Atwater City Council
May 13, 2024

In-person participation by the public will be permitted. In addition, remote public participation is available in the following ways:

1. Livestream online at www.atwater.org (Please be advised that there is a broadcasting delay. If you would like to participate in public comment, please use the option below).

2. Submit a written public comment prior to the meeting: Public comments submitted to [email protected] by 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official minutes but will not be read out loud during the meeting.

3. Pursuant to Government Code Section § 54953, Councilmember Cale will be participating via teleconference at the following location: 550 Washington Blvd.

Baltimore, MD 21230. This location is open to the public with the same opportunity to address the Council, and this agenda is duly posted at the teleconference location in advance of the Council meeting. Public comment from this address shall be allowed.

Assistance will be provided to those requiring accommodations for disabilities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Persons requesting accommodation should contact the City in advance of the meeting, and as soon as possible, at (209) 357-6241.

CITY OF ATWATER
City Council
AGENDA
Council Chambers
750 Bellevue Road
Atwater, California
May 13, 2024
CALL TO ORDER: 5:00 PM
ROLL CALL: (City Council)
Ambriz ____, Button ____, Cale ____, Raymond ____, Nelson _____

CLOSED SESSION
Adjourn to Conference Room A

City Council Agenda for Meeting of May 13, 2024 Page 2
• Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, Public Employment Appointment; Title: City Manager
• Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, Public Employment Appointment; Title: Police Chief
REGULAR SESSION: (Council Chambers)
CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM
INVOCATION:

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL: (City Council)
Ambriz ____, Button ____, Cale ____, Raymond ____, Nelson _____

MAYOR OR CITY ATTORNEY REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
SUBSEQUENT NEED ITEMS: (The City Clerk shall announce any requests for items requiring immediate action subsequent to the posting of the agenda. Subsequent need items require a two-thirds vote of the members of the City Council present at the meeting.)
APPROVAL OF AGENDA AS POSTED OR AS AMENDED: (This is the time for the City Council to remove items from the agenda or to change the order of the agenda.) Staff's Recommendation: Motion to approve agenda as posted or as amended.

CEREMONIAL MATTERS:
• Certificate of Recognition - 2023 Dispatcher of the Year • Certificate of Recognition - 2023 Police Officer of the Year • National Peace Officers Memorial Day, May 15, 2024 and National Police Week, May 13 - May 17, 2024
Staff's Recommendation: That Mayor Nelson present the proclamation to Police Chief Salvador, on behalf of the Police Department, recognizing the day of May 15, 2024 as National Peace Officers Memorial Day and the week of May 12 - May 18, 2024 as National Police Week. • National Public Works Week, May 19 - May 25, 2024
Staff's Recommendation: That Mayor Nelson present the proclamation to Public Works Director Vinson on behalf of the Public Works

City Council Agenda for Meeting of May 13, 2024 Page 3
Department, recognizing the week of May 19 - May 25, 2024 as National Public Works Week.

CONSENT CALENDAR

NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
Background information has been provided on all matters listed under the Consent Calendar, and these items are considered to be routine. All items under the Consent Calendar are normally approved by one motion. If a Councilmember requests separate discussion on any item, that item will be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.

WARRANTS

1. May 13, 2024
Staff's Recommendation: Approval of report as listed.

MINUTES: (City Council)

2. April 22, 2024 - Regular meeting
Staff's Recommendation: Approval of minutes as listed.

RESOLUTIONS:

3. Authorizing Grant Application Bureau of Justice Assistance 2024 Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program (Police Chief Salvador)
Staff's Recommendation: Adoption of Resolution No. 3459-24, authorizing the grant application to the United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance’s 2024 Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership (BVP) Program; and authorizing the Mayor and/or Interim City Manager or designee to execute Grant Application, amendments, and all documents related to the grant, on behalf of the City, including administration, if awarded.

4. Accepting and Adopting the prepared City of Atwater Existing Conditions Report and City of Atwater Existing Conditions Market Study Report prepared for the 2040 General Plan Update (Interim City Manager Thompson)
Staff's Recommendation: Adoption of Resolution No. 3458-24 Accepting and Adopting the City of Atwater Existing Conditions Report and the City of Atwater Existing Conditions Market Study Report for the 2040 General Plan Update.

5. Approving and Adopting a List of Projects for Fiscal Year 2024-25 Funded by SB 1: The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Public Works Director Vinson)

City Council Agenda for Meeting of May 13, 2024 Page 4
Staff's Recommendation: Adoption of Resolution No. 3457-24 approving and adopting the Fiscal Year 2024-25 annual list of projects funded by SB 1, The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017; and authorizes and directs the Interim City Manager to transmit a certified copy of the resolution to the California Transportation Commission.

AGREEMENTS:

6. Authorizing and Approving a Cooperative Purchase, Purchase Agreement (Purchase Order) to Montrose Ford for the purchase of one (1) new 2023 Dodge Charger Police Vehicle and Equipment (Police Chief Michael Salvador)
Staff's Recommendation: Authorizes and approves a Cooperative Purchase, Purchase Agreement (Purchase Order), in a form approved by the City Attorney, to Montrose Ford, Akron, Ohio, for the purchase of one (1) new 2023 Dodge Charger Pursuit with Police Equipment, in the combined amount not to exceed $56,100; and authorizes and directs the Interim City Manager or designee to execute the Agreement (Purchase Order) on behalf of the City.

7. Approving Memorandum of Understanding with the County of Merced Office of Emergency Services for the State Homeland Security Grant Programs Funding for Equipment, Planning, Administration, Training and Exercises (CAL FIRE Battalion Chief Ayuso)
Staff's Recommendation: Approval of the Memorandum of
Understanding, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with the County of Merced Office of Emergency Services for the State Homeland Security Grant Programs Funding for Equipment, Planning, Administration, Training and Exercises; and authorizes and directs the City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents related to the Memorandum of Understanding on behalf of the City.

8. Awarding Purchase to Tesco Controls, Inc of Sacramento, California for a Control Panel for the Future Storm Pond/Basin for Lower Shaffer Drainage Project(Public Works Director Vinson)
Staff's Recommendation: Award a purchase to Tesco Controls, Inc of Sacramento, California for a control panel for the future storm pond/basin for the future Lower Shaffer Drainage Project, in an amount not to exceed $215,000.00; and authorize and direct the Interim City Manager, or designee, to execute the Purchase Order on behalf of the City.
***END OF CONSENT CALENDAR***

City Council Agenda for Meeting of May 13, 2024 Page 5
REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS FROM STAFF:

9. Accepting the Qualified Bid, Authorizing and Approving a Purchase Agreement (Purchase Order) with Cooks Communications of Fresno for the lease purchase of Fifty (50) New Kenwood Portable Radios (Police Chief Salvador)
Staff's Recommendation: Accepts qualified bid, authorizes and approves a Purchase Agreement (Purchase Order) with Cooks Communications of Fresno, California, for the lease purchase of Fifty (50) new portable radios in an amount not to exceed $176,009.17; and authorizes and directs the Interim City Manager, or designee, to execute the purchase on behalf of the City.

10. Approving Equipment/Software Lease-Purchase Agreement with Axon Taser for the Lease-Purchase of a Body Camera, In-Car Video, Conductive Energy Weapon, and Video Evidence Management System (Police Chief Salvador)
Staff's Recommendation: Approval of retiring the current Five-Year Lease-Purchase Agreement and execution of a New 10-year agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Axon Taser of Arizona, in the amount not to exceed $122,000 per year, over a 10- year period, for the Police Department's Current Body Camera System, Video evidence management system, In-car Video System, conductive energy weapons system; and authorizes and directs the Interim City Manager or designee to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS/UPDATES:

11. Update from the Office of the Interim City Manager
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC:

NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
At this time any person may comment on any item which is not on the agenda. You may state your name and address for the record; however, it is not required. Action will not be taken on an item that is not on the agenda. If it requires action, it will be referred to staff and/or placed on a future agenda. Please limit comments to a maximum of three (3) minutes.

CITY COUNCIL REPORTS/UPDATES:
• City Council Member Cale, District 1
• City Council Member Button, District 2
• City Council Member Ambriz, District 3
• Mayor Pro Tem Raymond, District 4
• Mayor Nelson

City Council Agenda for Meeting of May 13, 2024 Page 6
CLOSED SESSION:

Continuation of Closed Session if necessary
ADJOURNMENT:

CERTIFICATION:

I, Kory J. Billings, City Clerk of the City of Atwater, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing agenda was posted at City Hall a minimum of 72 hours prior to the meeting. _______________________________
KORY J. BILLINGS

CITY CLERK
SB 343 NOTICE
In accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.5, any writing or document that is a public record, relates to an open session agenda item and is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a regular meeting will be made available for public inspection in the office of the City Clerk during normal business hours at 1160 Fifth Street, Atwater, California.

If, however, the document or writing is not distributed until the regular meeting to which it relates, then the document or writing will be made available to the public at the location of the meeting, as listed on this agenda at 750 Bellevue Road, Atwater, California.

In compliance with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, upon request, the agenda can be provided in an alternative format to accommodate special needs. If you require special accommodations to participate in a City Council, Commission or Committee meeting due to a disability, please contact the City Clerk’s Office a minimum of three (3) business days in advance of the meeting at (209) 357-6241. You may also send the request by email to [email protected] .

Unless otherwise noted, City Council actions include a determination that they are not a “Project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and therefore, that CEQA does not apply to such actions.

MAY 2024

S U N M O N T U E W E D T H U F R I S A T
6 20
13 27
12 26
19 5 7
21 28
14 29
8 22
15 10
24 17
11 25
18 9
23 16
30 31
1 2 3 4
Merced County
District 3 Supervisor
McDaniel Office
Hours - 1:30 PM -
3:30 PM
Trash pick up
delayed - 1 day
City Holiday
City Council
Meeting - 6:00 PM
Audit & Finance
Meeting - 4:30 PM
City Council
Meeting - 6:00 PM
Planning
Commission
Meeting - 6:00
PM
Application
Deadline - Citizens’
Oversight
Committee
Unscheduled
Vacancy - 5:00 PM
Community
Services Event
4 PM - 6 PM
Community Open House
(Prop 218)
6 PM Council Chambers

JUNE 2024

S U N M O N T U E W E D T H U F R I S A T
4 18
25 11
26 5
19 12
7 21
14 8
22 15
6 20
13 27 28
1 29
3 17
10 24
9 23
16 2
30 City Holiday
Planning
Commission
Meeting - 6:00
PM
Merced County
District 3 Supervisor
McDaniel Office
Hours - 1:30 PM -
3:30 PM
City Council
Meeting - 6:00 PM
Audit & Finance
Meeting - 4:30 PM
City Council
Meeting - 6:00 PM
Community Open House
(Prop 218)
10 AM Community
Center

CITY OF ATWATER
Minutes

CITY COUNCIL

ACTION MINUTES
April 22, 2024
OPEN SESSION: (Council Chambers)
The City Council of the City of Atwater met in Open Session this date at 5:01 PM in the City Council Chambers located at the Atwater Civic Center, 750 Bellevue Road, Atwater, California; Mayor Nelson presiding.

ROLL CALL:

Present: City Council Members Cale, Mayor Pro Tem Raymond, Mayor Nelson

Absent: City Council Member Ambriz, Button
Staff Present: Interim City Manager Thompson, City Attorney Splendorio, Assistant City Clerk Martin
CLOSED SESSION: (Conference Room A)
Conference with Labor Negotiators - Government Code Section 54957.6, Agency Negotiators: Interim City Manager Thompson and Human Resources Director Sousa Bargaining Units: AFSCME Local 2703 - Clerical Employees Unit, Miscellaneous Employees Unit and Mid-Managers Group
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8, Conference with Real Property Negotiations regarding property price and terms of payment. Agency Negotiators:

Interim City Manager Thompson. Negotiating Parties: Mister Car Wash Property Location: APN 156-060-011
Public Employee (Gov Code Section 54957); Title: City Manager

City Council Meeting Action Minutes for April 22, 2024 Page 2 Mayor Nelson invited public comment on Closed Session items.

No one came forward to speak.

Mayor Nelson adjourned the meeting to Conference Room A for Closed Session at 5:02 PM. Closed Session was called to order at 5:05 PM.

Closed Session adjourned at 5:55 PM.

REGULAR SESSION: (Council Chambers)
The City Council of the City of Atwater met in Regular Session this date at 6:00 PM in the City Council Chambers located at the Atwater Civic Center, 750 Bellevue Road, Atwater, California; Mayor Nelson presiding.

INVOCATION:

The Invocation was led by Police Chaplain Miller.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG:

The Pledge of Allegiance was led by City Council Member Cale.

ROLL CALL: (City Council)

Present: City Council Members Cale, Mayor Pro Tem Raymond, Mayor Nelson

Absent: City Council Member Ambriz, Button
Staff Present: Interim City Manager Thompson, City Attorney Splendorio, Police Chief Salvador, Finance Director Nicholas, Public Works Director Vinson, City Clerk Billings, Assistant City Clerk Martin MAYOR OR CITY ATTORNEY REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION:

City Attorney Splendorio reported that the City Council received information, provided direction, and there was no reportable action.

SUBSEQUENT NEED ITEMS: None
APPROVAL OF AGENDA AS POSTED OR AS AMENDED:

MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem moved to approve the agenda as posted. The motion was seconded by City Council Member Cale and the vote was: Ayes: Cale, Raymond, Nelson; Noes: None; Absent: Ambriz, Button The motion passed.

City Council Meeting Action Minutes for April 22, 2024 Page 3 CEREMONIAL MATTERS:

Oath of Office - Police Officer
City Clerk Billings administer the oath of office to the newly appointed Police Officers: Jaeda Ables, Edgar Maldonado, David Rivera and Tou Vang.

PRESENTATIONS:

Monthly report by Merced County District 3 Supervisor McDaniel Merced County District 3 Supervisor McDaniel reported the following:
• Labor Negotiations – Merced County Sheriff’s Department • Fire Stations closing doesn’t affect District 3 operations • Merced County and State Budget discussions
CONSENT CALENDAR:

Mayor Nelson opened public comment regarding items on the Consent Calendar.

Interim City Manager Thompson spoke regarding item #8 on the Consent Calendar.

This item was removed for further discussion.

Mayor Nelson closed the public comment.

MOTION: City Council Member Cale moved to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Raymond and the vote was: Ayes: Cale, Raymond, Nelson; Noes: None; Absent: Ambriz, Button. The motion passed.

TREASURER’S REPORT:

1. March 31, 2024
ACTION: Acceptance of report as listed.

WARRANTS:

2. a.) April 8, 2024
b.) April 22, 2024
ACTION: Approval of warrants as listed.

City Council Meeting Action Minutes for April 22, 2024 Page 4 MINUTES: (Audit and Finance Committee)

3. February 26, 2024 – Regular meeting
MINUTES: (Planning Commission)

4. a.) February 21, 2024 – Regular meeting
b.) March 20, 2024 – Regular meeting
ACTION: Acceptance of minutes as listed.

MINUTES: (City Council)

5. a.) March 25, 2024 – Regular meeting
b.) April 3, 2024 – Special meeting
ACTION: Approval of minutes as listed.

RESOLUTIONS:

6. Amending City of Atwater Classification Plan and Adopting City of Atwater Salary Schedule D-24, Effective March 28, 2024 (Interim City Manager Thompson and Human Resources Director Sousa)
ACTION: Adoption of Resolution No. 3452-24 Amending City of Atwater Classification Plan and Adopting Salary Schedule D-24, Effective March 28, 2024.

AGREEMENTS:

7. Approving On-Call Professional Services Agreements with Various Consultants for Right-of-Way Acquisition Services (Interim City Manager Thompson) ACTION: Approval of Professional Services On-Call Master Agreements, in a form approved by the City Attorney with Associated Right of Way Services, Inc. of Walnut Creek, California, Hamner, Jewell & Associates of Arroyo Grande, California, and Paragon Partners Consultants, Inc. of Cypress, California for Rightof- Way Acquisition Services, in an amount not to exceed $200,000 per Task Order; and authorizes and directs the Interim City Manager or designee to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City.

8. Approving Subdivision Improvement Agreement Tentative Map No. 23- 22-0100 (Interim City Manager Thompson)
This item was removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and possible action.

Interim City Manager Thompson provided background information on this item.

City Council Meeting Action Minutes for April 22, 2024 Page 5

9. Approving the Funding Agreement between MCAG and the City of Atwater for the Buhach Widening at Livingston Canal Project and Authorizing and Directing the Interim City Manager to Execute all Documents Related to the Buhach Road Widening at Livingston Canal Project (Interim City Manager Thompson) ACTION: Approval of Funding agreement with Merced County Association of Governments for the Buhach Widening at Livingston Canal Project for the Project Study Report Equivalent (PSR-E); and Adoption of Resolution No. 3453-24 approving budget amendment No. 12 amending fiscal year 2023-24 budget to establish a budget within the Measure V Regional Fund for the Preparation of the PSR-E for the Buhach Road Widening at Livingston Canal Project; and Adoption of Resolution No. 3454-23 Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to execute all documents related to the Buhach Road Widening at Livingston Canal Project.

10. Approving Funding Agreement between the MCAG and the City of Atwater for the Bellevue Road Realignment Project and Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to Execute all Documents Related to the Bellevue Road Rehabilitation/Realignment Project (Interim City Manager Thompson) ACTION: Approval of Funding Agreement with Merced County Association of Governments for the Bellevue Road Rehabilitation/Realignment project Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) Phase; and Adoption of Resolution No. 3455- 24 approving Budget Amendment No. 13 Amending Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget to include the preparation of Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) for the Bellevue Road Rehabilitation/Realignment Project; and Adoption of Resolution No. 3456-24 authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute all documents related to the Bellevue Road Rehabilitation/Realignment Project.

AGREEMENTS:

Approving Subdivision Improvement Agreement Tentative Map No. 23- 22-0100 (Interim City Manager Thompson)
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Raymond moved to approve a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map No. 23-22-0100, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Michael Fillebrown for public improvements related to the construction of a coffee shop with a drive-thru; and authorizes and directs the Interim City Manager, or designee, to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City. The motion was seconded by City Council Member Cale and the vote was: Ayes: Cale, Raymond, Nelson; Noes: None; Absent: Ambriz, Button. The motion passed.

REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS FROM STAFF:

Awarding Construction Services Agreement and Approving Budget Amendment Regarding the Suncrest Street and Fortuna Avenue Overlay Project (Public Works Director Vinson)

City Council Meeting Action Minutes for April 22, 2024 Page 6 Public Works Director Vinson provided background information on this item.

Mayor Nelson opened public comment regarding this item.

Maria Delgado spoke regarding the scope of the project.

Margie Matus spoke regarding the scope of the project.

No one else came forward to speak.

Mayor Nelson closed public comment.

MOTION: City Council Member Cale moved to adopt Resolution No 3451-24 approving Budget Amendment No. 11 Amending Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget regarding Suncrest Street and Fortuna Avenue Overlay Project; and to award a General Construction Agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, to Consolidated Engineering Inc. of Valley Springs, CA, for the Suncrest Street and Fortuna Avenue Overlay Project, City Project 24-09, in an amount not to exceed $201,246 and authorize construction contract change orders up to an aggregate amount of $20,124.60 (10%); and authorizes and directs the Interim City Manager or designee to execute all contract documents on behalf of the City. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Raymond and the vote was: Ayes: Cale, Raymond, Nelson; Noes: None; Absent: Ambriz, Button. The motion passed.

Set Public Hearing Date for New Water and Sewer Rates and Rate Adjustments (Public Works Director Vinson)
Public Works Director Vinson provided background information on this item.

Theresa Jurotich, P.E., P.M.P. Manager with Raftelis presented a PowerPoint presentation regarding the New Water and Sewer Rates and Rate Adjustments Mayor Nelson opened public comment regarding this item.

Pastor Rich Miller spoke regarding the rates.

No one else came forward to speak.

Mayor Nelson closed public comment.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS/UPDATES:

Interim City Manager Update
Interim City Manager Thompson reported the following:

City Council Meeting Action Minutes for April 22, 2024 Page 7 • Provided information regarding the Unscheduled Vacancy on the Citizens’ Oversight Committee for Public Safety Transaction and Use Tax • Provided information regarding the Community Services Event • Provided information regarding the Economic Development Expo in October 2024
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC:

Notice to the public was read.

Mayor Nelson clarified that under the Brown Act, members of the public are entitled to directly address the City Council and are not entitled to address their comments to other members of the public or to staff.

Mayor Nelson opened public comment.

Christan Santos, Field Representative for Congressman John Duarte, provided an update regarding Congressman Duarte’s office.

Pastor Rich Miller spoke regarding his appreciation and the upcoming Law Enforcement event at his church.

Michelle Alison spoke regarding her appreciation for Police Chief Salvador attending an event and the City Council.

Mayor Nelson closed the public comment.

CITY COUNCIL REPORTS/UPDATES:

City Council comments
City Council Member Cale stated he was proud of the new officers and wanted to congratulate them.

Mayor Pro Tem Raymond thanked those for their positivity.

Mayor Nelson spoke regarding the Fire Department Pancake Breakfast and how all proceeds go towards the Annual Toy Drive.

ADJOURNMENT:

Mayor Nelson adjourned the meeting at 6:52 PM.

City Council Meeting Action Minutes for April 22, 2024 Page 8 APPROVED:
________________________________

MIKE NELSON
MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________

JANELL MARTIN

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT

MEETING
DATE:

May 13, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Michael Salvador, Police Chief

PREPARED
BY:

Michael Salvador, Police Chief
SUBJECT: Authorizing Grant Application Bureau of Justice Assistance 2024 Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program (Police Chief Salvador)

RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Adoption of Resolution No. 3459-24, authorizing the grant application to the United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance’s 2024 Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership (BVP) Program; and authorizing the Mayor and/or Interim City Manager or designee to execute Grant Application, amendments, and all documents related to the grant, on behalf of the City, including administration, if awarded.

I. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) administers a federal funding program known as the 2024 Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program to further the mission of preventing or reducing injuries to police officers.

The purpose of the BVP Program is to reimburse states, units of local government, and federally recognized Indian tribes, i.e., jurisdictions, for up to 50 percent of the cost of body armor vests purchased for law enforcement officers.

Eligibility: States, units of local government, and federally recognized Indian tribes, i.e., jurisdictions, that employ eligible law enforcement officers are eligible to apply for BVP funds. Multiple law enforcement agencies (LEAs) within the same jurisdiction must submit their own application information and vest needs to the jurisdiction. The jurisdiction will then submit the LEA applications in one submission to BJA. This includes colleges and universities. All public colleges and universities are considered LEAs under their respective jurisdiction.

Body Armor Vest Requirements: Body armor vests purchased with BVP funds must have been tested through the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Compliance Testing Program (CTP) and found to comply with the most current NIJ body armor standards, appear on the NIJ Compliant Products List as of the date the body armor was ordered,

CITY COUNCIL
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Danny Ambriz Tyler Button
John Cale Brian Raymond

Agenda Report - Authorizing Grant Application Bureau of Justice Assistance 2024 Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program (Police Chief Salvador) Page 2

be uniquely fitted, and be made in the United States. NIJ has started adding vests to the compliant products list for the new 0101.07 Standard. FY 2024 BVP funds may be used towards the purchase of eligible vests listed on the 101.06 Standard and the 0101.06 Standard. In addition, applicants must have a written mandatory wear policy for uniformed patrol officers in place at the time of application.

The Police Department has taken advantage of these funds in prior fiscal years to reduce the City's cost to provide body armor for its Police Officers. Body armor has a shelf life of approximately 5 years. The majority of the Department's body armor is approaching that time frame and is in need of replacement.

II. FISCAL IMPACTS:

This is a 50% reimbursable grant, with a 50% local match from the City. Once the grant is approved, staff will program the appropriation in the Fiscal Year 24-25 budget in the following accounts: Police Grant Fund Special Department expense 1005-XXXX-2021 along with increasing revenue in revenue account 1005-0000-3138. This item has been reviewed by the Finance Department.

III. LEGAL REVIEW:

This item has been reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office.

IV. EXISTING POLICY:

This item is consistent and assists in the execution of the Police Department Strategic Plan that was introduced on April 8, 2019.

V. ALTERNATIVES:

N/A
VI. INTERDEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

This item has been reviewed by all departments.

VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:

The public will have opportunity to speak prior to City Council action.

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

This item is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as this activity does not cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21065.

IX. STEPS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Upon City Council approval, the interim City Manager will execute the grant application paperwork and the Grant Coordinator will transmit the grant application paperwork to the DOJ.

Submitted by:

Agenda Report - Authorizing Grant Application Bureau of Justice Assistance 2024 Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program (Police Chief Salvador) Page 3

Michael Salvador, Police Chief
Approved by:

Greg Thompson, Interim City Manager
Attachments:

1. 3459-24 Grant Patrick Leahy Body Armor

CITY COUNCIL
OF THE

CITY OF ATWATER
RESOLUTION NO. 3459-24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ATWATER AUTHORIZING THE
APPLICATION FOR THE 2024 PATRICK LEAHY

BULLETPROOF VEST PARTNERSHIP GRANT
PROGRAM.

WHEREAS, The United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance has made funding available under the Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant program to provide federal funding to assist jurisdictions in the purchase of body armor for Law Enforcement Officers; and WHEREAS, the City of Atwater is eligible to apply for funds from the Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant program in Federal fiscal year 2024; and WHEREAS, Staff has determined a need to replace protective body armor issued to Atwater Police Officers
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Atwater does hereby authorize the grant application to the Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant program. The City of Atwater authorizes the City Manager, Mayor, and designee’s to execute the Grant Application, and all other documents required for participation in the Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant program, and any amendments there to on behalf of the City of Atwater.

