noticia, por favor (lame a la oficina de la Secretaria Municipal, a las (209) 333-6702. CLERMPUBHEAR\NOTICES\NOTCDD teleconf FloodPlaln GP 8/10/20 Please immediately confirm receipt af'this fkx by calling 333-6702 CITY OF LODI P. 0. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS SUBJECT: 4 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING NOTICES PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 2020 =0 WIT TEAR SHEETS WANTED: Onelil please SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: JENNIFER CUSMIR, CITY CLERK LNS ACCT. #0510052 City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 DATED: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2020 ORDERED BY: JENNIFER CUSMIR CITY CLERK PAMELA M. FARRIS DEPUTY CITY CLERK KA L CLAYTON ADMINISTRATIVE CLER Verify Appearance of this Legal in the Newspaper — Copy to File Emalled to the Sentinel at dlaner@lodinews.com at (time) on (date)(pales) LNS — Phoned to confirm receipt of all pages at (time) _KC _PMF (ini(lals) formAndvins,doc DECLARATION OF POSTING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT TO IMPLEMENT PROVISIONS OF SENATE BILL (SB) 5 AND SB 1278 RELATED TO 200 -YEAR FLOOD PROTECTION On Thursday, September 3, 2020, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a Notice of Public Hearing to consider adopting resolution approving Planning Commission's recommendation to amend General Plan Safety Element to implement provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -year flood protection (attached and marked as Exhibit A) was posted at the following locations: Lodi City Clerk's Office Lodi City Hall Lobby Lodi Carnegie Forum WorkNet Office I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on September 3, 2020, at Lodi, California. PAMELA M. FARRIS ASSISTANT CITY CLERK ORDERED BY: JENNIFER CUSMIR CITY CLERK 1 KAYlLffE CLAYTON ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK \\cvcfilv0l\administration$\Administration\CLERK\Public Hearings\AFFADAVITS\DECPOSTCDD2.doc CITY OF LODI '6r0� Carnegie Forum • 305 West Pine Street, Lodi NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Date: September 16, 2020 Time: 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Jennifer Cusmir IBIT r City Clerk -� Telephone: (209) 333-6702 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, September 16, 2020, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following item: a) Adopting a resolution approving the Planning Commission's recommendation to amend the General Plan Safety Element to implement the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 5 and SB 1278 related to 200 -year flood protection. While social distancing measures are imposed due to COVID-19, Council chambers are closed to the public during meetings of the City Council. Members of the public may view and listen to the open session of the meeting at www.facebook,com Cit ofLodil or tt s;l/zoom.us/i/97854687709? wd=bLE3c 90 09WSzNM W1sZFFNSIN6Zz09. Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Community Development Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6711. All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk by emailing councilcomments lodi. ov. All comments received prior to the close of the public hearing will be read into the record. Oral comments may be made at: htt s:IJzoom.usli978646877097 wd=bEE3c 9D}t09V1lSzNM W1sZFFNSIN6Zz09, If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the close of the public hearing. By Order of the Lodi City Council: 6:4niferC mir �44--J City Clerk Dated: September 2, 2020 Appr vett as to form: Janice- . agdich City Attorney AVISO: Para obtener ayuda interpretativa con esta noticia, por favor (lame a la oficina de la Secretaria Municipal, a las (209) 333-6702. CLERnPUBNEARINOTICESINOTCOO leleconr_FloodPlaln GP 8127/20