Resolution No. 3459-24 Page 2
The foregoing resolution is hereby adopted this 13th day of May 2024.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

________________________________

MIKE NELSON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
KORY J. BILLINGS, CITY CLERK

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT

MEETING
DATE:

May 13, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Greg Thompson, Interim City Manager

PREPARED
BY:

Christina Thurman, Executive Assistant
SUBJECT: Accepting and Adopting the prepared City of Atwater Existing Conditions Report and City of Atwater Existing Conditions Market Study Report prepared for the 2040 General Plan Update (Interim City Manager Thompson)

RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Adoption of Resolution No. 3458-24 Accepting and Adopting the City of Atwater Existing Conditions Report and the City of Atwater Existing Conditions Market Study Report for the 2040 General Plan Update.

I. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:

The City of Atwater is actively working on updating its General Plan, a crucial document that guides the city's long-term growth and development. The existing General Plan for Atwater dates back to 2000, and since then, significant changes have occurred in the city. New housing developments, evolving business and industry, and overall growth necessitate an updated plan. The General Plan covers various essential community topics, including land use, housing, economic development, circulation, safety, open spaces, environmental justice, and noise. It serves as a roadmap for decision-making and reflects the community's values and priorities.

On May 8, 2023, the City Council awarded a Professional Services Agreement to De Novo Planning of El Dorado Hills, for the preparation of a Comprehensive General Plan Update and Master Environmental Impact Report. As the City of Atwater is embarking on an exciting journey, the City is taking bold steps to make the General Plan a true, long-range plan that will chart the City's future over the next 20 years. In these initial stages of the General Plan update, two critical reports have been prepared :
• Existing Conditions Report and Existing Conditions Market Study Report:

These reports provide high-level analysis for important topics such as land use, mobility, conservation, parks and recreation, infrastructure, community character, local and regional economy, the local real estate market for housing and other major land uses, the City's fiscal status as indicated by its General Fund, and

CITY COUNCIL
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Danny Ambriz Tyler Button
John Cale Brian Raymond

Agenda Report - Accepting and Adopting the prepared City of Atwater Existing Conditions Report and City of Atwater Existing Conditions Market Study Report prepared for the 2040 General Plan Update (Interim City Manager Thompson) Page 2

quality fo life in the City of Atwater.

As an initial step in the General Plan Update, these reports were prepared as an overview of the City's physical, environmental, economic, and demographic setting.

Both reports provide background information and documents significant conditions, trends, and key issues for the City in preparation of its Land Uses and Economic Development portions of the General Plan. The reports are intended to document the baseline conditions in the City, while also providing contextual comparisons with neighboring cities and the County of Merced, where applicable. Both reports are only to serve as a comprehensive guidance document intended to stimulate discussion and generate ideas to further the future steps of the planning process for the General plan among stakeholders, policymakers, city staff, the consultants, property-owners, and residents of the City of Atwater.

II. FISCAL IMPACTS:

There are no fiscal impacts associated with council action of adopting these informational reports.

Sufficient funding for this service is available in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget General Fund, General Plan Update, Professional Services expense, account number 1041- 4010-3030.

This item has been reviewed by the Finance Department.

III. LEGAL REVIEW:

This item has been reviewed by the City Attorney.

IV. EXISTING POLICY:

This item is consistent with goal numbers one (1) through six (6) of the City's Strategic Plan.

V. ALTERNATIVES:

N/A
VI. INTERDEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

This item has been reviewed by all departments.

VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:

The public will have an opportunity to provide comments on this item prior to City Council action.

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Agenda Report - Accepting and Adopting the prepared City of Atwater Existing Conditions Report and City of Atwater Existing Conditions Market Study Report prepared for the 2040 General Plan Update (Interim City Manager Thompson) Page 3

This item is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as this activity does not cause either direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065.

IX. STEPS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Following approval and option of the resolution, the City Clerk's office will upload the Existing Conditions Report and Existing Conditions Market Study Report to the City's website to promote transparency.

Submitted and Approved by:

Greg Thompson, Interim City Manager
Attachments:

1. 3458-24 Accepting and Adopting Existing Conditions Report and Market Study Report

2. Atwater ECR 4_25_24

3. Atwater Existing Conditions Market Report for Adoption

CITY COUNCIL
OF THE

CITY OF ATWATER
RESOLUTION NO. 3458-24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ATWATER ACCEPT AND ADOPT THE

EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT AND THE CITY

OF ATWATER EXISTING CONDITIONS MARKET
STUDY REPORT PREPARED FOR THE 2040

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
WHEREAS, the City is actively working on updating its General Plan, a crucial document that guides the city’s long-term growth and development. The existing General Plan for Atwater dates back to 2000; and
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2023, the City Council awarded a Professional Services Agreement to De Novo Planning of Eldorado for the preparation of a Comprehensive General Plan Update and Master Environmental Report; and WHEREAS, as an initial step in the General Plan update, these reports were prepared as an overview of the City’s physical, environmental, economic, and demographic setting; and both these reports provide background information and documents significant conditions, trends, and key issues for the City in preparation of its Land Uses and Economic Development portions of the General Plan update; and WHEREAS, these reports are intended to document the baseline conditions in the City, while also providing contextual comparisons with neighboring cities and the County of Merced, where applicable; and
WHEREAS, both reports are only to serve as a comprehensive guidance document intended to stimulate discussion and generate ideas to further the future steps of the planning process for the General Plan among stakeholders, policymakers, city staff, the consultants, property-owners, and residents of the City of Atwater.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Atwater that the Existing Conditions Report and City of Atwater Existing Conditions Market Study Report attached as Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “ B” collectively is hereby approved.

Resolution No. 3458-24 Page 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council does hereby accept and adopt the Existing Conditions Report and City of Atwater Existing Conditions Market Study Report as guidance documents for the 2040 General Plan Update, and direct the City Clerk to post these documents on the City’s website to promote transparency.

The foregoing resolution is hereby adopted this 13th day of May 2024.

Resolution No. 3458-24 Page 3
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

________________________________

MIKE NELSON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________
KORY J. BILLINGS, CITY CLERK

City of Atwater

EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT
APRIL 2024

PREPARED FOR THE

CITY OF ATWATER BY

DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOC-1 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

SECTIONS PAGE NUMBER
I: Introduction................................................................................................................................... i i. Background..................................................................................................................... i-2 ii. Existing Conditions Report Contents ............................................................................. i-3 iii. General Plan Overview ................................................................................................. i-6 iv. Using the General Plan ................................................................................................. i-8

1.0: Land Use Population and Housing......................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Land Use..................................................................................................................... 1-4

1.2 Housing .................................................................................................................... 1-18

1.3 Population and Demographics................................................................................. 1-26

2.0: Circulation ............................................................................................................................. 2-1

2.1 Pedestrian Facilities.................................................................................................... 2-4

2.2 Bicycle Facilities ......................................................................................................... 2-6

2.3 Transit Facilities.......................................................................................................... 2-9

2.4 Roadway System ...................................................................................................... 2-12

2.5 Freight Rail, Goods Movement and Aviation............................................................ 2-25

3.0: Economic Real Estate Market, and Fiscal Conditions............................................................ 3-1

3.1 Economic Conditions.................................................................................................. 3-5

3.2 Real Estate Conditions.............................................................................................. 3-17

3.3 Fiscal Conditions...................................................................................................... 3-22

4.0: Community Services Recreation and Facilities...................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Fire Protection............................................................................................................ 4-4

4.2 Law Enforcement ....................................................................................................... 4-6

4.3 Parks and Recreation................................................................................................ 4-11

4.4 Schools, Libraries, and Other Community Facilities.................................................. 4-14

5.0: Utilities .................................................................................................................................. 5-1

5.1 Water ......................................................................................................................... 5-4

5.2 Wastewater.............................................................................................................. 5-13

5.3 Stormwater and Drainage ........................................................................................ 5-19

5.4 Solid Waste...............................................................................................................5-21

5.5 Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications................................................... 5-23

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report TOC-2

6.0: Hazards and Safety ................................................................................................................ 6-1

6.1 Flooding Hazards........................................................................................................ 6-3

6.2 Wildfire Hazards......................................................................................................... 6-8

6.3 Hazardous Materials................................................................................................. 6-12

6.4 Air Traffic.................................................................................................................. 6-17

6.5 Emergency Preparedness......................................................................................... 6-23

7.0: Community Noise.................................................................................................................. 7-1

8.0: Conservation ......................................................................................................................... 8-1

8.1 Biological Resources................................................................................................... 8-3

8.2 Air Quality................................................................................................................. 8-19

8.3 Greenhouse Gases.................................................................................................... 8-29

8.4 Geology, Soils and Seismicity.................................................................................... 8-38

8.5 Mineral and Energy Resources................................................................................. 8-51

8.6 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................... 8-55

8.7 Scenic Resources...................................................................................................... 8-63

8.8 Agricultural Resources.............................................................................................. 8-66

8.9 Cultural and Historic Resources................................................................................ 8-74

9.0: Environmental Justice ........................................................................................................... 9-1

9.1 Background and Overview.......................................................................................... 9-3

9.2 Environmental Justice Determinants in Atwater........................................................ 9-5

TABLES PAGE NUMBER
Table 1.1-1: Assessed Land Uses................................................................................................... 1-8 Table 1.1-2: Existing General Plan Land Use Designations.......................................................... 1-10 Table 1.1-3: Surrounding Land Uses............................................................................................ 1-16 Table 1.2-1: Regional Housing Needs Allocation ......................................................................... 1-18 Table 1.2-2: Regional Housing Needs Allocation 2024-2032 Cycle RHNA ................................... 1-19 Table 1.2-3: Housing Units .......................................................................................................... 1-20 Table 1.2-4: Units In Structure (Unit Types), 2023 ...................................................................... 1-21 Table 1.2-5: Occupied Housing Units By Tenure, 2010 and 2020 ............................................... 1-21 Table 1.2-6: Housing Occupancy and Vacancy Status, 2010 And 2020 ....................................... 1-24 Table 1.2-7: Vacancy Rate By Tenure, 2010 and 2020 ................................................................ 1-25

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOC-3 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Table 1.3-1: Population and Household Trends, 2010, 2020, and 2023...................................... 1-26 Table 1.3-2: Age Distribution, 2010 and 2020............................................................................. 1-28 Table 1.3-3: Race and Ethnicity, 2010 and 2020 ......................................................................... 1-29 Table 1.3-4: Educational Attainment, 2021 Five-Year Sample Data .......................................... 1-30 Table 1.3-5: Household Type, 2010 and 2020 ............................................................................ 1-30 Table 1.3-6: Household And Per Capita Income, 2021................................................................ 1-31 Table 1.3-7: Household and Population and Household Growth ................................................ 1-32 Table 2.4-1: General Level of Service Thresholds Based on Daily Traffic Volumes...................... 2-18 Table 2.4-2: Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria ...................................................... 2-19 Table 2.4-3: Daily Traffic Volume Counts and LOS on Atwater area Streets ............................... 2-21 Table 2.4-4: Current Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service.................................................... 2-23 Table 3.1-1: Gross Domestic Product by Industry in 2021, Merced County & California .............. 3-6 Table 3.1-2: Jobs by Industry, Atwater, Merced California, And California, 2017-2022................ 3-9 Table 3.1-3: Average Annual Pay for Wage and Salary Workers, 2022 ....................................... 3-10 Table 3.1-4: Employed Residents by Industry.............................................................................. 3-11 Table 3.1-5: Employed Residents by Occupation, 2017-2021..................................................... 3-11 Table 3.1-6: Major Employers, Merced County, 2022................................................................. 3-12 Table 3.1-7: Commute Flows, 2017-2021 ................................................................................... 3-13 Table 3.1-8: Taxable Sales By Category, 2022 ............................................................................ 3.14 Table 3.1-9: Employment By Industry Projections....................................................................... 3-16 Table 3.2-1: Characteristics of Home Sales By Type, June 2022 Through April 2023.................. 3-17 Table 3.2-2: Costar Multifamily Residential Overview, 2q 2023.................................................. 3-18 Table 3.2-3: Costar Retail Market Overview, Q2 2023 ................................................................ 3-19 Table 3.2-4: Costar Office Market Overview, Q4 2022................................................................ 3-20 Table 3.2-5: Industrial Market Overview, Q3 2023 ..................................................................... 3-21 Table 3.3-1: General Fund Revenue – Taxes, Fy 2023-24............................................................ 3-24 Table 4.2-1: Calls For Service Statistics (2020 - 2022) .................................................................. 4-8 Table 4.2-2: Atwater Crime Statistics (2021 - 2022)..................................................................... 4-8 Table 4.2-3: SRO Statistics (2022-2023) ..................................................................................... 4-10 Table 4.3-1: Summary Of Parks................................................................................................... 4-12 Table 4.4-1: Public Schools Serving Atwater................................................................................ 4-14 Table 4.4-2: Enrollment By Grade, AESD (2022-2023) ................................................................ 4-15 Table 4.4-3: Enrollment By Grade, MUHSD (2022-2023) ............................................................ 4-15 Table 5.1-1: Normal Year Supply And Demand Comparison ....................................................... 5-11 Table 5.1-2: Groundwater Volume Pumped................................................................................ 5-12

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report TOC-4 Table 5.2-1: Historical Population and Wastewater Flow Rates.................................................. 5-17 Table 5.2-2: Predicted Wastewater Flow Rates From 2018 Sewer Master Plan......................... 5-18 Table 5.4-1: Landfills Existing Daily Capacity and Estimates Closure Date.................................. 5-21 Table 5.4-2: Solid Waste Generation Rates In Merced County................................................... 5-22 Table 5.5-1: Pacific Gas and Electric – 2021 Power Content Label.............................................. 5-24 Table 6.3-1: Atwater Site Cleanup and Hazardous Facilities List (Envirostor).............................. 6-12 Table 6.3-2: LUST Cleanup Sites .................................................................................................. 6-14 Table 6.3-3: Permitted UST Sites................................................................................................. 6-14 Table 6.3-4: CIWMB Facilities/Sites Merced County ................................................................... 6-15 Table 6.4-1: Aviation Accidents Within Merced County.............................................................. 6-23 Table 7.0-1: Typical Noise Levels................................................................................................... 7-4 Table 7.0-2: Predicted Existing Traffic Noise Levels..................................................................... 7-10 Table 7.0-3: Railroad Noise Measurement Results ..................................................................... 7-12 Table 7.0-4: Approximate Distances to the Railroad Noise Contours .......................................... 7-12 Table 7.0-5: Typical Stationary Source Noise Levels.................................................................... 7-15 Table 7.0-6: Existing Continuous 24-Hour Ambient Noise Monitoring Results ........................... 7-16 Table 7.0-7: Existing Short-Term Community Noise Monitoring Results..................................... 7-17 Table 8.1-1: Cover Types – California wildlife Habitat Relationship System.................................. 8-7 Table 8.1-2: Special-Status Plants Present or Potentially Present (One Mile) ............................. 8-11 Table 8.1-3: Special-Status Plants Present or Potentially Present (9 Quad) ................................ 8-12 Table 8.1-4: Special-Status Animals Present or Potentially Present (One Mile) .......................... 8-13 Table 8.1-5: Special-Status Animals Present or Potentially Present (9 Quad) ............................. 8-14 Table 8.1-6: Special-Status Invertebrate Animals Present or Potentially Present (9 Quad) ........ 8-15 Table 8.2-1: Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards................................................... 8-26 Table 8.2-2: Federal and State Attainment Status....................................................................... 8-27 Table 8.2-3: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data (Merced-2334 M Street) .............................. 8-28 Table 8.3-1: PG&E and the State of California Power Mix In 2021 .............................................. 8-36 Table 8.4-1: Planning Area Soils .................................................................................................. 8-39 Table 8.4-2: Fault Activity Rating................................................................................................. 8-41 Table 8.4-3: Richter Magnitudes and Effects............................................................................... 8-41 Table 8.4-4: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale for Earthquakes.................................................. 8-42 Table 8.4-5: Significant Earthquakes in the Region ..................................................................... 8-43 Table 8.5-1: Mineral Resource Classification System .................................................................. 8-52 Table 8.5-1: Mineral Resource Within The Planning Area........................................................... 8-53

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOC-5 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Table 8.6-1: State of California Watershed Hierarchy Naming Convention ................................ 8-59 Table 8.8-1: Summary Comparison of Crop Values..................................................................... 8-67 Table 8.8-2: Soil Capability Classification..................................................................................... 8-68 Table 8.8-3: Soil Classification ..................................................................................................... 8-68 Table 8.8-4: Farmland Classification............................................................................................ 8-69 Table 8.8-5: Merced County Farmlands Summary and Change by Land Use Category............... 8-71 Table 8.8-6: Summary Of Williamson Act Contracts.................................................................... 8-71 Table 8.9-1: Resources Listed with the Northwest Information Center...................................... 8-78 Table 9.2-1: Overall CalEnviroScreen Score By Census Tract (Atwater) ........................................ 9-5 Table 9.2-2: Population And Socioeconomic Factor Indicators..................................................... 9-8 Table 9.2-3: Environmental/ Pollution Burden By Pollution Indicators....................................... 9-10 Table 9.2-4: State and National Attainment Status..................................................................... 9-11 Table 9.2-5: Asthma Rates (2020) ............................................................................................... 9-12 Table 9.2-6: Obesity Trends – Adults (18+) ................................................................................. 9-22 Table 9.2-7: Obesity Trends – Children & Teens ......................................................................... 9-22 Table 9.2-8: Student Physical Fitness Testing (PFT) Results (2018-2019).................................... 9-23 Table 9.2-9: Health Indicators Merced County 2020.................................................................. 9-24

CHARTS PAGE NUMBER
Chart 2.2-1: Housing Units By Year Built, 2017-2021 Five-Year Sample Data............................. 1-22 Chart 3.1-1: Average Annual Unemployment Rate, 2010-2022 ................................................... 3-7 Chart 3.1-2: Monthly Unemployment Rates, 2015- July 2023 ...................................................... 3-8 Chart 3.3-1 General Fund Revenue & Expenditure Trends, Fy 2017-18 to Fy 2023-24............... 3-22 Chart 3.3-2 General Fund Revenue Sources, Fy 2023-24 ............................................................ 3-23 Chart 3.3-3 General Fund Expenditure Sources, FY 2023-24 ...................................................... 2-26

FIGURES PAGE NUMBER
Figure 1.1-1. Planning Areas.......................................................................................................... 1-5 Figure 1.1-2. Assessed Land Uses.................................................................................................. 1-9 Figure 1.1-3. Current General Plan Land Use Designations......................................................... 1-15 Figure 1.1-4. Merced County General Plan Land Use.................................................................. 1-17 Figure 1.2-1. Year Structures Built............................................................................................... 1-23 Figure 2.1–1. Critical Gaps in Sidewalk System.............................................................................. 2-5 Figure 2.2–1. Current and Proposed Bicycle Facilities................................................................... 2-8 Figure 2.3–1. Existing Public Bus Transit Services........................................................................ 2-11

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report TOC-6 Figure 2.4–1. 2020 General Plan Circulation Diagram................................................................. 2-16 Figure 2.4–2. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Volumes..................................................................... 2-20 Figure 2.4–3. Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Counts.............................................. 2-23 Figure 3.3-1 Property Tax Allocation ........................................................................................... 2-25 Figure 4.0-1: Community and Recreation Facilities....................................................................... 4-2 Figure 5.1-1. Existing Water Facilities............................................................................................ 5-8 Figure 5.1-2. Groundwater Basins................................................................................................. 5-9 Figure 5.1-3. Water Districts........................................................................................................ 5-10 Figure 5.2-1. Existing Sewer Facilities.......................................................................................... 5-16 Figure 6.1-1: FEMA Flood Zone Designations................................................................................ 6-5 Figure 6.1-2. Dam Inundation Areas.............................................................................................. 6-7 Figure 6.2-1. Fire Hazard Severity Map – County ........................................................................ 6-10 Figure 6.2-2. Fire Hazard Severity Map – City ............................................................................. 6-11 Figure 6.4-1. Castle Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones ......................................................... 6-21 Figure 7.0-1. Airport Noise Contours........................................................................................... 7-12 Figure 7.0-2. Noise Measurement Locations............................................................................... 7-18 Figure 8.1-1. Land Cover Map ..................................................................................................... 8-16 Figure 8.1-2. California Natural Diversity Database (One Mile Search)....................................... 8-17 Figure 8.1-3. California Natural Diversity Database (Nine Quad Search)..................................... 8-18 Figure 8.4-1: USGS Topographic Map.......................................................................................... 8-47 Figure 8.4-2. Soils Map................................................................................................................ 8-48 Figure 8.4-3. Earthquake Faults and Alquist Priolo Zones........................................................... 8-49 Figure 8.4-4. Shrink-Swell Potential Map .................................................................................... 8-50 Figure 8.5-1. Mineral Resource Zones......................................................................................... 8-54 Figure 8.6-1. Watershed Map ..................................................................................................... 8-62 Figure 8.8-1: Important Farmlands.............................................................................................. 8-71 Figure 8.8-2. Williamson Act Lands ............................................................................................. 8-72 Figure 9.2-1. CalEnviroScreen Disadvantaged Communities......................................................... 9-6 Figure 9.2-2. Park Buffer Map ..................................................................................................... 9-16 Figure 9.2-3. Food Access............................................................................................................ 9-19

APPENDICES
Appendix A – Regulatory Setting
Appendix B – References
Appendix C – Airport Land Use Compatibility Table

INTRODUCTION
This Chapter includes the following topics:
i. Background
ii. Existing Conditions Report Contents
iii. General Plan Overview
iv. Using the General Plan
This Existing Conditions Report prepared for the General Plan Update provides an overview of the City of Atwater’s physical, environmental, economic, and demographic setting. This
document is intended to serve as a comprehensive reference document for community members, policymakers, staff, and the consultant team throughout the General Plan Update process.

I ‐ INTRODUCTION
i‐1  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a brief background of the City of Atwater General Plan Update, summarizes the contents of this Existing Conditions Report, and provides an overview of the General Plan Update process.

This chapter is divided into the following sections:
i. Background
ii. Existing Conditions Report Contents
iii. General Plan Overview
iv. Using the General Plan

INTRODUCTION
City of Atwater| General Plan Existing Conditions Report i‐2 I. BACKGROUND
The City of Atwater’s existing General Plan was adopted in 2000. It was developed to anticipate the needs of the physical development of the community through the year 2020.

The Atwater General Plan identifies the community’s vision for the future and provides a framework to guide decisions on growth, development, and conservation of open space and natural resources in a manner consistent with the quality of life desired by residents, businesses, and local elected officials, while also meeting the requirements of State planning law.

This Existing Conditions Report, which has been prepared to support and complement the General Plan Update, provides an overview of Atwater’s physical, environmental, economic, and demographic setting, using the best available data at the time of publication.  This document serves to establish the baseline conditions in Atwater, in order to help guide the development of the General Plan Update.

City staff, the General Plan Update consultant (De Novo Planning Group), and its subconsultants have worked together to ensure that this is an accurate and reliable source of information. This document is intended to serve as a comprehensive reference document for community members, policymakers, staff, and the consultant team.

The Atwater General Plan Update is a multi‐year process that will include a comprehensive update of the General Plan, which sets a vision for the future of the city, goals and strategies to achieve the city’s vision, and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which investigates the possible impacts of the General Plan Update policy changes to the surrounding physical environment.

This chapter summarizes the contents of this Existing Conditions Report, and provides a brief overview of the General Plan Update.

INTRODUCTION
i‐3 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater II. EXISTING CONDITION REPORT CONTENTS
To prepare a meaningful General Plan, existing conditions must be understood and documented. The Existing Conditions Report identifies development patterns, natural resources, socioeconomic conditions, and environmental constraints in the city and identifies the local regulatory environment for each topic.

This report will be a resource for the Council, Planning Commission, City staff, and the De Novo team for the General Plan Update and Environmental Impact Report. The Existing Conditions Report makes extensive use of maps, graphics, and user‐friendly non‐technical terms to help make it accessible to the general public.

The Existing Conditions Report provides background data and serves as a technical framework, while the General Plan will focus on goals, policies, and implementation.

The following topic areas are addressed in this Existing Conditions Report:

CHAPTER 1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
The Land Use Population, and Housing chapter of the Existing Conditions Report addresses land use and demographics, including issues related to land use patterns, community demographical and housing information. The information in this chapter provides both a historical and current perspective on land use and isintended to assist the General Plan update process by providing both historical context and a baseline of existing land use information to be used when formulating and considering amendments to the city’s current land use pattern or when considering alternate growth and land use scenarios for the city.

CHAPTER 2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
The Circulation chapter of the Existing Conditions Report describes the circulation network. It assembles relevant transportation data from the City, County, Caltrans, and other agencies as appropriate. Data assembled includes recent average daily traffic (ADT) counts on City roadways and Caltrans facilities, citywide vehicle miles travelled (VMT), existing and planned roadway alignments and number of lanes, current and planned transit service, existing and planned non‐motorized (bicycle and pedestrian) facilities, and other relevant studies and reports.

CHAPTER 3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS The Economic and Real Estate Market, and Fiscal Conditions and Trends chapter within the Existing Conditions Report outlines both the current and anticipated economic and fiscal factors influencing the overall identity of Atwater. Subsequently, this information serves as the foundation for establishing a regulatory and policy framework, guiding and bolstering Atwater's fiscal and economic development goals.

CHAPTER 4.0 COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES
The Community Services and Facilities Chapter of the Existing Conditions Report describes the existing conditions and regulatory context regarding community services, including, education, public safety services, and parks and recreational resources within the city. These facilities and services provide a framework that supports growth and development in the city. This chapter also describes existing service levels, and available resources.

INTRODUCTION
City of Atwater| General Plan Existing Conditions Report i‐4 CHAPTER 5.0 UTILITIES
The Utilities chapter of the Existing Conditions Report discusses the current state of utility infrastructure and services within the city. This chapter assesses the condition and capacity of water, wastewater, storm drainage, solid waste, energy, and telecommunication systems. By providing a detailed snapshot of the existing utilities landscape, this chapter lays the groundwork for informed decision‐making and strategic planning, ensuring that the city’s utility infrastructure continues to support sustainable growth, resilience, and the well‐being of its residents.

CHAPTER 6.0 HAZARDS AND SAFETY
The Hazards and Safety chapter discusses existing conditions related to natural and man‐made hazards and public safety issues, including but not limited to wildfire, flooding, and hazardous materials. By analyzing these community hazards, this chapter identifies high risk areas and issues that should be addressed through the Land Use Map and General Plan policy document.

CHAPTER 7.0 COMMUNITY NOISE
The Community Noise chapter of the Existing Conditions Report serves as a comprehensive assessment of the acoustic environment within the city. This chapter serves to provide a detailed overview of the current state of noise pollution, identifying its sources, and potential implications for future urban development.

By examining noise levels from various sources such as transportation, urban uses, and construction activities, this report seeks to lay the foundation for sound policy recommendations that will help preserve tranquility and quality of life.

CHAPTER 8.0 CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
The Conservation and Natural Resources chapter of the Existing Conditions Report discusses conservation issues related to cultural and historic preservation, air quality, biological resources, geologic resources, and hydrology/water quality for the city. This chapter also discusses open space as it relates to the preservation of natural resources as part of the biological resources discussion, open space associated with managed production of surface water and groundwater resources as part of the hydrology discussion, and open space associated with public health related to geologic and hydrologic hazards as part of the geologic resources and hydrology discussions, respectively.

CHAPTER 9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
The Environmental Justice chapter of the Existing Conditions Report analyzes the potential for Disadvantaged Communities (DACs) within Atwater, and addresses a wide range of topics related to Environmental Justice issue areas.

APPENDIX A: REGULATORY SETTING
Appendix A includes the State and Federal Regulatory Section of the Existing Conditions Report that provides a detailed overview of the various laws, regulations, and policies at both the state and federal levels that impact the planning and development of the City and Region. This section outlines the legal framework governing land use, environmental protections, and other critical aspects of urban and regional planning. It serves as a crucial reference guide for policymakers, planners, and stakeholders, ensuring that development and growth align with the broader legal landscape.

INTRODUCTION
i‐5 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater APPENDIX B: REFERENCES
Appendix B includes the References of sources and documents that have been consulted and cited throughout the Existing Conditions Report document. This section provides a means to verify the accuracy and credibility of the information and data presented in this document and includes a wide range of references,such asresearch studies, government regulations, expert reports, and other relevant materials.

INTRODUCTION
City of Atwater| General Plan Existing Conditions Report i‐6 III. GENERAL PLAN OVERVIEW
State law requires every city and county in California to prepare and maintain a planning document called a general plan.  A general plan is a “constitution” or “blueprint” for the future physical development of a county or city.  All future planning decisions and project approvals must be consistent with the general plan, including, but not limited to: specific plans, subdivisions, public works projects, and zoning decisions.

A general plan has four defining features:

General.  Asthe name implies, a general plan provides general guidance for future land use, transportation, infrastructure, environmental, and resource decisions.

Long‐Range.  A general plan provides guidance on achieving a long‐range vision of the future for a city or county.  To reach this envisioned future, the general plan includes goals, policies, and implementation programsthat address both near‐term and long‐term needs.  The City’s General Plan Updatewill look ahead approximately 20 years, to the year 2045.

Integrated and Coherent.  The goals, policies, and implementation programs in a general plan must present a comprehensive, unified program for development and resource conservation.  A general plan uses a consistent set of assumptions and projections to assess future demands for housing, employment, public services, and infrastructure.  A general plan has a coherent set of policies and implementation programs that enables citizens to understand the vision of the general plan, and enables landowners, businesses, and industry to be more certain about how future planning decisions will be made and implemented.

Comprehensive. A general plan covers a wide range of social, economic, infrastructure, and natural resource issues.  There are seven mandatory elements: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, safety, and noise. State law allows local governments to organize and format their general plans however they desire, as long as the required topics or elements are addressed.

The Atwater General Plan is expected to address the following topics:
 Land Use: Establishes land use patterns and densities, and ensures that there are opportunities for growth to meet future needs, while protecting the city’s lands and resources.  Circulation: Guides decisions for how people of all ages and abilities can safely and efficiently get around the community— including by car, bike, walking, and transit. It will also consider new transportation technology and trends.
 Housing (to be updated on a separate timeline and is not a part of this work program)  Conservation  and  Open  Space: Provides measures to protect and improve the city’s natural, historic, cultural, and biological resources. Addresses the topic of local and regional parks, recreation and open space, including trails and scenic areas.  Community Noise: Provides measures to manage the effect of sound in the community, protecting the health and welfare of the community by promoting development and activities that are compatible with noise level criteria.
 Safety: Addresses natural and man‐made safety hazards such as fires, flooding, seismic safety and geologic hazards, hazardous materials, aircraft, noise, and emergency operations and preparedness.

INTRODUCTION
i‐7 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater  Environmental  Justice Addresses the fair and equitable treatment of all community members, regardless of their socioeconomic status, race, or ethnicity, in matters related to environmental policies, planning, and development.
 Parks and Recreation: Outlines the community's vision and strategies for managing and enhancing public parks, recreational facilities, and open spaces.  Economic Development: Establishes strategiesto support local businesses and enhanced economic vitality in the community.
 Sustainability: Addresses strategies, goals, and policies aimed at mitigating climate change, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and ensuring long‐term ecological, economic, and social well‐ being.
 Growth Management: Promotes orderly and fiscally sustainable growth, while maintaining high levels of public services and infrastructure. Growth management systems promote a variety of environmental, social, and economic goals, including balancing the service costs and revenues associated with development; protecting environmental and aesthetic qualities; encouraging the efficient use of land, water, and energy resources; preserving community identity; and protecting the economic base of the community.
 Administration and Implementation: General Plan implementation is necessary to achieve the vision laid out by the General Plan. The implementation section will provide feasible, practical implementation methods that ensure the General Plan does not “sit on the shelf” but instead achieves the goals it sets out.

INTRODUCTION
City of Atwater| General Plan Existing Conditions Report i‐8 IV. USING THE GENERAL PLAN
The General Plan is used by the City Council, Planning Commission, and City staff on a regular basis to make decisions with direct and indirect land use implications.  It also provides a framework for inter‐jurisdictional coordination of planning efforts among officials and staff of the City and other government agencies such as the State and Federal agencies, and other local jurisdictions.

The General Plan is the basis for a variety of regulatory mechanisms and administrative procedures.

California planning law requires consistency between the General Plan and its implementation programs.

Implementation programs and regulatory systems of the General Plan include zoning and subdivision ordinances, capital improvement programs, specific plans, environmental impact procedures, and building and housing codes.

Over time, the city’s population, demographics, and economy will change, its goals will be redefined, and the physical environment in which its residents live and work will be altered.  In order for the General Plan to be a useful document, it must be monitored and periodically revised to respond to and reflect changing conditions and needs.

The Goals and Policies document, developed in coordination with City staff, and decision‐makers, is the essence of the General Plan.  It contains the goals and policies that will guide future decisions within the city.  This document also identifies a full set of implementation programs that will ensure the goals and policies in the General Plan are carried out.

City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1-0

Chapter 1
Land Use, Population and Housing
This Chapter includes the following topics:

1.1 Land Use

1.2 Housing

1.3 Population & Demographics

The Land Use, Population and Housing chapter describes, land use and development patterns, housing profiles, population, and household characteristics and trends in the City of Atwater. This chapter also identifies the local regulatory framework associated with land use. The information in this chapter provides a current perspective on land use in Atwater and is intended to assist the General Plan update process by providing a baseline of existing land use information to be used when formulating and considering amendments to the city’s current land use pattern.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐1  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
This chapter examines the land use and development patterns in Atwater, the city’s housing stock, and population and demographic profiles.  The information and analysis is intended to inform the General Plan Update process by providing both historical context and a baseline of existing land use, demographic, and housing development information. This chapter includes the following sections:

1.1 Land Use

1.2 Housing

1.3 Population and Demographics

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐2 FINDINGS, ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Land use
The majority of assessed land acreage (40.3 percent) within the City of Atwater city limits is single family residential uses. Other major land uses within the city include government (12.9 percent), and vacant (9.0 percent). Within the unincorporated portions within the Atwater SOI, 84.8 percent of lands are agricultural uses. The City of Atwater is primarily surrounded by Agricultural land in the west and southern portions of the city. Developed usesincluding Residential, Commercial, Business Park and Aviation/Manufacturing uses within the northeast and northwest portion of the planning area near the Winton and the Castle Airport unincorporated areas.

Population and Household Trends
The California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates the Atwater population at 31,418 persons and 10,136 households as of 2023.  By population, Atwater is the third largest of the six incorporated cities in Merced County, ranking behind Merced and Los Banos.  Merced County is the 23rd most populous of California’s 58 counties.  These rankings have been relatively unchanged since 2000, asthe city, the county, and the state have all shown population growth.   Since 2020 the number of city residents has been relatively unchanged; however, the number of households continued to grow, leading to a decline in average household size.

Regional Housing Needs Trends
Atwater’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation has increased substantially from the previous cycle from 1,760 total units, to 3,017 units during the 2024‐ 2032 cycle.

Future Population Growth
Overall, Atwater and Merced County have shown population and household growth since 2010; however, since 2020, population estimates indicate that population growth has stalled for Atwater, but the county continues to see population growth.  The most recent projections, which incorporated 2020 Census data, show more limited growth or even possible declines in population statewide.  In contrast, Merced County’s population is projected to increase even as the overall state population stagnates.  Assuming Atwater mirrors county trends and maintains a constant percentage of the countywide population, as estimated by DOF, Atwater can be expected to grow gradually, from 31,751 in 2020 to approximately 37,000 persons in 2050, or about a 17 percent increase, with a commensurate increase in demand for housing.

Age Characteristics
Atwater has a relatively young population, with a 2020 median age of 33.2 years, which is lower than the state median of 37.5.  Thisislargely due to the greater presence of non‐adult children, who make up almost 30 percent of the Atwater population.  Atwater shows an increasing percentage and number of persons 65 and older, as the “baby boom” generation ages.  The growth in the population for all age groups may indicate demand for increased services targeting different age groups, especially children and the elderly, as well as housing suitable for household needs ranging from smaller homes for seniors who may be interested in downsizing and larger homes for young families.

Race and Ethnicity
Atwater and Merced County are “minority majority” areas.   The city and county ethnic profiles are dominated by large and increasingly Latino populations,which may influence the types ofretail and services demanded within the community.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐3  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Educational Attainment
The educational levels of an area’s residents are a key driver of local economic potential; a more educated populace is likely to be associated with stronger economic conditions including higher resident incomes and a more fully employable labor force.  Atwater, though, shows a lower level of educational achievement than California overall.   Improving educational outcomes for local students could provide more employment opportunities and an improved quality of life for those residents and make Atwater more attractive to a broader range of employers.

Household and Per Capita Income
Atwater’s resident income levels are below statewide levels.  These income levels are likely associated with the lower educational attainment levels in the city, and result in lower per capita gross domestic product and retailsalesin comparison to the state.  Further, the prevailing incomesindicate that it will be important for the City to consider the need for housing types that are built and rented and/or sold at costs that can be more attainable to households with modest incomes.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1-4

1.1 LAND USE
This section describes land use and development patterns in the City of Atwater and identifies the local regulatory framework associated with land use. Existing land use conditions, including land uses by General Plan designation and assessed land uses, are described.

KEY TERMS
City Limits: The city limits include the area within a City’s corporate boundary, over which the City exercises land use authority and provides public services.

Sphere of Influence: A Sphere of Influence (SOI) is the probable physical boundary and service area of a local agency, as adopted by a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). An SOI includes both incorporated and unincorporated areas within which a city or special district will have primary responsibility for the provision of public facilities and services.

Planning Area: For the purposes of the Atwater General Plan Update, the “planning area” is defined as all lands within the City Limits and SOI, as well as additional surrounding lands that may impact the city, or provide additional future opportunities for comprehensive planning.

Figure 1.1-1 shows the General Plan’s planning areas.

Longview Ave
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 1.1-1. Planning Areas
Sources: Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence Areas
Planning Area
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 1, 2023

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐6

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework discussion describes local regulations that guide land use decisions. Adopted plans that pertain to the City are also described.

City of Atwater General Plan
The City of Atwater’s existing General Plan was adopted in 2000. It was developed to anticipate the needs of the physical development of the community through the year 2020. The General Plan identifiesland uses based on the Land Use Map, and goals and policies established by the City’s General Plan. The City’s General Plan includes a broad goal policy framework that guides land use and planning decisions within the city.

Merced County General Plan
The County’s General Plan establishes allowed land uses for lands within all unincorporated areas of the County, including the City of Atwater’s SOI and planning area.  While the City of Atwater’s General Plan Land Use Map identifies land uses within the SOI, the County has ultimate land use planning and project approval authority in areas outside the Atwater City Limits until such lands are annexed to the City.

Local Agency Formation Commission of Merced County
In 1963, the State Legislature created a local agency formation commission (LAFCO) for each county, with the authority to regulate local agency boundary changes. Subsequently, the State has expanded the authority of a LAFCO. The goals of the LAFCO include preserving agricultural and open space land resources and providing for efficient delivery of services. The Merced LAFCO has authority over land use decisions in Merced County affecting local agency boundaries. Its authority extendsto the incorporated cities, including annexation of County lands into a city, and special districts within the County.  LAFCO has the authority to review and approve or disapprove the following:
 Annexations to or detachments from cities or districts.  Formation or dissolution of districts.
 Incorporation or disincorporation of cities.
 Consolidation or reorganization of cities or districts.  Establishment of subsidiary districts.
 Development of, and amendments to, Spheres of Influence. The Sphere of Influence (SOI) is the probable physical boundary and service area of each local government agency. This may extend beyond the current service area of the agency.
 Extensions of service beyond an agency's jurisdictional boundaries.  Provision of new or different services by districts.
 Proposals that extend service into previously unserved territory in unincorporated areas.

In addition, the Merced County LAFCO conducts Municipal Service Reviews (MSRs) for services within its jurisdiction. An MSR typically includes a review of existing municipal services provided by a local agency or district and its infrastructure needs and deficiencies. It also evaluates financing constraints and

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐7  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater opportunities, management efficiencies, opportunities for rate restructuring and shared facilities, local accountability and governance, and other issues.

Legislation, including Assembly Bill 1555 and Senate Bill 244, has been enacted to encourage the identification and annexation of islands, which are unincorporated areas substantially surrounded by a city or cities.

Airport Land Use Commission Law (Public Utilities Code §   21670 et seq.) The law, passed in 1967, authorized the creation of Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUC) in California. Per the Public Utilities Code, the purpose of an ALUC is to protect public health, safety, and welfare by encouraging orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimizes exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses(§21670). Furthermore, each ALUC must prepare an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Each ALUCP, which must be based on a twenty‐year planning horizon, should focus on broadly defined noise and safety impacts.

The ALUC adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) addresses the Merced‐Castle Airport. The ALUC adopted an update to the ALUCP on June 21, 2012.

The ALUC addresses three critical land use‐planning concerns:

1. Compatibility of surrounding land uses with respect to airport noise levels;

2. Compatibility of surrounding land uses in terms of exposure of persons on the ground to crash hazards associated with aircraft; and

3. The need for appropriate height restrictions to protect the airspace used by aircraft.

The ALUC Airport Safety Map and Land Use Compatibility Guidelinesfor Safety, containedwithin the Airport Master Plan, regulate land uses and structure heights that may constitute a hazard to air navigation.

EXISTING SETTING
Land Use Patterns
When discussing land use, it is important to distinguish between planned land uses and existing land uses.

The General Plan land use designations identify the long‐term planned use of land, but may not present a complete picture of existing land uses. The Merced County Assessor’s office maintains a database of existing (assessed) land uses on individual parcels, including an estimated number of dwelling units and related improvementssuch as non‐residential building square footage.  Thisinformation is used asthe basis for property tax assessments and is summarized in Table 1.1‐1 and depicted on Figure 1.1‐2.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐8 TABLE 1.1‐1:  ASSESSED LAND USES – ATWATER
Assessed Land Use City
(acres)
SOI
(acres)
Planning
Area
(acres)
Total
(acres)
Agricultural 237.87 5,108.33 6,063.94 11,410.14
Church 38.25 9.81 2.28 50.34
Commercial 321.45 138.30 4.48 464.23
Government 432.86 62.63 141.39 636.88
Industrial 109.80 106.14 3.81 219.75
Miscellaneous 31.32 ‐‐ 31.17 62.49
Residential Mobile/Manufactured Home Park 30.21 ‐‐ ‐‐ 30.21 Residential Mobile/Manufactured Homes 10.55 6.24 1.58 18.37 Residential Multiple Family 324.20 82.80 52.95 459.95
Residential Single Family 1,347.47 443.03 234.28 2,024.78 Utility 52.73 33.88 49.44 136.06
Vacant 398.25 36.11 6.31 440.68
No Data Available 12.23 ‐‐ 53.29 65.52
Grand Total  3,347.20  6,027.28  6,644.92  16,019.41
SOURCE: MERCED COUNTY ASSESSOR’S OFFICE, 2023; DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP, 2023.

Existing assessed uses refer to the existing built environment and site uses, which may be different from the land use or zoning designations applied to land for planning purposes.  Existing uses are based on data provided by the County Assessor. As shown in Table 1.1‐1 and Figure 1.1‐2 the majority of assessed land acreage (40.3 percent) within the City of Atwater city limits is single family residential uses. Other major land uses within the city include government (12.9 percent), and vacant (9.0 percent). Within the unincorporated portions within the Atwater SOI, 84.8 percent of lands are agricultural uses.

Longview Ave
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 1.1-2. Assessed Land Uses
Sources: ParcelQuest; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database.
0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Agricultural
Church
Commercial
Government
Industrial
Miscellaneous
Residential Single Family
Residential Multiple Family
Residential Mobile Home/Mobile
Home Park
Utility
Vacant
No Information Available
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 1, 2023

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐10 Atwater General Plan – Land Use Map
Figure 1.1‐3 (General Plan Land Use Map) illustrates the City’s current General Plan land use designations and their respective distributions throughout the city.  Table 1.1‐2 summarizes the City’s General Plan land use designations and acreage. As shown in Table 1.1‐2 and Figure 1.1‐3 the predominate land uses within the city limits are low density residential followed by business park and commercial land uses.  A brief description of each City General Plan Land Use Designation is described below.

TABLE 1.1‐2: EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Land Use Designation
City Limits SOI Planning
Area Grand Total
Acreage Acreage Acreage Acreage
AG: Agriculture  ‐‐  233.78  ‐‐  233.78
BP:  Business Park 356.42 905.85 8.54 1,270.81
C: Commercial 380.95 318.20  ‐‐  699.15
CT: Commercial‐Transition 3.88  ‐‐  ‐‐  3.88
DTR: Downtown Residential Transition 49.48  ‐‐  ‐‐  49.48 FPARK: Future Park 9.98 59.33  ‐‐  69.30
FSCH: Future School 19.06 16.49  ‐‐  35.55
HDR: High Density Residential 179.61 2.64  ‐‐  182.25
INST: Institutional 83.37 8.74  ‐‐  92.11
LDR: Low Density Residential 1,589.45 634.71  ‐‐  2,224.16 MDR: Medium Density Residential 85.75 151.68  ‐‐  237.44 MFG: Manufacturing 103.88 19.42  ‐‐  123.31
PARK: Park 54.92  ‐‐  ‐‐  54.92
PATH: Path 19.04 33.69  ‐‐  52.73
New Planning Area ‐‐  ‐‐  6,617.97 6,617.97
Parcelized ROW 35.53 32.35  ‐‐  67.88
RT: Residential Transition 59.47 0.90  ‐‐  60.37
SCH: School 202.92  ‐‐  ‐‐  202.92
SOI: Sphere of Influence  ‐‐  130.05  ‐‐  130.05
UR: Urban Reserve  ‐‐  2,271.39  ‐‐  2,271.39
URBP: Urban Reserve/Business Park   ‐‐  220.51  ‐‐  220.51 VLDR: Very Low Density Residential 113.49 987.55 18.42 1,119.46 Grand Total  3,347.20  6,027.28  6,644.92  16,019.41
SOURCES:  GIS LAND USE DATA FILE 2023; DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP, 2023.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐11  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (VLDR)
This designation accommodates the needs of residents who desire large parcels and the feeling of open space integrated with a suburban lifestyle. The permitted density range is 0 to 3.0 units per acre. The minimum parcel size permitted is 11,000 square feet, however, most parcels are greater in size. One single family residence is permitted per legally created lot. Typical land uses include: single family residences and residential accessory uses, churches, schools, parks, community care facilities, and necessary public utility and safety facilities. Secondary dwelling units may be permitted consistent with state and local regulations.

LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)
This category provides for residential development at densities that are typical for existing single family residential subdivisions within the City. The permitted density range is 3.1 to 7.0 units per acre. Parcel sizes range from 5,000 to 11,000 square feet in area. All properties must be served by public sewer and water.

Typical land uses include: single family residences and residential accessory uses, churches, schools, parks, community care facilities, and necessary public utility and safety facilities. Secondary dwelling units may be permitted consistent with state and local regulations.

MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR)
This classification is designed to accommodate a variety of residential products including, but not limited to, single‐family detached and attached units, zero lot line developments, duplexes, and multi‐family structures. The permitted density range is 7.1 to 15.0 units per acre. Associated land uses include:
residential accessory uses, churches, schools, parks, community care facilities, and necessary public utility and safety facilities.

HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR)
This designation is intended to provide for multi‐family units such as apartments, and/or condominiums in structures up to four stories in height. The permitted density range is 15.1 to 35 units per acre. Projects should include common open space and on‐site recreational amenities such as tot lots, pools, or playground equipment. On‐site day care facilities are also encouraged.

DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL TRANSITION (MIXED USE)
This designation provides for a full range of uses in Downtown Atwater including retail stores, eating and drinking establishments, commercial recreation, entertainment and cultural facilities, hospitals, hotels and motels, educational and social services, and government offices. Residential uses are appropriate up to 25 dwelling units per acre. Development and redevelopment projects shall be designed to have a strong pedestrian orientation with active uses occupying the ground floor. A mix of uses within a building‐‐ such as, active ground floor uses, and upperstory office and residential uses‐‐ is appropriate. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 2.0.

RESIDENTIAL TRANSITION (RT)
This designation is intended to provide a transition between commercial development and adjacent residential neighborhoods. It has also been applied in locations where a mix of commercial and residential land uses have been approved. The purpose of the classification is to encourage the development of apartments and certain compatible commercial uses, or the expansion and improvement of existing structures. Residential densities up to 21 units per acre are considered compatible. Commercial land uses which may be potentially compatible include, but are not limited to: medical, professional and business offices, parking lots and structures, personal service establishments, retail stores, restaurants, motels,

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐12 rooming and boarding homes, social halls, lodges, fraternal organizations and clubs, licensed nursing or convalescent homes, public and quasi‐public uses, minor manufacturing when at least 75 percent of the product is sold on the premises. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 0.35.

COMMERCIAL TRANSITION (CT)
This designation is also intended to provide a transition between commercial development and adjacent residential neighborhoods. Businesses which do not generate high volumes of traffic or noise, such as, professional office uses, low impact public uses, galleries, art and photography studios, church facilities, and other similar uses are generally considered compatible within this classification. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 0.30

COMMERCIAL (COM)
This designation is intended to accommodate a wide range of commercial activities ranging from regional commercial facilities to general and neighborhood commercial uses. Establishments may range from retail to service and entertainment uses. Development may occur as a single structure, group of commercial uses (small‐ to medium‐scale center) or regional mall type facility. Developments consisting of 75,000 square feet or more should incorporate landscaped public gathering areas with pedestrian oriented features such as benches in central locations. Common driveways and parking areas or other features should be utilized whenever possible to avoid impacts on the capacity of adjacent roadways. Commercial centers should present a unifying architectural theme, include an internal traffic circulation system and accommodations for transit services, as well as, a unifying landscape theme. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 0.35.

MANUFACTURING (MFG)
This designation provides for a wide range of industrial activities which involve warehousing, manufacturing, processing, fabrication, and other similar operations. Some uses may be noisy, and prone to emit dust, vibration, odor, and/or glare, although these impacts must be mitigated at the property line to avoid negative impacts on adjacent uses. Businesses generally involve the frequent use of large trucks for pick‐up and delivery of parts and products. Typical uses often have high utility demands and require special consideration for construction to accommodate heavy truck traffic. Uses can be developed independently or as part of a subdivision. The maximum floor area ratio permitted for most uses is 0.50.

However a maximum floor area ratio of 0.60 is allowed for low employment industries, such as, warehousing, wholesaling, or distribution.

BUSINESS PARK (BP)
In contrast to the Manufacturing category, the Business Park designation provides for large buildings or a cluster of buildings usually developed in a “campus” style. Business uses may include manufacturing operations within completely enclosed buildings, associated offices, trade schools, and supporting child care and retail activities. Outside storage is limited and must be effectively screened with solid fencing and/or landscaping. The operations are quiet and require infrequent use of large trucks for pickup or delivery of parts or products.

Buildings are visually pleasing with extensive landscaping around buildings and parking areas. Projects with multiple buildings provide a strong pedestrian orientation between the structures. A typical project has vehicular access to a major street with on‐site parking and a project identification sign. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 0.40.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐13  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

CASTLE AIRPORT AVIATION AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER (CAADC)
The City of Atwater has adopted land uses identified within the Castle Air Force Base Reuse Plan as the Land Use Plan for the Castle Airport Aviation and Development Center. These designations are incorporated into the General Plan by reference.

URBAN RESERVE (UR)
This designation has been applied to areas within the City of Atwater’s proposed (2000)sphere of influence to indicate locations which may be suitable for urban development in the future. Current Merced County agricultural designations and permitted uses will apply in these areas until such time as the City’s primary and secondary growth areas approach buildout.

URBAN RESERVE / BUSINESS PARK (UR/BP)
This designation has been applied to areas surrounding the CAADC site that are intended to remain at current Merced County agricultural designations until development demands warrant future transition to Business Park uses.

AGRICULTURE/AREA OF INTEREST (AG)
This designation has been applied both inside and outside of the City’s proposed (2000) Sphere of Influence to indicate those locations where current agricultural and open space land uses are to be maintained in areas surrounding the City. Application of the term “Area of Interest” is intended to lay the groundwork for long‐term agreements with the City and County of Merced relative to the maintenance of distinct boundaries and buffers between the City of Atwater, City of Merced, Community of Winton, McSwain, and Franklin‐Beachwood.

INSTITUTIONAL (I)
This designation is intended for public and quasi‐public facilities, including, but not limited to, government services and facilities, fire/police stations, wastewater treatment facilities, electrical substations, domestic water treatment and storage, and other similar uses. New facilities may be appropriate in any land use category based on need and environmental review. The Land Use Diagram will not be amended for new public facilities on sites that occupy less than 2 acres. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 0.40.

SCHOOL (SCH)
This designation has been applied to areas with existing and proposed primary and secondary public school facilities. Of particular interest is the proposed High School site located on the south side of Avenue Two just east of Buhach Road. Although this designation has been applied based upon existing information, new facilities may be appropriate in any land use category based on need and environmental review. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 0.40.

PARK (PK)
This designation has been applied to indicate the location of existing and planned public park facilities ranging from neighborhood to community parks. Additional parkland which may be dedicated and developed in conjunction with individual subdivisions need not receive a formal designation in order to be established. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 0.10.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐14

RECREATION (REC)
This designation is intended to accommodate commercial recreational facilities, including but not limited to, golf courses, driving ranges, tennis and racquet clubs, health clubs and spas, equestrian facilities, swim clubs, roller skating arenas, archery facilities, and other similar uses. The maximum floor area ratio permitted is 0.10.

PATH (P)
This designation is indicated in locations considered desirable for development of a comprehensive system of linear parks and pathways. These facilities shall be required as appropriate within new residential developments. Utilization of the existing canal system shall serve as the backbone of this open space network
SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS 1, 2 AND 3 (SP 1, SP 2, AND SP 3)
This overlay has been applied within the southwest portion of the City’s 2000 proposed Sphere of Influence to indicate those locations where Specific Plans will be prepared to guide future growth and development.

Lands within these areaswill continue to be under the jurisdiction of the County of Merced until the Specific Plans are adopted and future annexation is completed. Incorporation of these areas within the City’s proposed Sphere of Influence will allow the City to review and comment on any development applications that are considered by Merced County in the interim, and provide opportunities for the establishment of uniform development standards and coordinated facilities planning

Longview Ave
N Winton Way
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fai wr ay Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 1.1-3. Current General Plan Land Use Designations Sources: Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Specific Plan Overlay
Agricutlure
Very Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Residential Transition
Downtown Residential Transition
Commercial
Commercial Transition
Manufacturing
Business Park
Path
Park
Future Park
School
Future School
Institutional
Urban Reserve
Urban Reserve/Business Park
SOI - Undesignated
New Planning Area
Parcelized ROW
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater April 24, 2024

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐16 Merced County General Plan
The County’s General Plan establishes land uses for lands within all unincorporated areas of the County, including the City of Atwater’s SOI and planning area.  The County’s land use designations for areas within the SOI and planning area are summarized in Table 1.1‐3 and the County’s land use designations for the unincorporated area around the City are shown on Figure 1.1‐4.

As shown on Figure 1.1‐4, the City of Atwater is primarily surrounded by Agricultural, Agricultural Residential, land uses in the west and southern portion of the city with some developed uses including Residential, Commercial, Business Park and Aviation/Manufacturing uses within the northeast and northwest portion of the planning area near the Winton and the Castle Airport unincorporated areas.

TABLE 1.1‐3: SURROUNDING LAND USES (MERCED COUNTY GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS) Land Use Planning Area SOI Total
Acreage Acreage Acreage
A‐ Agricultural 6,766.31 5,798.20 12,564.51
AM‐ Aviation/Manufacturing 0.00 1.63 1.63
AR‐ Agricultural‐Residential 0.27 333.53 333.80
BP‐ Business Park 30.99 0.11 31.11
C‐ Commercial 0.01 0.02 0.03
GC‐ Commercial‐General 0.00 5.72 5.72
IND‐ Industrial 0.00 24.68 24.68
LD‐ Low Density Residential 0.00 23.50 23.50
MD‐ Medium Density Residential 0.00 11.67 11.67
NC‐ Commercial‐Neighborhood 3.62 0.00 3.62
REC‐ Recreation 0.00 117.13 117.13
VC‐ Commercial‐Visitor 1.34 0.00 1.34
VLDR‐ Very Low Density Residential 85.09 76.27 161.36
ROW/Null 0.00 2.07 2.07
Total  6,887.62  6,394.53  13,282.16
SOURCES:  GIS LAND USE DATA FILE 2023; DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP, 2024.

Longview Ave
N Winton Way
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 1.1-4. Merced County General Plan Land Use
Sources: Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Agricultural
Agricultural-Residential
Very Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Commercial
Commercial-Neighborhood
Commercial-General
Commercial-Visitor
Commercial-Transition
Business Park
Aviation/Manufacturing
Industrial
Mixed Use
Institutional
Public/Quasi-Public
Open Space
Recreation
Recreation and Open Space Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater February 15, 2024

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐18

1.2 HOUSING
This section provides a brief summary of the city’s housing profile.   For perspective, this includes comparisons with Merced County as a whole. The analysis primarily utilizes data from Esri Business Analyst (a private economic and demographic data vendor) and the U.S. Census Bureau, five‐year American Community Survey (ACS) estimates.  Where appropriate, data are also provided from a variety of other data sources, including the California Employment Development Department (EDD), California Department of Finance (DoF), and the Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG), among others.

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework discussion describeslaws and regulationsthat guide land use decisions. Adopted plans that pertain to the City are also described.

Regional Housing Needs Plan (Adopted RHNA 2014‐2023)
California General Plan law requires each city and county to have land zoned to accommodate a fair share of the regional housing need. The share is known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and is based on a Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) developed by councils of government. The Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) is the lead agency for developing the RHNP for the Merced County area. Atwater’s fair share of the adopted RHNA for 2014‐2023 is summarized in Table 1.2‐1.

The City is not required to ensure that adequate development to accommodate the RHNA occurs; however, the City must facilitate housing production by ensuring that land is available and that unnecessary development constraints have been removed. The City’s Housing Element, adopted in 2016, provides for the accommodation of the 2014‐2023 RHNA that has been assigned to the City of Atwater.

TABLE 1.2‐1: REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION 2014‐2023 Extremely
Low
Income
Very Low
Income
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
Total
Current RHNA 214 213 304 281 748 1,760
Unaccommodated
Need 10 9 0 16 0 35
Built since January
1, 2014 ‐‐  ‐‐  ‐‐  ‐‐  (95) (95)
Total Housing
Need 224 222 304 297 653 1,700
Sites Available 249 249 391 404 919 2,212
Surplus 25 27 87 107 266  ‐‐
SOURCE:  MERCED COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS 2014.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐19  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNA 2024)
The Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan for the 6th cycle (June 30th, 2023 ‐ January 31st, 2032) was adopted by the Merced County Association of Governments’ (MCAG) (Resolution 2022/11‐17‐ 02) on November 17, 2022. The Atwater General Plan Housing Element Update for the 2024‐2033 cycle has not been adopted at the time of this publication, but is anticipated to be adopted in 2024.

The total RHNA for all income levels was allocated among MCAG’s 7 jurisdictions using each jurisdiction’s share of forecasted 2015 ‐ 2035 household growth from the 2018 RTP/ SCS preferred land use scenario.

Then, the regional average split for moderate and above‐moderate income housing need (58.6 percent) and low and very low‐income housing need (41.4 percent)was applied to each jurisdiction’stotal allocation.

Table 1.2‐2 below includes the RHNA countywide and for each of the 7 jurisdictions within the MCAG planning area. As shown in Table 1.2‐2 Atwater’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation has increased substantially from the previous cycle (1,760 total units) to 3,017 units during the current cycle under various income levels as detailed below.

TABLE 1.2‐2: REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION 2024‐2032 CYCLE RHNA Jurisdiction
Lower Income Units Higher Income Units
Total
RHNA
Very Low Low
Very Low
+ Low
% of Total
RHNA
(VL + L) Moderate Above
Atwater  768  526  1,294  42.9%  508  1,215  3,017
Dos Palos 56 39 95 36.4% 49 117 261
Gustine 77 53 130 37.5% 64 152 346
Livingston 311 213 524 47.8% 169 404 1,097
Los Banos 719 493 1,212 38.7% 566 1,354 3,132
Merced 2,543 1,742 4,285 40.7% 1,838 4,394 10,517
Unincorporated
County 1,042 714 1,756 41.3% 736 1,758 4,250
Total  5,516  3,780  9,296  41.1%  3,930  9,394  22,620 SOURCE:  MERCED COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS 2014.

City of Atwater’s Existing Housing Element
The City’s Housing Element, one of the seven mandated General Plan elements, was adopted May 22, 2017.

The Atwater General Plan Housing Element is designed to provide the City with a coordinated and comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent, and affordable housing within the community. A priority of both State and local governments, Government Code Section 65580 states the intent of creating housing elements:

The availability of housing is of vital statewide importance, and the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian, including farmworkers, is a priority of the highest order.

The Housing Element has two main purposes:

1. To provide an assessment of both current and future housing needs and constraints to meeting those needs; and

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐20

2. To provide housing goals, policies, and programs that establish a strategy for attaining adequate housing for a range of people.

Atwater has areas of special priority that focus the purpose of its Housing Element, such as the growing proportion of families with children, increasing rates of overcrowding, limited availability of rental housing (especially affordable rentals) and constraints to accommodating additional housing within existing city limits.

The Housing Element serves as an integrated part of the General Plan, but is updated more frequently, as required by State law, to ensure its relevancy and accuracy. The Housing Element identifies strategies and programs that focus on:
 Matching housing supply with need;
 Maximizing housing choice throughout the community; Assisting in the provision of affordable housing;
 Removing governmental and other constraints to housing investment; and  Promoting fair and equal housing opportunities.

EXISTING SETTING
Housing Units
As shown in Table 1.2‐3, the number of housing units in Atwater has increased at rates similar to the population with significant increases since 1990. In 2023, there were an estimated 10,468 housing units in the city.

TABLE 1.2‐3: HOUSING UNITS
1990 2000 2010 2023
1990‐
2000
%Change
2000‐
2010
%Change
2010‐
2017
%Change
Atwater 7,422 8,114 9,529 10,468 9% 17% 10%
Merced County 38,373 58,410 85,215 91,465 52% 46% 7%
SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS, 1990, 2000, 2010; ATWATER HOUSING ELEMENT 2016‐2023, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, 2023.

In Merced County, housing units have increased at a much more rapid pace, with a 52% increase from 1990 to 2000 and a 46% increase from 2000 to 2010.  Due to the recent economic incline, growth in both the population and housing stock over the next few years is anticipated to remain relatively high, compared to historic averages.

Housing Stock Characteristics
The housing stock in Atwater and Merced County is characterized by a preponderance of single family detached homes.  Almost two‐thirds of housing units in the city are in this category, and nearly three‐ fourths are countywide, in contrast to only 57 percentstatewide (see Table 1.2‐4).  Conversely, the city and the county’ housing unit mix includes small proportions of larger multifamily (e.g., apartment) units, with units in buildings of five or more units making up less than 10 percent of housing, compared to almost 25 percent statewide.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐21  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 1.2‐4 UNITS IN STRUCTURE (UNIT TYPES), 2023
SOURCES: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, TABLE E‐5, 2023; BAE, 2023.

Housing Tenure
Despite housing being oriented toward single‐family detached homes in Atwater and Merced County, neither area shows a higher level of owner‐occupancy than the state, perhaps indicating that the lower income levels in the county are limiting the ability of local households to purchase their own homes.  In 2020, all three geographiesshowed between 54 and 56 percent owner‐occupancy.  These levels are almost unchanged from 2010.

TABLE 1.2‐5  OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY TENURE, 2010 AND 2020 SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2010, TABLE H16 AND DECENNIAL CENSUS 2020, TABLE H4; BAE, 2023.

Year Built
Housing construction in Atwater peaked in the 1970s, with nearly one‐fourth of all housing in the city constructed during that decade (see Chart 1.2‐1, and Figure 1.2‐1).  Less than five percent of housing units have been built since 2010.  More recent development has shifted to other areas of the county; the busiest decade for construction countywide was from 2000 through 2009, accounting for slightly less than one‐ fifth of the county housing inventory.   While decades since the 1970s have seen a slower pace of construction in Atwater, new home construction continued at a healthy pace until the recession and housing market meltdown in 2010.

City of Atwater Merced County California
Units in Structure Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Detached Single-Family 6,947 66.4% 67,630 73.9% 8,420,792 57.3% Attached Single-Family 637 6.1% 2,872 3.1% 1,056,780 7.2% 2 to 4 Units 1,594 15.2% 7,485 8.2% 1,146,148 7.8%
5 or more 583 5.6% 8,104 8.9% 3,545,018 24.1%
Mobile Homes 707 6.8% 5,374 5.9% 538,960 3.7%
Total, All Units 10,468 100.0% 91,465 100.0% 14,707,698 100.0% % Single Family
% Multifamily 20.8% 17.0% 31.9%

72.4% 77.1% 64.4%
2010 2020
City of Atwater Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Owner-Occupied 4,905 55.5% 5,576 55.9% 671 13.7%
Renter-Occupied 3,933 44.5% 4,394 44.1% 461 11.7%
Total Occupied Units 8,838 100.0% 9,970 100.0% 1,132 12.8% 2010 2020
Merced County Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Owner-Occupied 41,196 54.5% 45,639 54.7% 4,443 10.8%
Renter-Occupied 34,446 45.5% 37,825 45.3% 3,379 9.8%
Total Occupied Units 75,642 100.0% 83,464 100.0% 7,822 10.3% 2010 2020
California Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Owner-Occupied 7,035,371 55.9% 7,348,329 54.5% 312,958 4.4% Renter-Occupied 5,542,127 44.1% 6,127,294 45.5% 585,167 10.6% Total Occupied Units 12,577,498 100.0% 13,475,623 100.0% 898,125 7.1% Change, 2010-2020
Change, 2010-2020
Change, 2010-2020

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐22 CHART 1.2‐1: HOUSING UNITS BY YEAR BUILT, 2017‐2021 FIVE‐YEAR SAMPLE DATA SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2010, TABLE H16 AND DECENNIAL CENSUS 2020, TABLE H4; BAE, 2023.

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%
Built 1939
or earlier
Built 1940
to 1949
Built 1950
to 1959
Built 1960
to 1969
Built 1970
to 1979
Built 1980
to 1989
Built 1990
to 1999
Built 2000
to 2009
Built 2010
or later
% of Households Built
City of Atwater Merced County California

Longview Ave
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Grove Ave
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
CASTLE

AIRPORT
WINTON
Figure 1.2-1. Year Structures Built
Sources: ParcelQuest; Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; CalTrans Aviation; USGS Roads Database.
0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Pre-1930
1930-1949
1950-1969
1970-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
2010-2019
2020-2023
No Structure/No Information/
Government or Agricultural
Parcel
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater September 1, 2023

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐24 Housing Occupancy Status
Vacancy rates help demonstrate the relationship between housing supply and demand and can indicate whether a jurisdiction has an adequate housing supply to accommodate demand.  The following section examines the published vacancy data from the U.S. Decennial Census.  Since this data is collected on a regular and consistent basis every ten years, it allows an analysis of any changes in the local housing market over that time period.  Vacancy trends may be linked to other changes in the housing market including increasing affordability problems.

As of 2020, Atwater shows a relatively low overall housing vacancy rate of 3.2 percent, lower than the 4.9 percent countywide and 6.4 percent statewide (see Error!  Reference source  not  found.).   These rates represent a steep decline from conditions in 2010 during the Great Recession and associated housing market and financial market crisis.  Even though the overall housing inventory grew between 2010 and 2020 in the three geographies, there were less units vacant in 2020 than 2010.  The low vacancy rate in Atwater may indicate that the local housing market is struggling to meet demand as new households and existing households seeking different housing face a lack of choices.

TABLE 1.2‐6: HOUSING OCCUPANCY AND VACANCY STATUS, 2010 AND 2020 SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2010, TABLES H4 AND H5; DECENNIAL CENSUS 2020, TABLES H4 AND H5; BAE, 2023.

Vacant housing units are not always available for occupancy in the regular housing market, with some units held for seasonal or occasional use, for use by migrant workers, or simply held off the market for other reasons (e.g., awaiting settlement of an estate, foreclosure, storage, needing repairs, or other personal reasons of the owner).  Measuring vacancy rates by tenure, excluding units that are not occupied and not available for rent or sale, provides a more refined measure of market conditions relevant to those seeking a primary residence.  Economists typically consider a healthy vacancy rate to be between approximately one and two percent in the ownership market, and approximately five percent for rental housing market.

The rental vacancy rate is generally higher than the ownership vacancy rate as renters switch residences more frequently, such that at any given time a higher proportion of units are between occupants. 2010 2020
Occupancy/Vacancy Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent City of Atwater
Occupied Housing Units 8,838 90.5% 9,970 96.8% 1,132 12.8% Vacant Housing Units 933 9.5% 326 3.2% (607) -65.1%
Total, Housing Units 9,771 100.0% 10,296 100.0% 525 5.4% Merced County
Occupied Housing Units 75,642 90.4% 83,464 95.1% 7,822 10.3% Vacant Housing Units 8,056 9.6% 4,319 4.9% (3,737) -46.4% Total, Housing Units 83,698 100.0% 87,783 100.0% 4,085 4.9% California
Occupied Housing Units 12,577,498 91.9% 13,475,623 93.6% 898,125 7.1% Vacant Housing Units 1,102,583 8.1% 916,517 6.4% (186,066) -16.9% Total, Housing Units 13,680,081 100.0% 14,392,140 100.0% 712,059 5.2% Change, 2010-2020

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐25  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater The low 2020 vacancy ratesfor rentersin Atwater and Merced County indicate a constrained rental market, where demand may be greater than the overall supply, where one result could be increasing affordability issues asrentsincrease.  In Atwater, the for‐sale market also showslow vacancy ratesthat may also indicate a limited supply relative to demand.  Merced County’srate is also at the low end of the range for a balanced market, as is statewide also.

TABLE 1.2‐7: VACANCY RATE BY TENURE, 2010 AND 2020
SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2010, TABLES H4 AND H5; DECENNIAL CENSUS 2020, TABLES H4 AND H5; BAE, 2023.

Atwater 2010 2020
Homeowner Vacancy Rate 3.3% 0.6%
Rental Vacancy Rate 10.9% 3.1%
Merced County 2010 2020
Homeowner Vacancy Rate 3.2% 1.1%
Rental Vacancy Rate 8.1% 3.9%
California 2010 2020
Homeowner Vacancy Rate 1.0% 1.0%
Rental Vacancy Rate 6.3% 4.6%

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐26

1.3 POPULATION & DEMOGRAPHICS
The following section presents population, and household characteristics and trends for Atwater, Merced County, and the State of California, providing demographic context for the Existing Conditions Report.

EXISTING SETTING
Population and households, and changes over time in their numbers, are key factorsin assessing conditions for a locale, driving local trends in housing, labor force and employment, real estate (both residential and commercial), and consumer, business and government expenditures.

Population Trends
By population, Atwater is the third largest of the six incorporated cities in Merced County, ranking behind Merced and Los Banos.  Merced County is the 23rd most populous of California’s 58 counties.   These rankings have been relatively unchanged since 2000, as the city, the county, and the state have all shown population growth.

Since 2010, Atwater’s population has increased at a faster rate than for Merced County overall, which in turn has grown faster than California’s (see Table 1.3‐1).  However, that growth occurred between 2010 and 2020, with little change in population since 2020.   The California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates the 2023 Atwater population at 31,418 and the county population at 285,337.

Household Trends
The number of households in Atwater also grew faster than in the county or California, at about the same rate as population growth.  However, the number of households continued to grow after 2020 in Atwater, Merced County, and California even where population did not in Atwater and the state.  For 2023, DOF estimates the city has 10,136 households, with the county at 86,906 households.  Due to the growth in the number of households after 2020 while population showed declines or limited growth, all three geographies showed a decrease in average household size to levels below those in 2010.  Even as the average sizes have declined, Atwater and Merced County still both have larger households on average than the state; larger households are likely to seek larger housing units than smaller households.  The discussion of the housing market below will examine whether the city and county housing stock characteristics reflect this demographic differentiation from the state overall.

TABLE 1.3‐1: POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD TRENDS, 2010, 2020, AND 2023 SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 2010, 2020 AND 2023, TABLE E5; BAE, 2023. % Change % Change
Population 2010 (a) 2020 (b) 2023 (b) 2010-2020 2020-2023 City of Atwater 28,168 31,751 31,418 12.7% -1.0%
Merced County 255,793 281,202 285,337 9.9% 1.5%
California 37,253,956 39,538,223 38,940,231 6.1% -1.5%
Households
City of Atwater 8,838 9,970 10,136 12.8% 1.7%
Merced County 75,642 83,464 86,906 10.3% 4.1%
California 12,568,167 13,475,623 13,739,470 7.2% 2.0%
Average Household Size
City of Atwater 3.18 3.18 3.09 0.0% -2.7%
Merced County 3.32 3.29 3.20 -0.8% -2.7%
California 2.90 2.86 2.77 -1.2% -3.4%

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐27  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Age Characteristics
Atwater and Merced County have a young population relative to California overall (see Table 1.3‐2), with the 2020 median age at 33.2 years in Atwater and 32.0 in the county, compared to 37.5 statewide.  These lower median ages are largely due to the presence of more non‐adult children; 29.4 percent of the Atwater population and 28.8 percent of the county population is under 18 years of age, in contrast to only 22.0 percent for California.  Each of the age categories displayed in Table 1.3‐2 shows at least some growth in Atwater and the county over the 2010 to 2020 decade, while the state has actually lost population for the under 25 group.  All three geographiesshow an increasing percentage and number of 65 and older persons, as the “baby boom” generation ages, but the proportions are lower in the city and county than in the state.

Nevertheless, the growth in the population for all age groups may indicate demand for increased services targeting different age groups, especially children and the elderly.

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐28 TABLE 1.3‐2: AGE DISTRIBUTION, 2010 AND 2020
NOTE: (A) TOTALS MAY NOT MATCH OTHER TABLES DUE TO INDEPENDENT ROUNDING OR DIFFERENT SOURCE DATA.

SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2010, TABLES P12 AND P13; U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2020, TABLES P12 AND P13; BAE, 2023.

Race and Ethnicity
Atwater and Merced County are “minority majority” areas.   The city and county ethnic profiles are dominated by large and increasing Latino populations.  The city’s population was approximately 60 percent Latino in 2020, up from 53 percent in 2010, and the county was approximately 62 percent, an increase from 55 percent in 2010 (see Table 1.3‐3).  While California also has an increasing Latino share of the total population, in 2020 the proportion was still slightly below 40 percent.  The city, county, and state are all undergoing an absolute decline in the white and Black non‐Hispanic populations, with increases for other smaller racial categories.

2010 2020
City of Atwater Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Under 18 9,016 32.0% 9,409 29.4% 393 4.4%
18-24 2,968 10.5% 3,015 9.4% 47 1.6%
25-34 4,004 14.2% 4,374 13.7% 370 9.2%
35-44 3,488 12.4% 4,173 13.1% 685 19.6%
45-54 3,314 11.8% 3,493 10.9% 179 5.4%
55-64 2,446 8.7% 3,409 10.7% 963 39.4%
65 or older 2,932 10.4% 4,097 12.8% 1,165 39.7%
Total Population (a) 28,168 100.0% 31,970 100.0% 3,802 13.5% Median Age
2010 2020
Merced County Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Under 18 80,698 31.5% 80,979 28.8% 281 0.3%
18-24 30,456 11.9% 32,004 11.4% 1,548 5.1%
25-34 35,060 13.7% 38,711 13.8% 3,651 10.4%
35-44 31,967 12.5% 35,409 12.6% 3,442 10.8%
45-54 31,007 12.1% 31,107 11.1% 100 0.3%
55-64 22,645 8.9% 29,511 10.5% 6,866 30.3%
65 or older 23,960 9.4% 33,481 11.9% 9,521 39.7%
Total Population 255,793 100.0% 281,202 100.0% 25,409 9.9% Median Age
2010 2020
California Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Under 18 9,295,040 25.0% 8,711,118 22.0% (583,922) -6.3% 18-24 3,922,951 10.5% 3,809,055 9.6% (113,896) -2.9%
25-34 5,317,877 14.3% 5,826,832 14.7% 508,955 9.6%
35-44 5,182,710 13.9% 5,326,009 13.5% 143,299 2.8%
45-54 5,252,371 14.1% 4,977,255 12.6% (275,116) -5.2%
55-64 4,036,493 10.8% 4,870,790 12.3% 834,297 20.7%
65 or older 4,246,514 11.4% 6,017,164 15.2% 1,770,650 41.7% Total Population 37,253,956 100.0% 39,538,223 100.0% 2,284,267 6.1% Median Age
Change, 2010-2020

35.2 37.5
Change, 2010-2020
30 33.2
Change, 2010-2020

29.6 32.0

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐29  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 1.3‐3: RACE AND ETHNICITY, 2010 AND 2020
NOTE: (A) TOTALS MAY NOT MATCH OTHER TABLES DUE TO INDEPENDENT ROUNDING OR DIFFERENT SOURCE DATA.

SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2010, TABLES P12 AND P13; U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2020, TABLES P12 AND P13; BAE, 2023.

Educational Attainment
The educational levels of an area’s residents are a key driver of local economic potential; a more educated populace is likely to be associated with stronger economic conditions including higher resident incomes and a more fully employable labor force.  As shown in Table 1.3‐4, Atwater and Merced County show lower level of educational achievement than California overall, with lower proportions of high school graduates and less than half the percentage of adults with bachelor’s degrees or higher. Nearly 30 percent of the city and county adults 25 or older have not completed high school, almost twice the statewide proportion.

Improving educational outcomes for local students would likely provide more employment opportunities and an improved quality of life for those students as well as improving the City’s attractiveness to the types of businesses that prioritize the educational attainment of the local workforce.

2010 2020
City of Atwater Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Hispanic/Latino (a) 14,808 52.6% 19,042 59.6% 4,234 28.6% Not Hispanic/Latino 13,360 47.4% 12,928 40.4% (432) -3.2% White 10,085 35.8% 8,788 27.5% (1,297) -12.9%
Black/African American 1,087 3.9% 1,001 3.1% (86) -7.9% Native American 132 0.5% 133 0.4% 1 0.8%
Asian 1,347 4.8% 1,684 5.3% 337 25.0%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 66 0.2% 60 0.2% (6) -9.1% Other 61 0.2% 144 0.5% 83 136.1%
Two or More Races 795 2.8% 5,014 15.7% 4,219 530.7%
Total Population 28,168 100.0% 31,970 100.0% 3,802 13.5% 2010 2020
Merced County Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Hispanic/Latino (a) 140,485 54.9% 173,857 61.8% 33,372 23.8% Not Hispanic/Latino 115,308 45.1% 107,345 38.2% (7,963) -6.9% White 81,599 31.9% 68,729 24.4% (12,870) -15.8%
Black/African American 8,785 3.4% 8,191 2.9% (594) -6.8% Native American 1,126 0.4% 1,164 0.4% 38 3.4%
Asian 18,183 7.1% 19,824 7.0% 1,641 9.0%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 476 0.2% 617 0.2% 141 29.6% Other 439 0.2% 1,242 0.4% 803 182.9%
Two or More Races 62,226 24.3% 87,873 31.2% 25,647 41.2% Total Population 255,793 100.0% 281,202 100.0% 25,409 9.9% 2010 2020
California Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Hispanic/Latino (a) 14,013,719 37.6% 15,579,652 39.4% 1,565,933 11.2% Not Hispanic/Latino 23,240,237 62.4% 23,958,571 60.6% 718,334 3.1% White 14,956,253 40.1% 13,714,587 34.7% (1,241,666) -8.3% Black/African American 2,163,804 5.8% 2,119,286 5.4% (44,518) -2.1% Native American 162,250 0.4% 156,085 0.4% (6,165) -3.8% Asian 4,775,070 12.8% 5,978,795 15.1% 1,203,725 25.2%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 128,577 0.3% 138,167 0.3% 9,590 7.5% Other 85,587 0.2% 223,929 0.6% 138,342 161.6%
Two or More Races 846,688 2.3% 4,132,513 10.5% 3,285,825 388.1% Total Population 37,253,956 100.0% 39,538,223 100.0% 2,284,267 6.1% Change, 2010-2020
Change, 2010-2020
Change, 2010-2020

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐30 TABLE 1.3‐4: EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT, 2021 FIVE‐YEAR SAMPLE DATA NOTE: (A) TOTALS MAY NOT MATCH OTHER TABLES DUE TO INDEPENDENT ROUNDING OR DIFFERENT SOURCE DATA.

SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2010, TABLES P12 AND P13; U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2020, TABLES P12 AND P13; BAE, 2023.

Household Composition
Atwater and the county have somewhat higher proportions of family households than California.  Over three‐fourths of their households are family households, compared to slightly less than 70 percent statewide (see Error! Reference source not found.).  A family household is a household with at least two related individuals in it.  The higher proportions of family households is linked to the high proportion of children as discussed above.

TABLE 1.3‐5: HOUSEHOLD TYPE, 2010 AND 2020
NOTE: (A) TOTALS MAY NOT MATCH OTHER TABLES DUE TO INDEPENDENT ROUNDING OR DIFFERENT SOURCE DATA.

City of Atwater Merced County
Educational Attainment Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Less than 9th Grade 3,061 15.6% 30,984 18.1% 2,380,657 8.8% 9th to 12th Grade, No Diploma 2,672 13.6% 17,822 10.4% 1,804,222 6.7% High School Graduate (incl. Equivalency) 4,703 23.9% 50,217 29.4% 5,578,997 20.7% Some College, No Degree 4,892 24.9% 34,479 20.2% 5,287,901 19.7% Associate Degree 1,740 8.8% 12,854 7.5% 2,120,275 7.9%
Bachelor's Degree 2,024 10.3% 16,472 9.6% 5,958,030 22.1% Graduate/Professional Degree 590 3.0% 8,166 4.8% 3,779,787 14.0% Total Population 25+ (a) 19,682 100.0% 170,994 100.0% 26,909,869 100.0% Population 25+ No High School
Diploma
Population 25+ High School Graduate
(incl. Equivalency) or Higher (%)
Population 25+ with Bachelor's
Degree or Higher (%)
California

36.2%

70.9% 71.5% 84.4%

13.3% 14.4%

29.1% 28.5% 15.6%
2010 2020
City of Atwater Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Family Households 6,823 77.2% 7,676 77.0% 853 12.5%
Non-Family Households 2,015 22.8% 2,294 23.0% 279 13.8% Total Households 8,838 100.0% 9,970 100.0% 1,132 12.8%
2020
Merced County Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Family Households 58,767 77.7% 64,458 77.2% 5,691 9.7%
Non-Family Households 16,875 22.3% 19,006 22.8% 2131 12.6% Total Households 75,642 100.0% 83,464 100.0% 7,822 10.3% 2020
California Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Family Households 8,642,473 68.7% 9,296,271 69.0% 653,798 72.8% Non-Family Households 3,935,025 31.3% 4,179,352 31.0% 244,327 27.2% Total Households 12,577,498 100.0% 13,475,623 100.0% 898,125 7.1% Change, 2010-2020
Change, 2010-2020
2010 Change, 2010-2020
2010

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
1‐31  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2010, TABLES P12 AND P13; U.S. CENSUS, DECENNIAL CENSUS 2020, TABLES P12 AND P13; BAE, 2023.

Household and Per Capita Income
Resident incomes are an indicator of local economic conditions.  Local spending is largely dependent on these income levels, with greater spending supporting more jobs and importantly to the local jurisdictions such as Atwater, those expenditures generate tax dollars to support city services.  As displayed in Error! Reference source not found., Atwater and the County have similar income characteristics, with median annual household incomes between $50,000 and $60,000 and annual per capita incomes between $23,000 and $25,000.  These are well below the income levels statewide, where the median household income per the 2021 American Community Survey is almost $85,000 and the per capita income is approximately $42,000 annually.  As discussed elsewhere in this analysis, these income levels are likely associated with the lower educational attainment levels in the city and county, and result in the lower per capita gross domestic product and retail sales in comparison to the state, as shown in Error! Reference source not found..

TABLE 1.3‐6: HOUSEHOLD AND PER CAPITA INCOME, 2021
NOTE: (A) TOTALS MAY NOT MATCH OTHER TABLES DUE TO INDEPENDENT ROUNDING OR DIFFERENT SOURCE DATA.

SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS, AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY 2017‐2021 FIVE‐YEAR SAMPLE PERIOD, TABLES B19001, B19013 AND B19301; BAE, 2023.

PROJECTED POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
This section provides a discussion of future population and employment growth in Atwater and Merced County.  The discussion reviews the following population and employment projections:
 California Department of Finance’s (DOF’s) Demographic Research Unit’s Interim Projections  Long‐Term Socio‐Economics Forecasts by County from Caltrans  Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) 2022 Regional Transportation Plan DOF’s projectionswere released in July 2023 and incorporate 2020 Census data and more current estimates from DOF.  These are county‐ and state‐level population projections only and go out to 2060.  Statewide estimates show California population stagnating long‐term, with some decades showing population declines, a reversal of long term historic growth trends.

City of Atwater Merced County California
Income Category Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Less than $15,000 963 9.3% 12,234 14.4% 1,185,540 8.8%
$15,000-$24,999 909 8.8% 8,909 10.5% 808,568 6.0%
$25,000-$34,999 871 8.4% 8,111 9.5% 829,411 6.2%
$35,000-$49,999 1,603 15.5% 9,130 10.7% 1,206,545 9.0%
$50,000-$74,999 2,095 20.3% 17,211 20.3% 1,974,452 14.7% $75,000-$99,999 1,329 12.9% 9,352 11.0% 1,639,647 12.2% $100,000-$149,999 1,792 17.4% 12,203 14.4% 2,359,723 17.6% $150,000-$199,999 495 4.8% 4,753 5.6% 1,343,134 10.0%
$200,000 or more 252 2.4% 3,064 3.6% 2,082,043 15.5%
Total Households (a) 10,309 100.0% 84,967 100.0% 13,429,063 100.0% Median HH Income
Per Capita Income
$59,436
$24,576
$53,992
$23,118
$84,907
$42,396

1.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 1‐32 The Caltrans estimates were released in March 2023, and also incorporate 2020 Census data.  Numerous variables are covered, including population, employment, households, net migration, income, and employment by major industry group.  Projections are available out to 2050.

The MCAG projectionsfor the 2022 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) were developed prior to the release of 2020 Census data and provide estimates of population and total employment through 2040.

Future Population Growth
Overall and as discussed above, Atwater and Merced County have shown population and household growth in recent years.  However, since 2020, estimates indicate that growth has stalled for Atwater, while the county continues to see population growth.   The projections series considered here vary considerably regarding future growth; DOF shows population increasing to 329,168 in 2040 (despite statewide trends of no estimated growth), with Caltrans projecting a 2040 population of 334,620, and MCAG projecting 346,085 by 2040 (see Error! Reference source not found.).  Given that Caltrans and DOF have provided more recent updates and incorporate the 2020 Census, their projections may more accurately reflect long‐term patterns.  Assuming Atwater mirrors county trends and maintains a constant percentage of the countywide population as estimated by DOF, Atwater is projected to grow gradually from 31,751 in 2020 to approximately 37,000 personsin 2050.  This would roughly translate to a 16 percent increase in population, households, and housing unit demand.

TABLE 1.3‐7: HOUSEHOLD AND POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NOTE: NOTES:
(A)  ATWATER 2020 POPULATION FROM TABLE 1.  FUTURE POPULATION ESTIMATES BASED ON CITY SHARE OF DOF‐PROJECTED COUNTY POPULATION AT 11 PERCENT, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY THE RATIO IN 2023; THIS RATIO HAS BEEN RELATIVELY CONSTANT OVER THE 2010 THROUGH 2023 PERIOD.  FUTURE ESTIMATES FOR ATWATER ROUNDED TO NEAREST 100.
(B)  2020 AND FUTURE EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES BASED ON CITY SHARE OF JOBS BASED ON RATIO OF JOBS IN CITY TO JOBS IN COUNTY IN 2022 AS SHOWN IN TABLE 1.3‐9.  ESTIMATES ROUNDED TO NEAREST 100.

SOURCES: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE (DOF) REPORT P‐2A; MERCED COUNTY ASSOCIATION OFGOVERNMENTS 2022 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN; CALTRANS LONG‐TERM SOCIO‐ECONOMIC FORECASTS BY COUNTY, 2022;QUARTERLY CENSUS OF EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES (QCEW),US BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, 2023; BAE, 20233.

County % Change % Change % Change
Population 2020 2030 2040 2050 2020-2030 2030-2040 2040-2050 Merced County
DOF 280,909 311,578 329,168 336,170 10.9% 5.6% 2.1%
Caltrans 280,873 309,756 334,620 352,891 10.3% 8.0% 5.5% MCAG RTP 284,761 314,690 346,085 na 10.5% 10.0% na
Atwater (a) 31,751 34,300 36,200 37,000
County
Employment
Caltrans 81,120 91,804 93,622 95,589 13.2% 2.0% 2.1%
MCAG RTP 80,882 95494 105,544 na 18.1% 10.5% na
Atwater (b) 7,600 8,600 8,700 8,900

City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-0

Chapter 2
Transportation and Circulation
This Chapter includes the following topics:

2.1 Pedestrian Facilities

2.2 Bicycle Facilities

2.3 Transit Facilities

2.4 Roadway System

2.5 Freight Rail, Goods Movement and
Aviation
The Transportation and Circulation chapter describes the existing transportation conditions in Atwater. A discussion of pertinent local regulations and plans is presented. This chapter also describes transportation facilities in Atwater that accommodate pedestrians, bicycles, transit, freight, and automobiles, plus an description of commute trip patterns, and roadway operations.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-1 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
The following chapter describes the existing physical and operational characteristics affecting the transportation system in the City of Atwater. Sections in this chapter are divided by mode and include a review of the regulatory setting and followed by an overview of modal infrastructure. This chapter includes the following sections:

2.1 Pedestrian Facilities

2.2 Bicycle Facilities

2.3 Transit Facilities

2.4 Roadway System

2.5 Freight Rail, Goods Movement and Aviation

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-2

FINDINGS, ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES
The City of Atwater follows a typical suburban pattern, with distinct areas of residential, commercial, and retail areas.

Commercial uses serve the City of Atwater, as well as the community of Winton to the north of the city. The city also serves as a major commercial destination for the City of Merced and City of Livingston. For example, the city is served by nine supermarkets – about as many as the City of Merced – despite being about one-third of the population of Merced.

Castle Commerce Center (at Castle Airport) has recently received funding to implement the Inland Port vision. This includes upgraded rail connections for future uses that will better connect with ports in Oakland, Long Beach and Los Angeles. Castle Commerce Center also has access to the sixth longest runway in California at Castle Airport.

Levels of Service (LOS): The current daily traffic volume on all of the study roadway segments operate at LOS C or D, indicating that these roadways operate within the requirements of current Atwater General Plan policy. The current peak hour intersection operations at the study intersections is LOS D or better, indicating that these roadways operate within the requirements of current Atwater General Plan policy.

Transportation Safety: Data from the UC Berkeley Transportation Injury Mapping System for the January 2020 through December 2022 period indicated that a total of 299 crashes were reported within the City of Atwater limits, resulting in 31 reported serious injuries and six fatalities. Hotspot mapping indicates that the Applegate Road, Bellevue Avenue, Juniper Avenue, Winton Way and Buhach Road corridors are the primary locations with collisions.

Complete Streets and Safe Systems. The transportation network in Atwater is mainly catered towards driving, with a grid system of multilane arterials serving as the backbone of travel. The roadway system is complemented by a nearly complete pedestrian system and a partially complete bicycle facility network. However, some gaps remain, particularly in the downtown area (e.g. First Street) and other older areas of the city. Reconfiguring the street system to incorporate Safe Systems principles, including more bicycle and pedestrian facilities, may help lower the crash rate in Atwater, where six people were killed and 31 people were injured over the last three years of available data (2020-2022).

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): The VMT data indicates that residents in the city of Atwater generally drive 17 percent less than the average Merced County resident. Similarly, the average worker in the City of Atwater has a two-way commute that is 16 percent shorter than the average Merced County worker.

Transit Usage. The City of Atwater is served by multiple local and regional bus routes that operate at 60-minute intervals during the weekday. Increasing the use of public transit by increasing frequencies could help address the high drive-alone mode share for the city, which may help it qualify for additional transportation funding dollars in the future.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-3 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Unlocking Castle Commerce Center. The Castle Commerce Center area is expected to undergo a major transformation in the coming decades as Castle Airport becomes an Inland Port.

Employment at the Castle Commerce Center will likely increase, which provides an opportunity for more Atwater residents to also work in Atwater. These jobs could be accessed by public transposition given the current status of the network for these modes.

Opportunities for Infill Development. There are multiple opportunities for infill development in Atwater, including several large parcels of land in the downtown area. Parcels next to the Union Pacific Railroad may also be considered for the planned future Altamont Corridor Express station envisioned as part of the Merced extension.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-4

2.1 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
This section describes the pedestrian circulation system in the City of Atwater. The existing sidewalk system, trail system, and connectivity between areas of residential, commercial, employment and schools are described.

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework discussion describes local regulations that guide land use decisions. Adopted and upcoming plans that pertain to the City are also described.

City of Atwater General Plan Circulation Element
The purpose of the Circulation Element is to provide the policy framework for regulation and development of the circulation system in the City of Atwater. The existing General Plan includes policies related to providing a safe and efficient pedestrian circulation system connecting all destinations in the city. The existing General Plan also notes new public and private developments should install sidewalks and other pedestrian features on the periphery of sites as well as internal parking areas.

Merced County Regional Transportation Plan
The 2022 Merced County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is intended to guide pedestrian mobility investments throughout Merced County. The RTP considers greenhouse gas reductions per Senate Bill 375 and other state requirements. The RTP is one of many steps being taken to provide for alternative modes of travel and to address traffic congestion in the region by developing an efficient and coordinated multimodal transportation system. A number of active transportation projects are planned for implementation in the core of the City of Atwater.

Merced County Regional Active Transportation Plan (Upcoming, 2024) The Merced County Regional Active Transportation Plan (to be finalized in the first half of 2024) will build upon the RTP with specific recommendations for local and regional multimodal transportation investments.

The Regional Active Transportation Plan will also include further project prioritization for pedestrianrelated improvements in and around the City of Atwater.

EXISTING SETTING
The existing pedestrian system in the City of Atwater is generally comprised of sidewalks along roadways that have been built over the course of the buildout of the city. The vast majority of roadways include sidewalks along both sides of the street, providing pedestrian access to the residential, commercial, employment and school areas of the city. However, some gaps remain, particularly in the downtown area (e.g. First Street) and other older areas of the city. The Merced County Regional Active Transportation Plan outreach effort noted several locations of community concern regarding critical gaps in the sidewalk network. Many of these gaps are located immediately adjacent to the City limits or along City roadways where the fronting land is undeveloped (e.g. Broadway Avenue east of Almador Terrace). Notably, a sidewalk is only provided along one side of the Applegate Road State Route 99 overcrossing, and no sidewalks are provided under SR 99 at either Atwater Boulevard undercrossing.

Many sidewalks are located at the immediate curb face (i.e. little separation from travel lanes), which may increase pedestrian discomfort. Most signalized intersections include a full set of signalized crosswalks; marked pedestrian crossings of arterial roadways are typically confined to signalized intersections, which may limit pedestrian mobility across the city’s north-south and east-west arterials. Figure 2.1-1 identifies the locations of critical gaps in the sidewalk system.

Castle
Airport
E Bellevue Rd
Juniper Ave
Olive Ave
Liberty Ave
Almond Ave
Walnut Ave
Yosemite Hwy
Westside Blvd Bellevue Rd
Atwater Jordan Blvd
Santa Fe Ave
Applegate Rd
Bert Crane Rd
Gurr Rd
Franklin Rd
Snelling Hwy
N Winton Wy
Vine Ave
Central Ave
Sultana Dr
Buhach Rd
Atwater Blvd

ATWATER
MERCED

LIVINGSTON
WINTON
Arena
99 140
99 59
J7
WC23-4029_2.1-1_SidewalkGaps
Critical Gaps in Sidewalk System
Figure 2.1–1
City Limit Sidewalk Gap
Sphere of Inuence Area
Planning Area

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-6

2.2 BICYCLE FACILITIES
This section describes the bicycle circulation system in the City of Atwater. The existing bicycle system, trail system, and connectivity between areas of residential, commercial, employment and schools are described.

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework discussion describes local regulations that guide land use decisions. Adopted plans that pertain to the City are also described.

City of Atwater General Plan Circulation Element
The purpose of the Circulation Element is to provide the policy framework for regulation and development of the circulation system in the City of Atwater. The existing General Plan includes policies related to development of an interconnected system of bikeways and trails connecting all destinations in the city. The existing General Plan also includes consideration of bicycle circulation in the review of private and public projects, including requiring that the cost of bicycle lanes be paid by developments.

Merced County Regional Transportation Plan
The 2022 Merced County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is intended to guide bicycle mobility investments throughout Merced County. The RTP considers greenhouse gas reductions per Senate Bill 375 and other state requirements. The RTP is one of many steps being taken to provide for alternative modes of travel and to address traffic congestion in the region by developing an efficient and coordinated multimodal transportation system. A number of active transportation projects are planned for implementation in the core of the City of Atwater. The RTP quotes the 2008 Regional Bikeway Plan as the current bikeway planning document for the City of Atwater.

Merced County Regional Active Transportation Plan (Upcoming, 2024) The Merced County Regional Active Transportation Plan (to be finalized in the first half of 2024) will build upon the RTP with specific recommendations for local and regional multimodal transportation investments.

The Regional Active Transportation Plan will also include further project prioritization for bicycle-related improvements in and around the City of Atwater. This Plan will supersede the 2008 Regional Bikeway Plan.

EXISTING SETTING
Bicycle facilities are classified according to a typology established by Caltrans as documented in its Highway Design Manual, Chapter 1000, Topic 1002. The Caltrans standards provide for distinct types of bikeway facilities, as described below:
(1) Shared Roadway (No Bikeway Designation). Most bicycle travel occurs on streets and highways without bikeway designations. In some instances, entire street systems may be fully adequate for safe and efficient bicycle travel, where signing and pavement marking for bicycle use may be unnecessary. In other cases, prior to designation as a bikeway, routes may need improvements for bicycle travel. Many rural highways are used by touring bicyclists for intercity and recreational travel. It might be inappropriate to designate the highways as bikeways because of the limited use and the lack of continuity with other bike routes.

However, the development and maintenance of 4-foot paved roadway shoulders with a standard four-inch edge line can significantly improve the safety and convenience for bicyclists and motorists along such routes.
(2) Class I Bikeway (Bike Path). Generally, bike paths should be used to serve corridors not served by streets and highways or where wide right of way exists, permitting such facilities to be constructed away from the

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-7 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater influence of parallel streets. Bike paths should offer opportunities not provided by the road system. They can either provide a recreational opportunity, or in some instances, can serve as direct high-speed commute routes if cross flow by motor vehicles and pedestrian conflicts can be minimized. The most common applications are along rivers, ocean fronts, canals, utility right of way, abandoned railroad right of way, within school campuses, or within and between parks. There may also be situations where such facilities can be provided as part of planned developments. Another common application of Class I facilities is to close gaps to bicycle travel caused by construction of freeways or because of the existence of natural barriers (rivers, mountains, etc.).
(3) Class II Bikeway (Bike Lane). Bike lanes are established along streets in corridors where there is significant bicycle demand, and where there are distinct needs that can be served by them. The purpose should be to improve conditions for bicyclists in the corridors. Bike lanes are intended to delineate the right of way assigned to bicyclists and motorists and to provide for more predictable movements by each. But a more important reason for constructing bike lanes is to better accommodate bicyclists through corridors where insufficient room exists for side-by-side sharing of existing streets by motorists and bicyclists. This can be accomplished by reducing the number of lanes, reducing lane width, or prohibiting or reconfiguring parking on given streets in order to delineate bike lanes. In addition, other things can be done on bike lane streets to improve the situation for bicyclists that might not be possible on all streets (e.g., improvements to the surface, augmented sweeping programs,special signal facilities, etc.). Generally, pavement markings alone will not measurably enhance bicycling. If bicycle travel is to be provided by delineation, attention should be made to assure that high levels of service are provided with these lanes. It is important to meet bicyclist expectations and increase bicyclist perception of service quality, where capacity analysis demonstrates service quality measures are improved from the bicyclist’s point of view. (4) Class III Bikeway (Bike Route). Bike routes are shared facilities which serve either to: (a) Provide continuity to other bicycle facilities (usually Class II bikeways); or (b) Designate preferred routes through high demand corridors. As with bike lanes, the designation of bike routes should indicate to bicyclists that there are particular advantages to using these routes as compared with alternative routes. This means that responsible agencies have taken actions to assure that these routes are suitable as shared routes and will be maintained in a manner consistent with the needs of bicyclists. Normally, bike routes are shared with motor vehicles. The use of sidewalks as Class III bikeways is strongly discouraged. (5) CLASS IV BIKEWAYS (SEPARATED BIKEWAYS). A Class IV bikeway (separated bikeway) is a bikeway for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation required between the separated bikeway and the through vehicular traffic. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible posts, inflexible barriers, or on-street parking.

Figure 2.2-1 presents current and proposed bicycle facilities in Atwater identified in the 2008 Regional Bikeways Plan. Class I bikeways are provided along Buhach Road, Shaffer Road, and Juniper Avenue. Class II bikeways are provided along several streets, notably along Winton Way north of Bellevue Avenue, Atwater Boulevard west of Winton Way. Class I, II or III bikeways are proposed along most arterial roadways in the city, and a Class I path is envisioned for the Merced Irrigation District/Livingston Canal corridor.

Castle
Airport
E Bellevue Rd
Juniper Ave
Olive Ave
Liberty Ave
Almond Ave
Walnut Ave
Yosemite Hwy
Westside Blvd Bellevue Rd
Atwater Jordan Blvd
Santa Fe Ave
Applegate Rd
Bert Crane Rd
Gurr Rd
Franklin Rd
Snelling Hwy
N Winton Wy
Vine Ave
Central Ave
Sultana Dr
Buhach Rd
Atwater Blvd

ATWATER
MERCED

LIVINGSTON
WINTON
Arena
99 140
99 59
J7
WC23-4029_2.2-1_BikeNet
Current and Proposed Bicycle Facilities
Figure 2.2–1
City Limit
Sphere of Inuence Area
Planning Area
Existing Proposed
Class 1 Bike Path
Class 2 Bike Lane
Class 3 Bike Route

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-9 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

2.3 TRANSIT FACILITIES
This section summarizes current and proposed public transit services that connect destinations within the City of Atwater as well as around the region. This section includes a review of bus and passenger rail transit facilities.

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework discussion describes local regulations that guide land use decisions. Adopted plans that pertain to the City are also described.

City of Atwater General Plan Circulation Element
The purpose of the Circulation Element is to provide the policy framework for regulation and development of the circulation system in the City of Atwater. The existing General Plan includes policies related to promoting local and regional transit usage for residents, employees and visitors in the city. The existing General Plan also includes consideration of connections to UC Merced, coordination with Merced County Transit (also known as “The Bus”), and a desire to provide high-quality bus stops for residents within one mile of their residence (with a distance of no more than one-half mile preferred).

Merced County Regional Transportation Plan
The 2022 Merced County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is intended to guide transit investments throughout Merced County. The RTP considers greenhouse gas reductions per Senate Bill 375 and other state requirements. The RTP is one of many steps being taken to provide for alternative modes of travel and to address traffic congestion in the region by developing an efficient and coordinated multi-modal transportation system. A number of transit projects are planned for the City of Atwater.

Merced County Short Range Transit Plan (2022-2027)
The Merced County Short Range Transit Plan provides information on current and planned bus transit service for a five-year period. The document is prepared by the Merced County Association of Governments and considers the City of Atwater and community of Winton in tandem.

EXISTING SETTING
Public Bus Transit
Public bus transit in the Atwater area is provided by Merced County Transit, providing service under the name “The Bus.” The City of Atwater “Transpo Center” local and regional transit hub is located at Atwater Boulevard/Second Street. The Bus provides local and regional transit service in Atwater, which are summarized below.

LOCAL TRANSIT SERVICE
Local transit services include the following routes in Atwater:
• The Bus Route A1 “Atwater Cross Town” – A loop route serving Winton Way, Bellevue Road, Castle Airport, Buhach Road, Juniper Avenue, Shaffer Road, downtown Atwater, the Atwater Transpo Center, and the Atwater Target store. Weekday service is provided at 60-minute intervals from 6:22 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., with weekend service at 60-minute intervals from 8:49 a.m. to 6:05 p.m. • The Bus Route A2 “Winton Way” - A generally north-south aligned route serving the Winton Way corridor from Winton in the north to the Atwater Target store in the south; a deviation to the Atwater Transpo Center is provided for both directions of the route. Weekday service is provided

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-10 at 60-minute intervals from 6:18 a.m. to 7:04 p.m., with weekend service at 60-minute intervals from 8:32 a.m. to 5:34 p.m.

REGIONAL TRANSIT SERVICE
Regional transit services include the following routes in Atwater; it is noted that many of these routes include several stops within the City of Atwater and by doing so supplement the local transit service routes noted previously.
• The Bus Route W1 “Winton Commuter” – This route serves local streets paralleling SR 99 between the Merced Transpo Center and the community of Winton. Within Atwater, the route serves the Green Sands Avenue corridor, Buhach Road corridor, Castle Airport, the Bellevue Road corridor, and the Winton Way corridor; this route does not serve the Atwater Transpo Center. Weekday service is generally provided at 60-minute intervals from 5:23 a.m. to 8:47 p.m., with weekend service at 120- to 150-minute intervals from 7:21 a.m. to 6:25 p.m. • The Bus Route T “Turlock Commuter” – This route serves Atwater and the communities of Turlock, Delhi, Livingston, and Merced via the Atwater Transpo Center; the route largely uses SR 99, and the only Atwater stop is at the Atwater Transpo Center. Weekday service is provided at 60-minute intervals from 5:30 a.m. to 8:50 p.m., with weekend service at 150- to 180-minute intervals from 9:00 a.m. to 6:45 p.m.
• The Bus Route L “Livingston Commuter” – This route serves local streets paralleling SR 99 between the Merced Transpo Center and the community of Livingston via northern Atwater and Winton.

Within Atwater, the route serves Castle Airport, the Bellevue Road corridor, and the Winton Way corridor; this route does not serve the Atwater Transpo Center. Weekday service is provided at 90- minute intervals from 6:14 a.m. to 8:14 p.m., with weekend service at 60- to 120-minute intervals from 6:36 a.m. to 7:51 p.m.

Figure 2.3-1 presents current public bus transit services and routings in the City of Atwater. It is noted that the Short Range Transit Plan proposes a new Atwater Commuter service between Castle Airport, the Atwater Transpo Center, and the Merced Transpo Center.

Passenger Rail Service
Passenger rail service for Atwater is provided by the Merced Amtrak station, which is served by the Amtrak San Joaquins service between Bakersfield and Oakland. An Amtrak Thruway motorcoach connection in Bakersfield provides service to the Los Angeles metro region. The City of Merced is also a proposed station along the California High Speed Rail system.

The downtown Atwater area is also proposed to be a potential station location for the proposed extension of the Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) passenger rail route between Merced and San Jose.

Castle
Airport
E Bellevue Rd
Juniper Ave
Olive Ave
Liberty Ave
Almond Ave
Walnut Ave
Yosemite Hwy
Westside Blvd Bellevue Rd
Atwater Jordan Blvd
Santa Fe Ave
Applegate Rd
Bert Crane Rd
Gurr Rd
Franklin Rd
Snelling Hwy
N Winton Wy
Vine Ave
Central Ave
Sultana Dr
Buhach Rd
Atwater Blvd

ATWATER
MERCED

LIVINGSTON
WINTON
Arena
99 140
99 59
J7
T
WC23-4029_2.3-1_Transit
Existing Public Bus Transit Services
Figure 2.3–1
City Limit
Sphere of Inuence Area
Planning Area
Regional Bus Service Local Bus Service On-Demand Service T Atwater Transpo Center

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-12

2.4 ROADWAY SYSTEM
This section summarizes the roadway system, travel demand and modal choice within the City of Atwater.

Roadway system classifications, proposed roadway network improvements, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), traffic operations, and safety data are discussed.

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework discussion describes local regulations that guide land use decisions. Adopted plans that pertain to the City are also described.

City of Atwater General Plan Circulation Element
The purpose of the Circulation Element is to provide the policy framework for regulation and development of the circulation system in the City of Atwater. The existing General Plan includes policies related to current and future automobile access and mobility for residents, employees and visitors in the city. The existing General Plan indicates support for the following regional and local roadway improvements in and around the City of Atwater.

LOCAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
• Atwater Boulevard: Widen to four lanes from Wedel Street to Winton Way • Atwater Boulevard: Widen to four lanes from Winton Way to Shaffer Road

REGIONAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
• Expansion of SR 99 from four lanes to eight lanes
• Upgrade of Castle Parkway to four lanes from SR 99 to Santa Fe Avenue (Note: This is the AtwaterMerced Expressway project) • Improvements at SR 99/Applegate Road and SR 99/Shaffer Road interchanges • Extension of Bellevue Road to SR 99/Westside Boulevard interchange Merced County Regional Transportation Plan
The 2022 Merced County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is intended to guide roadway system investments throughout Merced County. The RTP considers greenhouse gas reductions per Senate Bill 375 and other state requirements. A number of regionally-focused roadway projects have been adopted that will change and improve circulation in and around the Atwater area.

Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, California Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 743 into law. SB 743 changed transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance. These changes included elimination of auto delay, level of service (LOS), and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts in many or all parts of California. The CEQA Guidelines developed by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research utilize vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the primary means of measuring transportation impacts.

Furthermore, parking impacts will not be considered significant impacts on the environment for select development projects within infill areas with nearby frequent transit service. According to the legislative intent contained in SB 743, these changes to current practice were necessary to more appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-13 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater State of California (AB 1358) and Caltrans Regarding Complete Streets On September 30, 2008, the California Complete Streets Act of 2008 was signed into law. As of January 2011, AB 1358 requires any substantive revision of the circulation/mobility element of a city or county’s general plan to identify how they will safely accommodate the circulation of all users of the roadway including pedestrians, bicyclists, children, seniors, individuals with disabilities, and transit riders, as well as motorists.

Caltrans Deputy Directive 64-R1: Complete Streets – Integrating the Transportation System In 2001, Caltrans adopted Deputy Directive 64; a policy directive related to non-motorized travel throughout the State. In October 2008, Deputy Directive 64 was strengthened to reflect changing priorities and challenges. Deputy Directive 64-R1 states:

The Department views all transportation improvements as opportunities to improve safety, access, and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system. Providing safe mobility for all users, including motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders, contributes to the Department's mission/vision:
"Improving Mobility across California.”
Successful long-term implementation of this directive is intended to result in more options for people to go from one place to another, less traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, more walkable communities (with healthier, more active people), and fewer barriers for older adults, children, and people with disabilities.

Director’s Policy 22: Director’s Policy on Context Sensitive Solutions Director’s Policy 22, a policy regarding the use of “Context Sensitive Solutions” on all State highways, was adopted by Caltrans in November of 2001. The policy reads:

The Department uses “Context Sensitive Solutions” as an approach to plan, design, construct, maintain, and operate its transportation system. These solutions use innovative and inclusive approaches that integrate and balance community, aesthetic, historic, and environmental values with transportation safety, maintenance, and performance goals. Context sensitive solutions are reached through a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach involving all stakeholders.

The context of all projects and activities is a key factor in reaching decisions. It is considered for all State transportation and support facilities when defining, developing, and evaluating options. When considering the context, issues such as funding feasibility, maintenance feasibility, traffic demand, impact on alternate routes, impact on safety, and relevant laws, rules, and regulations must be addressed.

The policy recognizes that “in towns and cities across California, the State highway may be the only through street or may function as a local street,” that “these communities desire that their main street be an economic, social, and cultural asset as well as provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods,” and that “communities want transportation projects to provide opportunities for enhanced nonmotorized travel and visual quality.” The policy acknowledges that addressing these needs will assure that transportation solutions meet more than just traffic and operational objectives.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-14

EXISTING SETTING
Vehicle Miles Traveled & Community Travel Characteristics A common indicator used to quantify the amount of motor vehicle use in a specified area is Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). One VMT is defined as any type of motor vehicle being driven one mile. Many factors affect VMT, including the average distance residents commute to work, school, and shopping, as well as the proportion of trips that are made by non-automobile modes. Areas that have a diverse land use mix and ample facilities for non-automobile modes, including transit, tend to generate lower VMT than autooriented rural and suburban areas where residents live at a distance from work, school, and other amenities.

An important consideration related to transportation is that Senate Bill (SB) 743 has changed the metric used to identify potential significant transportation impacts in CEQA analysis. SB 743 directed the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify a new metric and to recommend analysis methodology and thresholds. OPR selected VMT as the preferred metric and has finalized guidance material that went into effect in 2020. However, SB 743 does not prevent a city or county from continuing to analyze delay or LOS as part of other plans (i.e., the general plan), studies, or on-going network monitoring.

However, LOS metrics may no longer constitute the sole basis for CEQA impacts. SB 743 did not change the discretion that lead agencies have to select methodology or define their own significance thresholds, but the guidance being developed by OPR should be carefully considered by lead agencies when they ultimately finalize their own recommended practices. A key factor should be how the lead agency / community values VMT reduction, especially with regards to its influence on reducing greenhouse gases, promoting active transportation, and encouraging infill development, all of which, are identified as objectives in the legislative intent of SB 743. Absent a locally established VMT threshold, the current OPR threshold guidance as contained in Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, OPR, December 2018, should be used. OPR recommends that for land use projects, VMT thresholds are set at fifteen percent (15%) below baseline VMT/capita for the city or region in suburban areas. The City of Atwater has not adopted guidelines relating to VMT; the Merced County Association of Governments has provided supplemental guidance for member agencies to consider in adoption of VMT-related thresholds.

Year 2019 data from the VMT+ database of VMT information for the City of Atwater is presented below.

VMT+ is based on the StreetLight Data location-based services “Big Data” database of mobile device-based travel patterns.
• Average City of Atwater Home-Based Residential VMT per Resident: 22.0 vehicle-miles per day • Average City of Atwater Home-Based Work “Commute” VMT per Employee: 12.7 vehicle-miles per day
• Average Merced County Home-Based Residential VMT per Resident: 25.9 vehicle-miles per day • Average Merced County Home-Based Work “Commute” VMT per Employee: 15.2 vehicle-miles per day
The VMT+ data indicates that residents in the City of Atwater generally drive 17 percent less than the average Merced County resident. Similarly, the average worker in the city of Atwater has a two-way commute that is 16 percent shorter than the average Merced County worker.

Data from the latest American Community Survey indicate that over 98 percent of employed residents in Atwater have access to at least one automobile. Over all employed residents in Atwater, the American Community Survey indicates the following mode split:

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-15 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater • Drive alone: 82.2%
• Carpool: 8.9%
• Public Transit: 0.3%
• Walking: 1.1%
• Bicycle: 0.3%
• Taxicab, motorcycle, other: 3.6%
• Work from home: 3.6%
Roadway System & Complete Streets
The network of roadways in and around Atwater consists of arterials, connectors and local streets. The State Route 99 freeway passes through southern Atwater near the downtown area; SR 99 runs from Red Bluff in the north to Wheeler Ridge via Sacramento, Stockton, Fresno and Bakersfield. Interchanges connecting SR 99 with the Atwater roadway system are provided at Westside Boulevard (future Bellevue Avenue extension), Atwater Boulevard, Applegate Road, Shaffer Road, and Atwater-Merced Expressway.

The roadway system in Atwater serves a variety of modes through designs that were typical in the mid to late-20th century. Many arterial streets (described below) allow for travel speeds at or beyond 35 milesper-hour, which can cause friction between the pedestrian, bicycle and automobile modes, even when sidewalks and bicycle facilities are present. The federal Safe Systems approach now allows communities to re-envision their street network to provide for more complete modal balance on the street network.

The following provides an overview of the existing roadway system, along with an analysis of how well it is able to carry current traffic loads. Many of Atwater’s streets have existed since the mid-20th Century. Figure

2.4-1 presents the current General Plan Circulation Diagram.

ARTERIALS
Atwater's arterial streets are the primary movers of traffic and provide the primary routes within and through the city, and they also carry traffic to and from the regional highways and other communities. The city arterial system is generally laid out on a grid pattern, although a section of the grid in the downtown area (generally bound by Juniper Avenue, Atwater Boulevard, Shaffer Road and Winton Way) is offset about 45 degrees from the remainder of the grid.

North-South Arterials
• Winton Way/Applegate Road
• First Street
• Shaffer Road
• Buhach Road
• Atwater-Merced Expressway
East-West Arterials
• Bellevue Avenue
• Santa Fe Road (diagonal)
• Broadway Avenue
• Atwater Boulevard

Note: With the exception of Highways 140 and 59, roads not indicated with a specifc classication are considered urban and rural local roads.

Castle
Airport
E Bellevue Rd
Juniper Ave Ave Two
Green Sands Ave
Atwater Blvd
Commerce Ave
Bell Dr
Olive Ave
Liberty Ave
Bellevue Rd
Atwater Jordan Blvd
Santa Fe Ave
Applegate Rd
Bert Crane Rd
Gurr Rd
Franklin Rd
N Winton Wy
Vine Ave
Central Ave
Buhach Rd
Shafter Rd
First St
ATWATER 99
99 J7
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
WC23-4029_2.4-1_Circulation
2020 General Plan Circulation Diagram
Figure 2.4–1
City Limit 6-8-Lane Freeway
4-Lane Expressway
4-Lane Urban Major Arterial
2-Lane Urban Arterial
2-Lane Urban Connector
Sphere of Inuence Area
Planning Area

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-17 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

CONNECTORS
Connectors provide additional connections between local streets and arterial roadways and serve to balance access and mobility. Travel speeds are generally lower on these roadways than on arterials, but speeds are higher than on local streets. These routes are also found in a grid pattern, similar to the arterial system.

North-South Connectors
• Central Avenue
• Fifth Street
• Third Street
• High Street
• Giannini Road
East-West Connectors
• Juniper Avenue
• Cedar Avenue
• Commerce Avenue

LOCAL STREETS
The remainder of Atwater’s roadways are considered local streets that serve to connect vehicles from individual neighborhoods to the collector system. The older portions of the City of Atwater are generally along a grid pattern, so local streets offer relatively continuous connectivity. Local streets in newer residential subdivisions are generally oriented around cul-de-sacs and non-direct through streets that lack the connectivity of Atwater's older neighborhoods.

KEY INTERSECTIONS
In urban areas the quality of traffic flow is often governed by the flow of traffic through signalized intersections. The following intersections in Atwater are key arterial-arterial and arterial-connector intersections that govern city-wide flows:
• Winton Way/Bellevue Road
• Winton Way/Juniper Avenue
• Applegate Road-Winton Way/Atwater Boulevard
• Applegate Road/Bell Drive-Commerce Avenue
• Shaffer Road/Atwater Boulevard
• Shaffer Road/Juniper Avenue
• First Street/Shaffer Road/Bellevue Road
• Buhach Road/Bellevue Road
• Buhach Road/Juniper Avenue-West Avenue Two
• Buhach Road/Green Sands Avenue
The above list is not intended to be an exhaustive list of signalized intersections; rather, the list includes key intersections that could become bottlenecks under General Plan Buildout if not analyzed.

Roadway Segment Level of Service
Local agencies adopt their goals for the operation of the circulation system based on Level of Service (LOS).

Level of Service is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions and can be applied to individual roadway segments and intersections. Under LOS analysis a letter grade, “A” through “F,” corresponds to progressively worsening traffic service at a facility.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-18 While not a CEQA significance criteria, this setting document makes use of LOS to describe general traffic conditions on roadway segments, and presents the methods currently used to evaluate the operation of intersections. The criteria identified for each are described below.

ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
Roadway LOS is based upon a comparison of the traffic volume along the roadway with the capacity of that roadway. The City of Atwater has established LOS D as the threshold below which roadways are considered to be operating unacceptably. Table 2.4-1 shows the daily traffic volumes thresholds used in the current General Plan for assessing traffic conditions on collector and arterial roadways that would correspond with LOS C, D and E.

TABLE 2.4-1: GENERAL LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS BASED ON DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES STREET

CLASSIFICATION LANES CONTROL

MAXIMUM DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUME AT LOS
C D E
Rural Arterial Roadway 2 Undivided <6,800 14,100 17,400 Arterial
2 undivided <9,700 17,600 18,700
4 undivided <17,500 27,400 28,900
4 divided <19,200 35,400 37,400
SOURCES: FEHR & PEERS, 2023.

INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
While LOS is not a CEQA significance criterion, like other roadway facilities, intersections can be evaluated using a LOS approach. While current conditions are not addressed herein, the applicable methodologies are provided in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition (HCM). At signalized intersections, the LOS rating is based on the weighted average control delay measured in seconds per vehicle. The relationship between the control delay and LOS for signalized intersections is summarized in Table 2.4-2. The City of Atwater utilizes Level of Service D as the acceptable operating threshold for individual intersections.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-19 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 2.4-2: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA

LEVEL OF

SERVICE

DESCRIPTION

AVERAGE

CONTROL DELAY
(SECONDS/VEH)
A Free flow/non-congested operation. Turning movements are easily made and all queues clear in a single signal cycle. ≤ 10.0 B
Stable operation/minimal delays. An occasional approach phase is fully utilized. Drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within platoons of vehicles.
> 10.0 to 20.0
C Stable operation/acceptable delays. Major approach phases fully utilized. Backups may develop behind turning vehicles. > 20.0 to 35.0 D
Approaching unstable operation/tolerable delays. Drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indication. Queues may develop but dissipate rapidly, without excessive delays. > 35.0 to 55.0
E
Unstable operation/significant delays. Volumes at or near capacity.

Vehicles may wait through several signal cycles. Long queues form upstream of intersection.
> 55.0 to 80.0
F Forced flow/excessive delays. Represents jammed conditions. Traffic demand exceeds capacity. Queues may block upstream intersection. > 80.0 SOURCE: HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL, TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD, 6TH EDITION

ROADWAY SEGMENT TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Existing roadway segment traffic operations were analyzed based on traffic counts made at locations on major roads in Atwater. This sample of current traffic volumes was intended to look at those roads which already carry major traffic volumes, and which are expected to carry high traffic volumes in the future.

Traffic counts were conducted in October and November 2023 during mid-week days when local schools were in session.

Figure 2.4-2 illustrates the locations of daily traffic counts reported for this analysis, and Table 2.4-3 summarizes daily traffic volumes and resulting levels of service along major roadways in Hughson. As shown in the table, based on these volumes and the thresholds described in Table 2.4-1, the current daily traffic volume on all of the study roadway segments operate at LOS C or D, indicating that these roadways operate within the requirements of current Atwater General Plan policy.

Castle
Airport
E Bellevue Rd
Juniper Ave
Olive Ave
Liberty Ave
Almond Ave
Walnut Ave
Yosemite Hwy
Westside Blvd Bellevue Rd
Atwater Jordan Blvd
Santa Fe Ave
Applegate Rd
Bert Crane Rd
Gurr Rd
Franklin Rd
Snelling Hwy
N Winton Wy
Vine Ave
Central Ave
Sultana Dr
Buhach Rd
Atwater Blvd

ATWATER
MERCED

LIVINGSTON
WINTON
Arena
99 140
99 59
J7
13,108
3,424
17,551
8,403 9,886 8,685
10,905
2,398 15,312
16,397
13,316 13,078 12,352
16,952
9,866
9,126
11,512
3,859 7,231
9,501
1 2
3 4
5 9
8 10
16 11 17
14 19
18 20 7 6
12 13
15 1 Olive Avenue Vine Ave Vine St
2 Atwater Blvd Golden State Hwy Maple St
3 Bell Dr Bell Ln Bell Ln
4 Applegate Rd Sycamore Ave Bell Dr
5 Applegate Rd Bell Dr Sunset Dr
6 Commerce Ave Commerce Ave Industry Way
7 Atwater Blvd Castle St California St
8 N Winton Way Grove Ave Mitchell Ave
9 N Winton Way Fruitland Ave Bellevue Rd
10 N Winton Way Camellia Dr Fruitland Ave
11 Bellevue Rd Sixth St Fih St
12 Juniper Ave Fourth St Third St
13 First St Juniper Ave Grove Ave
14 Sha
er Rd Della Dr Pacemaker Dr
15 First St Center St Village Cir Dr
16 Sha
er Rd Manzanita Dr Bellevue Rd
17 E Bellevue Rd Constitution Dr Muir Ave
18 E Juniper Ave Sierra Madre Dr Valley St
19 N Buhach Rd Garden Dr E Junipero Ave
20 N Buhach Rd E Junipero Ave Ave One
Segment
Number
Street
Name From To
WC23-4029_2.4-2_DailyADT
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Volumes
ADT Location ADT Volume
Figure 2.4–2
City Limit
Sphere of Inuence Area
Planning Area
# X,XXX

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-21 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

2.4-3: DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNTS AND LOS ON ATWATER AREA STREETS

ROAD LOCATION FROM LOCATION
TO
CLASSIFICATION1

CURRENT

VOLUME LOS
Olive Avenue Vine Avenue Vine Street 2 Lane Rural Arterial 2,398 C
Atwater Blvd SR 99 Maple Street 2 Lane Arterial
13,108 D
Bell Drive Bell Lane Bell Lane 2 Lane Arterial
3,424 C
Applegate Road
Sycamore
Avenue Bell Drive 2 Lane Arterial
17,551 D
Applegate Road Bell Drive Sunset Drive 2 Lane Arterial
8,403 C
Commerce Avenue
Commerce
Avenue Industry Way 2 Lane Arterial
9,886 D
Atwater Blvd Castle Street
California
Street 4 Lane Undivided Arterial
8,685 C
North Winton Way Grove Avenue
Mitchell
Avenue 4 Lane Undivided Arterial
15,312 C
North Winton Way Fruitland Avenue Bellevue Road 4 Lane Undivided Arterial 16,397 C
North Winton Way Camellia Drive
Fruitland
Avenue 4 Lane Undivided Arterial
13,316 C
Bellevue Road Sixth Street Fifth Street 4 Lane Undivided Arterial 13,078 C
Juniper Avenue Fourth Street Third Street 2 Lane Arterial 3,859 C
First Street Juniper Avenue Grove Avenue 2 Lane Arterial 9,501 C
Shaffer Road Della Drive
Pacemaker
Drive 4 Lane Undivided Arterial
10,905 C
First Street Center Street
Village Circle
Drive 4 Lane Undivided Arterial
7,231 C
Shaffer Road Manzanita Drive Bellevue Road 4 Lane Undivided Arterial 12,352 C
East Bellevue Road
Constitution
Drive Muir Avenue 4 Lane Undivided Arterial
16,952 C
East Juniper Avenue
Sierra Madre
Drive Valley Street 4 Lane Undivided Arterial
11,512 C
North Buhach Road Garden Drive
East Junipero
Avenue 4 Lane Undivided Arterial
9,866 C
North Buhach Road
East Junipero
Avenue Avenue One 4 Lane Divided Arterial
9,126 C
NOTES:

1. CLASSIFICATION FOR CAPACITY SELECTION ONLY, CLASSIFICATION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MATCH GENERAL PLAN ROADWAY DESIGNATION SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2023

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-22

INTERSECTION TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Existing intersection traffic operations were analyzed based on traffic counts made at locations on major roads in Atwater. This sample of current traffic volumes was intended to look at those roads which already carry major traffic volumes, and which are expected to carry high traffic volumes in the future. Traffic counts were conducted in October and November 2023 during mid-week days when local schools were in session. Traffic counts were taken between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. as well as 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. to establish the peak one-hour morning and peak one-hour evening traffic volumes at intersections.

Figure 2.4-3 illustrates the locations of peak period intersection traffic counts and resulting morning and afternoon peak hour volumes. Table 2.4-4 presents current morning and afternoon peak hour intersection Levels of Service. As shown in the table, based on these volumes and the thresholds described in Table 2.4- 2, the current peak hour intersection operations at the intersections is LOS D or better, indicating that these roadways operate within the requirements of current Atwater General Plan policy.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-23 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 2.4-4: CURRENT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE

INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR

CURRENT

DELAY LOS

1. Winton Way/Bellevue Road AM 17.5 B
PM 16.9 B

2. Winton Way/Juniper Avenue AM 18.2 B
PM 16.6 B

3. Applegate Road-Winton Way/Atwater Boulevard AM 19.1 B PM 24.4 C

4. Applegate Road/Bell Drive-Commerce Avenue
AM 18.9 B
PM 27.6 C

5. Shaffer Road/Atwater Boulevard AM 32.4 C
PM 35.9 D

6. Shaffer Road/Juniper Avenue AM 13.3 B
PM 15.3 B

7. First Street/Shaffer Road/Bellevue Road AM 42.1 D
PM 45.3 D

8. Buhach Road/Bellevue Road AM 16.6 B
PM 17.0 B

9. Buhach Road/Juniper Avenue-West Avenue Two
AM 39.8 D
PM 25.0 C

10. Buhach Road/Green Sands Avenue AM 18.1 B
PM 19.7 B
SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2023

ROADWAY SAFETY DATA
Federal and state policies related to the design and funding of the transportation system are shifting towards a “safe systems” approach that recognizes that safety improvements do not have to wait for a history of recorded crashes, and that certain roadway characteristics lend themselves to worse safety outcomes. Collision data remains a key part of this aspect of Circulation Element planning as it can be extrapolated to the larger roadway network. Data from the UC Berkeley Transportation Injury Mapping System for the January 2020 through December 2022 period indicated that a total of 299 crashes were reported within the City of Atwater limits, resulting in 31 reported serious injuries and six fatalities. Hotspot mapping indicates that the Applegate Road, Bellevue Avenue, Juniper Avenue, Winton Way and Buhach Road corridors are the primary locations with collisions.

First St
67 (101)
114 (131)
26 (35)
ACF
0 (0)
83 (36)
377 (427)123 (208)
45 (29)
126 (59)
79 (26) 23 (18) 357 (409) 222 (252)
3 (1)
197 (164)
120 (83)
109 (197)

1. Winton Way/Bellevue Rd
4 (5)
517 (617)
75 (85)
62 (48)
28 (26) 16 (14) 531 (524)
65 (47)
91 (73)
31 (22)
91 (56)

2. Winton Way/Juniper Ave
28 (35)
234 (348)
99 (147)
82 (116)
227 (401)
33 (69) 135 (130) 260 (272)
77 (88)
73 (96)
378 (224)
95 (128)

3. Winton Way-Applegate Rd/Atwater Blvd
63 (111)
228 (260)
14 (42)
0 (3)
132 (114)
122 (243)
132 (155) 57 (95) 180 (141) 119 (274)
19 (17)
103 (333)
71 (180)
19 (38)
1 (0)

4. Applegate Rd/Bell Dr-Commerce Ave
76 (78)
94 (203)
22 (50)
55 (117)
115 (129)
83 (163) 142 (70) 164 (209)
115 (96)
107 (197)
111 (167)
44 (69)

5. Shaffer Rd/Atwater Blvd
52 (50)
210 (357)
74 (102)
24 (24)
228 (210)
39 (33) 19 (18) 237 (279)
153 (184)
189 (177)
248 (209)
100 (102)

6. Shaffer Rd/Juniper Ave
90 (117)
161 (261)
86 (89)
69 (90)
327 (287)
62 (86)
68 (92)192 (248)173 (169)
116 (123)
216 (350)
81 (120)
0 (0)

7. Shaffer Rd/Bellevue Rd/First St
8 (11)
234 (217)180 (111)
214 (78)
0 (0)
93 (26)
416 (255)
286 (237) 50 (102) 69 (196) 2 (3)
0 (0)
3 (4)
172 (323)
32 (92)
0 (0)

8. Buhach Rd/Bellevue Rd
Bellevue Rd
Winton Way
Atwater Blvd
Winton Way Applegate Rd
Bell Dr Commerce Ave
Applegate Rd
Atwater Blvd
Shaffer Rd
Juniper Ave
Shaffer Rd
Bellevue Rd
Shaffer Rd
Bellevue Rd
Buhach Rd
32 (2)
130 (142)303 (270)
136 (89)
15 (15)
194 (118)
259 (198)
140 (84) 94 (98) 227 (254) 123 (124)
20 (9)
95 (94)
197 (315)
74 (48)

9. Buhach Rd/Juniper Ave-W Avenue Two
Juniper Ave W Avenue Two
Buhach Rd
1 (3)
21 (42)
273 (295)
73 (106)
55 (36)
89 (64)
28 (23) 26 (28) 184 (199)
147 (132)
148 (167)
42 (80)
33 (73)
14 (6)

10. Buhach Rd/Green Sands Ave
Green Sands Ave
Buhach Rd
Juniper Ave
Winton Way
ACE
ICCF
ICE
ACE
AF
ACE
ACE
BE
ACFF
BE
ACF
ACE
ICE
ACF
ICF
ICF
ACF
D
ACF
AACCF
D
ACE
ACE
BF
ACE
ACE
ACE
ICE
ICE
ICCF
ICE
ICE
ICF
ICE
ICCF
ACE
AE
ICF
AACE
IACF
Castle
Airport
E Bellevue Rd
Juniper Ave Ave Two
Green Sands Ave
Atwater Blvd
Commerce Ave
Bell Dr
Olive Ave
Bellevue Rd
Santa Fe Ave
Applegate Rd
Gurr Rd
Franklin Rd
N Winton Wy
Buhach Rd
Shafter Rd
First St

ATWATER
99 J7
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
WC23-4029_2.4-3_PHTV
Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Counts
Figure 2.4–3
City Limit Sphere of Inuence Area Planning Area
XX (YY) AM (PM) Peak Hour Tra
c Volumes Signalized Intersection # Study Intersection

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
2-25 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

2.5 FREIGHT RAIL, GOODS MOVEMENT AND AVIATION
This section describes freight rail, goods movement, and airports in the City of Atwater’s planning area.

Freight rail providers, truck routes, freight nodes, and airport activities are discussed in this section. While airports are typically separate from freight rail modes, the Castle Commerce Center project (and Inland Port concept) links these modes together.

LOCAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework discussion describes local regulations that guide land use decisions. Adopted plans that pertain to the City are also described.

City of Atwater General Plan Circulation Element
The purpose of the Circulation Element is to provide the policy framework for regulation and development of the circulation system in the City of Atwater. The existing General Plan includes policies related to promoting goods movement in the city. The existing General Plan notes that goods movement, specifically trucking, is anticipated to remain stable in the future. However, given the shift to e-commerce and the proposed Inland Port at the Castle Commerce Center, the nature of goods movement has shifted since the current General Plan was adopted.

Merced County Regional Transportation Plan
The 2022 Merced County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is intended to guide bicycle mobility investments throughout Merced County. The RTP considers greenhouse gas reductions per Senate Bill 375 and other state requirements. The RTP is one of many steps being taken to provide for goods movement in the region by developing an efficient and coordinated multi-modal transportation system.

EXISTING SETTING
Freight Rail
Both the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad and Union Pacific rail service pass through Atwater, utilizing railroad corridors that parallel Santa Fe Avenue and Atwater Boulevard, respectively. Rail spurs have historically served businesses in the downtown Atwater area, where the BNSF corridor only includes mainline trackage.

Truck Routes
Most freight, mainly consisting of retail and agricultural goods, travels to and from Atwater ultimately by truck, but often connects during transport with the regional rail corridor in other locations. Currently the City has not defined truck routes, so truck traffic travels along the major roadways throughout Atwater, including all arterial roadways. Agricultural production generates high amounts of truck traffic, especially during the summer months when there is a peak in agricultural activities. Slower moving trucks, or trucks entering and exiting industrial and agricultural facilities along major roadways, can result in congestion and traffic hazards for smaller vehicles.

Freight Nodes
Freight nodes include major retail centers and agricultural manufacturing locations. In Atwater, these locations include the Bellevue Road commercial corridor, the Dole Packaged Foods plant to the west of the city, downtown Atwater, and the Commerce Avenue commercial corridor. Future freight nodes may include the proposed Inland Port at the Castle Airport.

2.0 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 2-26 Aviation
Since the closure of Atwater Municipal Airport and transfer of general aviation operations to the former Castle Air Force Base (now Castle Airport), Castle Airport has become the busiest General Aviation (GA) airport in the Merced County region. Castle Airport is served by 11,800 feet long and 150 feet wide runway (sixth longest in California), and is open 24-hours per day.

The proposed Inland Port at the Castle Commerce Center was awarded $50,000,000 in mid-2023 to expand rail access for further connections to major ports in Oakland, Long Beach and Los Angeles. The combination of rail access and airport facilities will increase employment in the Castle Commerce Center area, along with increases in commuter and truck traffic.

City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-0

Chapter 3
Economic, Real Estate Market, and Fiscal
Conditions
This Chapter includes the following topics:

3.1 Economic Conditions

3.2 Real Estate Market Conditions

3.3 Fiscal Conditions and Trends

The Economic, Real Estate Market, and Fiscal Conditions chapter examines the market and fiscal conditions and trends in Atwater.

The information and analysis is intended to inform the General Plan Update process by providing both historical context and a baseline of existing economic and fiscal information.

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-1 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS This chapter examines the city’s economic, real estate, and fiscal conditions. This includes an overview of existing conditions and trends for the city’s local and regional economy, the local real estate market for housing and other major uses, and the City of Atwater’s fiscal status as indicated by its General Fund. This section also summarizes the key issues & opportunities regarding economic, real estate, and fiscal conditions.

This chapter includes the following sections:

3.1 Economic Conditions

3.2 Real Estate Market Conditions

3.3 Fiscal Conditions and Trends

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-2

FINDINGS AND KEY ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES IN ATWATER

ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
Unemployment Trends. The unemployment rate is an indicator of local and regional economic strength; lower unemployment is generally linked to a healthy economy that is providing adequate job opportunities to area residents. Areas with large agriculture sectors typically have higher rates of unemployment and more seasonal variation in employment.

Between 2010 and 2022, Atwater and Merced County experienced consistently higher unemployment rates than California, with unemployment rates from three to six percent above the statewide rate. In 2022, the city’s unemployment rate averaged 7.5 percent, with the county rate at 7.7 percent, compared to a state rate of only 4.2 percent.

Jobs by Industry. Employment by major industry sector shows the strong focus on agriculture and food product manufacturing in Merced County. For Atwater, in descending rank order, natural resources and mining (which includes agricultural employment), retail trade, and the government sector (which includes public schools) provide over half of the city’s employment.

Between 2017 and 2022, Atwater showed rapid employment growth compared to the county and the state, with that growth concentrated in agriculture, construction, retail trade, and accommodation and food services. However, the limited growth, and even loss of jobs, in “white collar” sectors such as professional services, indicates that Atwater and Merced County have so far had limited success in diversifying their economies to provide more of these types of jobs, which tend to provide higher earnings and more full-time work than many of the current agriculture and service-related jobs. This information suggests that further economic diversification should be an economic development priority.

Future Job Growth. Based on Caltrans projections, Merced County will experience 17.8 percent growth in employment between 2020 and 2050, to a total of approximately 96,000 jobs, with most of this growth occurring by 2030.

Worker Earnings. As noted above, Atwater residents and households have incomes below statewide levels. This results in large part from the pay levels associated with the jobs available in the city. Average annual pay for jobs in Atwater is below that of the county, and well below the average for California, further highlighting the need for diversification of the local economy into new industry sectors.

Jobs/Employed Residents Balance and Commute Flows. Atwater and Merced County both show an imbalance between workers and jobs, with more working residents than jobs. This is an indicator of net out-commuting from the city and the county, with only approximately one job in Atwater for every two working residents. This information highlights the importance of local economic development, to create a better balance between the size of the local working population and the number of local employment opportunities.

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-3 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Castle Commerce Center. Located adjacent to Atwater, the former Castle Air Force Base, now the Castle Airport and Castle Commerce Center, offers a key asset serving the local economic base.

This facility includes a general aviation airport and a developing multi-modal freight facility with rail service for local agricultural producers and industries. While the Airport and Commerce Center are outside city limits, the current and future facilities will provide jobs for city residents and generate economic activity within Atwater itself. The development of improved rail-related facilities will also provide environmental benefits by replacing multiple truck trips with fewer train trips, resulting in reduced emissions and improved local air quality.

REAL ESTATE MARKET CONDITIONS

Residential Real Estate Market. The housing stock in Atwater consists of a preponderance of singlefamily detached homes. Conversely, the city’s housing unit mix includes limited proportions of apartment-style multifamily housing units.

Despite housing being oriented toward single-family detached homes in Atwater and Merced County, neither area shows a higher level of owner-occupancy than the state, perhaps indicating that the lower income levels in the county are limiting the ability of local households to purchase their own homes.

Housing construction in Atwater peaked in the 1970s, with nearly one-fourth of all housing in the city constructed during that decade. Less than five percent of housing units have been built since 2010, with more recent development shifting to other areas of Merced County.

Between June 2022 and April 2023, larger single-family residential units with three or more bedrooms were the most commonly sold unit type. The median home sale price for single-family units was $360,000
Retail Real Estate Market. Retail properties in Atwater are primarily concentrated in three nodes:
adjacent to State Highway 99 near the Applegate Road exit, along or near Bellevue Road, and Downtown along or near Broadway. The largest shopping center (by a large margin) in Atwater is the Applegate Ranch Shopping Center at Applegate Road and State Route 99, containing both a Walmart Supercenter and a Super Target, along with numerous other retailers. Bellevue Road is home to several older centers anchored by supermarkets or second-generation replacement stores. Downtown Atwater is home to a mix of small independent retailers and service businesses along Broadway and nearby streets. The City has undertaken efforts to enhance “Old Town Atwater,” including the 2009 Atwater Downtown Revitalization Strategy, with work on this strategy ongoing.

Overall, CoStar reports approximately 1.7 million square feet of retail space in Atwater, out of a total of 12 million square feet countywide, or about 14 percent of the countywide retail inventory.

Considering that Atwater’s resident population is about 11 percent of the countywide population, the City has a disproportionate share of the inventory and may be a net attractor of shoppers from other areas.

Office Real Estate Market. The data on employment by major industry indicates limited demand for office space in Atwater. CoStar data confirms this, with a total reported inventory of only approximately 340,000 square feet, out of a total of 3.6 million square feet in Merced County. In

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-4 Atwater, office uses are scattered throughout the city. Office vacancies are extremely low, at less than one percent.

Industrial Real Estate Market. Industrial development in Atwater is concentrated in the southern portions of the city, with a large cluster of properties to the south of Highway 99 and east of the Applegate Ranch Shopping Center. Other industrial uses, including the Teasdale Latin Foods facility, are found between the Union Pacific rail line and Highway 99. Much of the city south of Highway 99 is zoned for manufacturing, industrial, and business park uses, along with some areas near the airport and in the westernmost areas of the city north of Highway 99. CoStar reports approximately 1.2 million square feet of existing industrial space in Atwater, and 12.0 million in Merced County overall. Vacancies for industrial space are extremely low, at 1.0 percent for Atwater and 2.3 percent for the county.

The low vacancy rates in not only the industrial sector but also the retail and office sectors indicate that new businesses or existing businesses seeking to expand within the City would have little choice of space offered for sale or for lease. The lack of vacancies may hinder efforts to attract new and/or retain existing businesses as a means of diversifying the local economy. Land use and economic development-related policies should encourage and facilitate developers to expand the local supply of non-residential real estate.

Fiscal Conditions. The City of Atwater General Fund receives the City’s discretionary revenues and funds its basic municipal services. Atwater’s General Fund revenues and expenditures vary annually based on the changing conditions in the city. The majority of revenue generated within Atwater is attributed to property and sales taxes, while General Fund expenditures are primarily associated with police and fire services.

With the exception of the proposed budget for the current fiscal year, Atwater’s General Fund has maintained a positive annual balance, allowing the City to build a reserve that, even with this year’s imbalance, remains at 25 percent. The substantial reserve could assist the City during any future periods of declining revenues and/or increasing expenses. With the State of California projected to experience a substantial budget deficit for the 2024/2025 Fiscal Year, the local budget reserve could give the City flexibility to adapt to cutbacks in State subventions to local governments that sometimes occur during State budget crises.

Property taxes are a critical source of revenue for the City. Based on the current master property tax revenue sharing agreement with the County, Atwater’s share of property taxes from any future annexations would likely be similar to that from other recently incorporated areas covered by the lower rate of 17 to 18 percent. This means that the City generally receives a lower share of property tax revenue to help fund services for new development than it had historically, which could make the City more dependent upon other sources of revenue, such as sales tax and transient occupancy tax, to ensure long-term fiscal sustainability as the City continues to grow.

The City should carefully assess the fiscal impacts of any annexation to ensure that the cost to provide services to the new areas does not exceed the revenue generated by the annexation.

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-5 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

3.1 ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
This section summarizes the city’s economic conditions. For perspective, this includes comparisons with Merced County as a whole. The analysis primarily utilizes data from Esri Business Analyst (a private economic and demographic data vendor) and the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS) estimates. Where appropriate, data are also provided from a variety of other data sources, including the California Employment Development Department (EDD), California Department of Finance (DoF), and the Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG), among others.

More detailed information regarding population and housing, including population and household characteristics and housing needs, is provided in Chapter 1.0 (Land Use, Population and Housing) of this Existing Conditions Report.

ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
Gross Domestic Product
One measure of an area’s economy is gross domestic product (GDP), which is a measure of the annual value of all goods and services within that area. The BEA provides estimates by major industry sectors for US counties and states, thus highlighting key economic sectors for a given county or region. As shown in Table

3.1-1, in 2021 (most recent year available) the total GDP for Merced County was approximately $10.5 billion; this amounts to only about 0.3 percent of California’s overall GDP of $3.4 trillion. In the county, the government and agriculture sectors are over-represented relative to the state, accounting for 18.6 percent and 16.8 percent of GDP, respectively. Nondurable goods manufacturing (e.g., food processing) is also a strong contributor to GDP for Merced County. Finance and real estate, professional and related services, and especially information are relatively small sectors in Merced County, indicating that the county’s participation in California’s tech and related services sector is limited. For the Atwater Zip Code, 95301, which also encompasses areas beyond city limits, the area’s GDP constitutes 14 percent of the county-wide GDP.

Overall, GDP data indicates that the county’s economy is growing at only about half the rate for the state overall; in constant 2012 dollars, Merced County’s GDP grew by 20 percent between 2011 and 2021; statewide GDP growth was 39 percent. The county GDP also lags on a per capita basis, at only $37,280, less than half the statewide figure of $85,863.

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-6 TABLE 3.1-1: GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT BY INDUSTRY IN 2021, MERCED COUNTY & CALIFORNIA NOTES: GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP)IS IN THOUSANDS OF CURRENT DOLLARS (NOT ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION). INDUSTRY DETAIL IS BASED ON THE 2012 NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAICS).

LAST UPDATED: DECEMBER 8, 2022
(A) NOT SHOWN TO AVOID DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION; ESTIMATES ARE INCLUDED IN HIGHER-LEVEL TOTALS.

TOTALS MAY NOT SUM EXACTLY FROM PARTS DUE TO INDEPENDENT ROUNDING. (B) BASED ON DOF POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR 2021 FROM 2023 E-5 REPORT.

SOURCES: BUREAU OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS TABLE CAGDP2, GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT BY COUNTY& METROPOLITAN AREA; CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE (DOF); BAE.

Unemployment Trends
Another indicator of local and regional economic strength and trends is the unemployment rate; lower unemployment is generally linked to a healthy economy that is providing adequate job opportunities to area residents. As a “rule of thumb,” a rate of five percent is considered to represent full employment, high enough to allow workers to move between jobs and to limit upward inflationary wage pressures due to employers having difficulty filling open positions.

GDP in thousands of 2021 dollars
Merced County Cailfornia
Industry Sector Number Percent Number Percent
Government & government enterprises $1,947,378 18.6% $373,598,430 11.1% Private industries
Agriculture, forestry, fishing & hunting $1,762,513 16.8% $38,294,632 1.1% Finance, insurance, real estate, rental, & leasing $1,455,538 13.9% $617,020,764 18.3% Nondurable goods manufacturing $1,087,716 10.4% $152,636,729 4.5% Educational services, health care& social assistance $776,060 7.4% $256,456,541 7.6% Retail trade $761,052 7.3% $178,861,745 5.3%
Professional & business services $507,037 4.8% $492,172,731 14.6% Transportation & warehousing $450,599 4.3% $93,492,570 2.8% Construction $395,654 3.8% $124,564,467 3.7%
Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation & food services $274,837 2.6% $137,809,403 4.1% Durable goods manufacturing $223,149 2.1% $242,190,990 7.2% Other services (except government & government enterprises) $216,899 2.1% $57,713,613 1.7% Information $48,225 0.5% $362,001,669 10.7%
Mining, quarrying,& oil & gas extraction (a) na $12,014,817 0.4% Utilities (a) na $45,687,406 1.4%
Wholesale trade (a) na $188,724,156 5.6%
All industry total $10,465,518 100.0% $3,373,240,664 100.0% Gross Domestic Product per Capita in 2021 Dollarts $ (b) $37,280 $85,863

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-7 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater As presented in Chart 3.1-1, between 2010 and 2022, Atwater and Merced Monterey County experienced consistently higher unemployment rates than California. For the 12-year period, the city and county unemployment rates have remained from three to six percent above the statewide rate.

Areas with large agriculture sectors typically have higher rates of unemployment and more seasonal variation in employment.

Unemployment decreased and the gap between the local and county rates and the California rate narrowed between 2010 and 2019; unemployment rates spiked in 2020 due to the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, but by 2022 were again below or near the 2019 rates. The lower proportional decline for Atwater and Merced County may be in part due to larger proportions of essential workers in agriculture who continued to work throughout the pandemic period. For 2022, the city’s unemployment rate averaged 7.5 percent, with the county rate at 7.7 percent, compared to a state rate of 4.2 percent.

CHART 3.1-1: AVERAGE ANNUAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, 2010-2022 SOURCES: CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (EDD), LOCAL AREA UNEMPLOYMENT STATISTICS, 2023; BAE, 2023.

In addition to having high unemployment relative to the state, Atwater and Merced County have substantial seasonal swings in employment tied to the region’s agricultural economy (see Chart 3.1-2).

For example, the unemployment rate for Atwater in 2022 peaked in January, at 10.3 percent, with the lowest rate for the year at 5.6 percent in May. In contrast, the unemployment rate in California in 2022 only fluctuated between 3.7 percent and 5.6 percent. The creation of additional year-round jobs would likely benefit the local labor force and reduce the reliance on seasonal employment.

20.1% 19.6%

18.2%

16.1%

14.3%

12.6%

10.1%

8.9%

7.8% 7.3%

12.2%

9.9%

7.5%

18.4% 17.9%

16.6%

14.7%

13.0%

11.4%

10.6%

9.4%

8.4% 8.2%

12.5%

10.3%

7.7%

12.5% 11.9%

10.5%

9.0%

7.6%

6.… 5.5%

4.8% 4.2% 4.1%

10.1%

7.3%

4.2%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 City of Atwater Merced County California

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-8 CHART 3.1-2: MONTHLY UNEMPLOYMENT RATES, 2015- JULY 2023 SOURCES: CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (EDD), LOCAL AREA UNEMPLOYMENT STATISTICS, 2023; BAE, 2023.

Jobs by Industry
Employment by major industry sector shows the strong focus on agriculture and food product manufacturing in Merced County, as shown in Table 3.1-2, which presents industry job trends from 2017 through 2022 for wage and salary workers employed in Atwater, Merced County and California. For Atwater, in descending rank order, natural resources and mining (which includes agricultural employment), retail trade, and the government sector provide over half of the city’s employment. Countywide, government provides the most jobs, followed by natural resources and mining, and manufacturing (which consists largely of food manufacturing) provide over half of total employment. In comparison, “white collar” employment (in a set of several combined sectors as shown in Table 3.1-2), government, and health care and social assistance are the top three employment sectors in California, providing slightly less than half of all wage and salary employment. Natural Resources and Mining account for only 2.4 percent of jobs statewide.

Atwater shows rapid employment growth compared to the county and the state, with growth concentrated in agriculture, construction, retail trade, and accommodation and food services. However, the limited growth, and even loss of jobs, in “white collar” jobs such as professional services, indicates that Atwater and Merced County have so far had limited success in diversifying their economies to provide more of these types of jobs, which tend to provide higher earnings and more full-time work than many of the current agriculture and service-related jobs.
0 0.02

0.04 0.06

0.08 0.1

0.12 0.14

0.16 0.18

0.2 Jan-15
May-15
Sep-15
Jan-16
May-16
Sep-16
Jan-17
May-17
Sep-17
Jan-18
May-18
Sep-18
Jan-19
May-19
Sep-19
Jan-20
May-20
Sep-20
Jan-21
May-21
Sep-21
Jan-22
May-22
Sep-22
Jan-23
May-23
Atwater County State

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-9 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 3.1-2: JOBS BY INDUSTRY, ATWATER, MERCED CALIFORNIA, AND CALIFORNIA, 2017-2022 NOTES:

UNIVERSE CONSISTS OF ALL WAGE AND SALARY EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK ON AN ANNUAL AVERAGE BASIS. EXCLUDES SELF-EMPLOYED PERSONS NOT ON PAYROLL.

SOME CATEGORIES HAVE BEEN COMBINED FOR THE CITY DUE TO DISCLOSURE RULES. NAICS 51, 55, 56 AND 61 ARE ROLLED UP WITH NAICS 54, AND GOVERNMENT IS ROLLED UP INTO ONE CATEGORY. NAICS 62412 AND 814 ARE DELETED. TO BE CONSISTENT, THE COUNTY AND STATE DATA HAS BEEN PRESENTED SIMILARLY.
(A) NAICS 62412 EXCLUDED. INCLUDED IN TOTAL EMPLOYMENT, AND IN UNCLASSIFIED FOR COUNTY AND STATE. MERCED COUNTY EMPLOYMENT IN 62412 ESTIMATED USING THE RATIO OF JOBS TO ESTABLISHMENTS FROM STATEWIDE DATA. (B) NAICS 814 EXCLUDED. INCLUDED IN TOTAL EMPLOYMENT, AND IN UNCLASSIFIED FOR COUNTY AND STATE. (C) TOTALS MAY NOT MATCH SUM OF PARTS DUE TO INDEPENDENT ROUNDING AND DATA CONFIDENTIALITY.

SOURCES: QUARTERLY CENSUS OF EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES (QCEW), US BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, 2023; BAE, 2023.

City of Atwater Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Private Sector
Natural Resources and Mining 733 12.7% 1,710 22.0% 977 133.3% Construction 367 6.3% 857 11.0% 490 133.4%
Manufacturing 551 9.5% 615 7.9% 64 11.6%
Wholesade Trade 66 1.1% 50 0.6% (16) -24.2%
Retail Trade 1,176 20.3% 1,405 18.1% 229 19.5%
Transporation, Warehousing, and Utilities 3 0.1% 39 0.5% 36 1202.8% Information; Professional, Scientific, & Technical Services: Management of Companies & Enterprises; Administrative & Waste Services; Educational Services 233 4.0% 203 2.6% (30) -12.9% Finance and Insurance 108 1.9% 62 0.8% (47) -43.1%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 28 0.5% 36 0.5% 8 27.1% Healthcare and Social Assistance (a) 647 11.2% 712 9.2% 65 10.0% Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 56 1.0% 55 0.7% (1) -2.2% Accommodation and Food Services 649 11.2% 808 10.4% 159 24.5% Other Services (except Public Administration) (b) 109 1.9% 129 1.7% 20 18.7% Unclassified 12 0.2% n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Government 1,052 18.2% 1,086 14.0% 34 3.3%
Total Employment (c) 5,790 100.0% 7,766 100.0% 1,988 34.1% Merced County Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Private Sector
Natural Resources and Mining 14,050 17.7% 14,078 16.9% 28 n.a.

Construction 2,359 3.0% 3,279 3.9% 920 39.0%
Manufacturing 9,504 12.0% 9,832 11.8% 328 3.5%
Wholesale Trade na na na na na na
Retail Trade 8,304 10.5% 8,805 10.6% 501 6.0%
Transporation, Warehousing, and Utilities 2,802 3.5% 2,966 3.6% 164 5.9% Information; Professional, Scientific, & Technical Services: Management of Companies & Enterprises; Administrative & Waste Services; Educational Services 4,363 5.5% 4,322 5.2% (41) -0.9% Finance and Insurance 1,304 1.6% 1,245 1.5% (59) -4.5%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 547 0.7% 622 0.7% 75 13.7% Healthcare and Social Assistance (a) 6,428 8.1% 6,456 7.8% 28 0.4% Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 498 0.6% 585 0.7% 87 17.5% Accommodation and Food Services 5,078 6.4% 6,341 7.6% 1,263 24.9% Other Services (except Public Administration) (b) 1,173 1.5% 1,532 1.8% 359 30.6% Unclassified or Excluded 5,141 6.5% 6,067 7.3% 926 18.0% Government 17,823 22.5% 17,126 21.6% (697) -3.9%
Total Employment (c) 79,373 100.0% 83,257 104.9% 3,884 4.9% California Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Private Sector
Natural Resources and Mining 441,460 2.6% 436,751 2.4% (4,709) -1.1% Construction 805,942 4.7% 911,750 5.1% 105,808 13.1%
Manufacturing 1,303,550 7.7% 1,335,625 7.5% 32,075 2.5% Wholesale Trade 720,304 4.2% 668,518 3.7% (51,786)
Retail Trade 1,680,913 9.9% 1,616,028 9.0% (64,885) -3.9% Transporation, Warehousing, and Utilities 609,765 3.6% 837,196 4.7% 227,431 Information; Professional, Scientific, & Technical Services: Management of Companies & Enterprises; Administrative & Waste Services; Educational Services 3,377,250 19.8% 3,803,496 21.2% 426,246 12.6% Finance and Insurance 544,087 3.2% 535,890 3.0% (8,197) -1.5% Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 283,407 1.7% 305,110 1.7% 21,703 7.7% Healthcare and Social Assistance (a) 1,686,165 9.9% 1,846,465 10.3% 160,300 9.5% Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 305,110 1.8% 307,399 1.7% 2,289 0.8% Accommodation and Food Services 1,630,870 9.6% 1,621,370 9.1% (9,500) -0.6% Other Services (except Public Administration) (b) 495,632 2.9% 505,685 2.8% 10,053 2.0% Unclassified or Excluded 674,197 4.0% 718,047 4.0% 43,850 6.5% Government 2,461,050 14.5% 2,464,630 13.8% 3,580 0.1%
Total Employment (c) 17,019,702 100.0% 17,913,958 100.0% 894,256 5.3% 2017 2022 Change 2017-2022
2017 2022 Change 2017-2022
2017 2022 Change 2017-2022

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-10 Worker Earnings
As shown in Table 3.1-3 below, Atwater residents have incomes below statewide levels. This results in large part from the pay levels associated with the jobs available in the city. Average annual pay for jobs in Atwater, at $42,733, is below that of the county ($50,912), and well below the average for California overall ($84,376).

TABLE 3.1-3: AVERAGE ANNUAL PAY FOR WAGE AND SALARY WORKERS, 2022 Location Average Pay
Atwater $42,733
Merced County $50,912
California $84,376
NOTE: WAGE AND SALARY EMPLOYMENT; EXCLUDES SOLE PROPRIETORS AND OTHER SELF-EMPLOYED PERSONS.

SOURCES: QCEW; BLS; EDD.

Resident Employment by Industry
Table 3.1-4 provides the industry distribution of workers for workers residing in Atwater, Merced County, and California, i.e., for the labor force. While the time period is different, the industry categorization varies, and the data is from a different source and should only be compared to the above data provided in Table

3.1-2 with caution, it appears that Atwater and Merced County both show an imbalance between workers and jobs, with more working residents than jobs. This is an indicator of net out-commuting from the city and the county. Commute flows are discussed in more detail below.

Similar to the jobs by industry in the city and county, the number of local residents employed in information, professional services and related “white collar” jobs is limited. Overall, the labor force appears relatively matched with the current local jobs, but the educational attainment and the particular skill sets of local residents may limit the ability of the city to attract industries such as professional services or life sciences that require higher education levels or specific training.

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-11 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 3.1-4: EMPLOYED RESIDENTS BY INDUSTRY
NOTE:
(A) UNIVERSE CONSISTS OF ALL WORKERS BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE. PREVIOUS TABLE PROVIDES GOVERNMENT WORKERS REGARDLESS OF INDUSTRY; THIS TABLE DOES NOT SEPARATE OUT GOVERNMENT WORKERS EXCEPT THOSE IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION (E.G., PUBLIC SCHOOL STAFF WOULD BE IN THE EDUCATION, ETC. CATEGORY, NOT PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION IN THIS TABLE). AS A RESULT, COMPARISONS BETWEEN THESE TWO TABLES SHOULD BE MADE WITH CAUTION.

SOURCES: US. CENSUS BUREAU, AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY 2017-2021 FIVE-YEAR SAMPLE PERIOD, TABLE S2403; BAE, 2023.

Resident Employment by Occupation
Resident occupations in Atwater and Merced County also reflect the local economy, with an orientation toward production and manufacturing jobs rather than professional services and information as shown in Table 3.1-5. Compared to California, Atwater and Merced County show high proportions of residents in “blue collar” occupations including production, transportation, and material moving occupations and natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations. The city and county exhibit low concentrations of “white collar” jobs in computer, engineering, and science and in management, business, and financial occupations.

TABLE 3.1-5: EMPLOYED RESIDENTS BY OCCUPATION, 2017-2021 NOTE:

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
11, 21 Agriculture, Forestry, & Mining 1,231 9.3% 12,326 11.4% 394,881 2.1% 23 Construction 1,064 8.1% 8,623 8.0% 1,235,586 6.6%
22, 31-33,
42, 48-49
Manufacturing, Utilities, Transportation
& Warehousing, & Wholesale Trade
3,101 23.5% 23,440 21.7% 3,249,274 17.4%
44-45 Retail Trade 1,455 11.0% 11,804 10.9% 1,919,513 10.3% 52 Finance & Insurance 354 2.7% 1,836 1.7% 702,567 3.8% 53 Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 160 1.2% 1239 1.1% 405394 2.2% 51, 54, 55 Information, Professional Services, &
Business Management
340 2.6% 3,923 3.6% 2,296,302 12.3%
56 Administrative & Support & Waste
Management & Remediation Services
524 4.0% 4,191 3.9% 856,240 4.6%
61, 62 Education, Health Care, & Social
Assistance
3,352 25.4% 23,797 22.0% 3,990,094 21.4%
71, 72 Arts, Entertainment, Accommodation, &
Food Services
698 5.3% 7,682 7.1% 1,835,141 9.8%
81 Other Services 409 3.1% 4,275 4.0% 927,253 5.0%
92 Public Administration 502 3.8% 5,058 4.7% 864,476 4.6% Total, All Industries (a) 13,190 100% 108,194 100% 18,676,721 100% California
NAICS Industry Sector
City of Atwater Merced County
Occupational Category Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Computer, Engineering, & Science 1,086 8.2% 10,426 10.0% 3,138,038 17.3% Management, Business, & Financial 597 4.5% 4,952 4.7% 1,848,659 10.2% Sales & Office 2,538 19.2% 16,583 15.9% 3,545,812 19.5% Production, Transportation, & Material Moving 2,637 20.0% 20,078 19.2% 2,190,054 12.1% Health Practitioners & Technicians 1,235 9.4% 9,207 8.8% 1,709,679 9.4% Service 1,549 11.7% 12,383 11.9% 2,344,883 12.9%
Education, Legal, & Arts 954 7.2% 10,732 10.3% 1,788,448 9.9% Natural Resources, Construction, & Maintenance 2,594 19.7% 20,048 19.2% 1,590,478 8.8% Total Employed Labor Force (a) 13,190 100.0% 104,409 100.0% 18,156,051 100.0% City of Atwater Merced County California

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-12 (A) TOTALS MAY NOT MATCH OTHER TABLES DUE TO INDEPENDENT ROUNDING AND USE OF DIFFERENT SOURCES FOR THE ESTIMATES.

SOURCES: US. CENSUS BUREAU, AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY 2017-2021 FIVE-YEAR SAMPLE PERIOD, TABLE C24010; BAE, 2023 Major Employers
As discussed above in Table 3.1-2, government establishments provide a large share of the jobs in Merced County, and account for a large share of the county’s GDP, and accordingly, represent six of the top seven largest employers reported for Merced County. Mercy Medical Center is ranked fourth, and food processing businesses round out the list of top ten employers (see Table 3.1-6). Combined, these employers provide over 14,000 jobs in the county, approximately 12 percent of total wage and salary employment.

TABLE 3.1-6: MAJOR EMPLOYERS, MERCED COUNTY, 2022
SOURCES: COUNTY OF MERCED, ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT, 2022, BASED ON DATA FROM EDD; BAE, 2023 Major Employers
As indicated above, the jobs-employed residents’ ratio in Atwater is heavily weighted toward employed residents, indicating many of those residents commute elsewhere for work. Using a single consistent source of commute data for Atwater, as shown in Table 3.1-7, shows that there is only approximately one job in Atwater for every two working residents. Additionally, there is substantial cross-commuting, such that only 38 percent of the jobs within the city are held by local residents, and only approximately 20 percent of employed residents work in the city. Slightly greater than half of the remainder work within Merced County, with about one-quarter commuting outside the county.

Jobs/Employed Residents Balance and Commute Flows
As indicated above, the jobs-employed residents ratio in Atwater is heavily weighted toward employed residents, indicating many of those residents commute elsewhere for work. Using a single consistent source of commute data for Atwater, as shown in Table 3.1-7, shows that there is only approximately one job in Atwater for every two working residents. Additionally, there is substantial cross-commuting, such that only 38 percent of the jobs within the city are held by local residents, and only approximately 20 percent of employed residents work in the city. Slightly greater than half of the remainder work within Merced County, with about one-quarter commuting outside the county.

Percentage of
Major Employers in Total County
Merced County Location Industry Employees Employment
UC Merced Merced Schools-Universities &
Colleges Academic
2,811 2.41%
County of Merced Merced Government OfficesCounty
2,157 1.85%
Merced County Office of Education Merced Government OfficesCounty 2,015 1.73%
Mercy Medical Center Merced Hospitals 1,371 1.18%
Merced City School District Merced School Districts 1,364 1.17% Merced Union High School District Merced School Districts 1,334 1.15% Merced College Merced Schools-Universities &
Colleges Academic
1,012 0.87%
Dole Packaged Foods LLC Atwater Food Processors 834 0.72% Liberty Packing Company LLC Los Banos Packing & Crating Service 650 0.56% Hilmar Cheese Company Inc. Hilmar Food Processors 650 0.56% Total County Employment 14,198 12.20%

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-13 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater TABLE 3.1-7: COMMUTE FLOWS, 2017-2021
SOURCES: U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY 2017-2021 FIVE-YEAR SAMPLE PERIOD, TABLES B08007, B08008, AND B08624; BAE, 2023.

Taxable Sales Trends
The relative level of purchases by households, businesses, and government provides another measure of the strength of a local economy. In California, taxable sales reports provide a way to assess local buying power; comparing sales on a per capita basis with other locales and larger regions can highlight an area’s strengths and weaknesses. With the exception of most food for offsite consumption and prescription drugs, most end-user purchases of tangible goods in California are taxable, with data on the level of sales published by the state on a quarterly and annual basis. The sales and use taxes collected also provide a source of revenue for government entities to provide services to a community, thus enhancing the community’s quality of life.

In 2022, Atwater had local taxable sales of approximately $392 million, 11 percent of the countywide total of $3.57 billion; statewide taxable sales were $782 billion. On a per capita basis, Atwater and Merced County had similar sales levels, at $12,419 and $12,551, respectively. (Note that in order to provide an appropriate comparison, county sales that are unallocated by city are excluded). This includes online sales and sales related to construction projects.

In contrast, statewide per capita sales were $20,019. The lower sales in Atwater and the county reflect the lower incomes and spending power of city and county residents with per capita income in Atwater and the county at less than 60 percent of the state level.

Detail by type of business type highlights strengths and weaknesses of particular retail and related sectors in Atwater. Atwater lags the county and state for motor vehicle-related retail, home furnishings and appliances stores, and building materials outlets. These types of retail are dominated by auto malls and “big box” stores, and sales to Atwater residents are being captured in other larger nearby cities, especially in the auto center and Home Depot and Lowe’s stores in Merced city. Attracting a large building materials outlet to the city may represent a potential opportunity to capture additional taxable retail sales. On the other hand, Atwater has strong general merchandise store sales, due to the presence of large Walmart and Target stores which likely attract customers from nearby unincorporated areas such as Winton and McSwain. It should be noted, however, that the growth of online shopping has adversely affected the viability of local “brick and mortar” retail outlets, especially for certain types of goods such as electronics, books, and clothing, Nevertheless, as discussed below, Atwater and Merced County show extremely limited retail vacancies and continued demand for space according to CoStar, a service providing data on the retail, office, and industrial real estate inventory nationwide (see discussion and Table 3.1-8 below).

Workers Employed Residents
Place of Residence Number Percent Place of Work Number Percent Atwater 2,517 38.1% Merced County 9,486 73.5%
All Other Locations 4,081 61.9% Atwater 2,517 19.5%
Total Working in City 6,598 100.0% All Other Merced County 6,969 54.0% All Other Locations 3,420 26.5%
Total Employed Residents 12,906 100.0%

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-14 TABLE 3.1-8: TAXABLE SALES BY CATEGORY, 2022
NOTES:

EXCLUDES UNALLOCATED SALES AT THE CITY, COUNTY, AND STATE LEVEL, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE BETTER COMPARISON OF CITY WITH LARGER AREAS.
(A) BASED ON 2022 POPULATION ESTIMATES PUBLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE.

SOURCES: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION (CDTFA); CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE; BAE, 2023.

City of Atwater
Category Number Percent Per Capita
Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers $12,985,938 3.3% $411
Home Furnishings and Appliance Stores $5,103,456 1.3% $161 Bldg. Matrl. and Garden Equipment $7,314,452 1.9% $231
Food and Beverage Stores $34,629,202 8.8% $1,095
Gasoline Stations $54,011,056 13.8% $1,708
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores $27,693,037 7.1% $876 General Merchandise Stores $83,472,161 21.3% $2,639
Food Services and Drinking Places $61,097,926 15.6% $1,932 Other Retail Group $32,119,360 8.2% $1,016
Subtotal, All Retail and Food $318,426,588 81.1% $10,068 All Other Outlets $74,378,366 18.9% $2,352
Total, All Outlets $392,804,954 100.0% $12,419
Merced County
Category Number Percent Per Capita
Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers $412,670,490 11.6% $1,452 Home Furnishings and Appliance Stores $53,040,170 1.5% $187 Bldg. Matrl. and Garden Equipment $207,260,383 5.8% $729 Food and Beverage Stores $204,926,156 5.7% $721
Gasoline Stations $755,294,810 21.2% $2,658
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores $100,778,637 2.8% $355 General Merchandise Stores $450,826,994 12.6% $1,587
Food Services and Drinking Places $404,520,705 11.3% $1,424 Other Retail Group $202,273,007 5.7% $712
Subtotal, All Retail and Food $2,791,591,352 78.3% $9,825 All Other Outlets $774,577,022 21.7% $2,726
Total, All Outlets $3,566,168,374 100.0% $12,551
California
Category Number Percent Per Capita
Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers $107,327,993,599 13.7% $2,746 Home Furnishings and Appliance Stores $28,123,859,305 3.6% $720 Bldg. Matrl. and Garden Equipment $47,782,134,266 6.1% $1,223 Food and Beverage Stores $34,280,182,642 4.4% $877
Gasoline Stations $70,636,801,148 9.0% $1,808
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores $40,072,459,084 5.1% $1,025 General Merchandise Stores $63,997,398,244 8.2% $1,638
Food Services and Drinking Places $101,686,416,493 13.0% $2,602 Other Retail Group $75,396,667,543 9.6% $1,929
Subtotal, All Retail and Food $569,303,912,324 72.8% $14,568 All Other Outlets $213,004,255,626 27.2% $5,451
Total, All Outlets $782,308,167,950 100.0% $20,019

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-15 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Castle Commerce Center
Located adjacent to Atwater, the former Castle Air Force Base, now the Castle Airport and Castle Commerce Center, offers a key asset serving the local economic base. This facility includes a general aviation airport with an 11,800 foot runway, over 100,000 annual aircraft operations, and a developing multi-modal freight facility with rail service for local agricultural producers and industries, providing access to the neighboring BNSF line. The Airport is within a Foreign Trade Zone, and the Commerce Center includes office, warehouse, and R& D facilities and acreage, as well as aviation support and training facilities.

One of the activities taking place at the former air base is research on and testing of autonomous vehicles, including by Waymo. Merced County has provided funding to support this activity, including $2.1 million in 2021 to expand the 2.2-mile oval test track and other related facilities. These facilities are part of the TRC California Test Center, a branch of Ohio-based Transportation Research, Inc. More recently, in July 2023, the California State Transportation Agency awarded a Port and Freight Infrastructure Project grant of $49.6 million toward a $115.7 million project to build out an inland port at the Castle Commerce Center, providing multiple transportation modes for the shipment and transfer of goods, particularly agricultural products.

While the Airport and Commerce Center are outside city limits, the current and future facilities will provide jobs for city residents and generate economic activity within Atwater itself. The development of improved rail-related facilities will also provide environmental benefits by replacing multiple truck trips with fewer train trips, resulting in reduced emissions and better local air quality.

Future Job Growth
As shown in Table 1.3-10, Caltrans projects 17.8 percent growth in employment between 2020 and 2050, to a total of approximately 96,000 jobs, with most of this growth occurring by 2030. Assuming that Atwater maintains a constant share of Merced County jobs, employment in the city would reach 8,900 jobs in 2050, or about a 13 percent increase in jobs and non-residential real estate demand. It should be noted that this estimate for Atwater is based on a model trending out current conditions, and while macroeconomic conditions strongly influence regional trends, City actions with respect to economic development, land use, and other factors could influence the future of job creation in Atwater.

In addition to providing estimates of overall county employment, Caltrans projections allocate these jobs by major industry groups, as shown in Table 3.1-9. Caltrans projects that overall, employment growth in Merced County will lag California overall, with county job growth at 17.8 percent and statewide job growth at 24.1 percent between 2020 and 2050. County employment will continue to be dominated by jobs in the government, farm, and health and education employment sectors, with the top three sectors statewide being health and education, professional services, and government. The county proportion of jobs will continue to be particularly low relative to the state in the professional services sector as well as financial activities and information. In absolute numbers the largest employment gains in the county between 2020 and 2050 are projected to be in health and education, government, and leisure (which includes arts, recreation, and hospitality). These projections indicate that the overall economic base of Merced County will remain similar over time, with agriculture and related industries continuing to be a key component of the economy.

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-16 TABLE 3.1-9: EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY PROJECTIONS
NOTES: UNIVERSE CONSISTS OF ALL WAGE AND SALARY EMPLOYMENT BY PLACE OF WORK ON AN ANNUAL AVERAGE BASIS. DOES NOT INCLUDE SELF-EMPLOYED

PERSONS NOT ON PAYROLL
SOURCE: CALTRANS LONG-TERM SOCIO-ECONOMIC FORECASTS BY COUNTY, 2022; BAE, 2023.

Merced County
Major Industry Sector Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Private Sector
Farm 14,210 17.5% 15,282 16.0% 1,072 7.5%
Construction 3,060 3.8% 3,696 3.9% 636 20.8%
Manufacturing 9,700 12.0% 9,589 10.0% (111) -1.1%
Transportation, Utilities 3,610 4.5% 4,770 5.0% 1,160 32.1% Wholesale & Retail Trade 9,360 11.5% 9,802 10.3% 442 4.7% Financial Activities 1,830 2.3% 1,884 2.0% 54 3.0%
Professional Services 3,740 4.6% 4,651 4.9% 911 24.4%
Information 230 0.3% 109 0.1% (121) -52.4%
Health & Education 10,320 12.7% 14,417 15.1% 4,097 39.7% Leisure 5,330 6.6% 7,666 8.0% 2,336 43.8%
Government 18,400 22.7% 21,775 22.8% 3,375 18.3%
Unclassified 1,330 1.6% 1,947 2.0% 617 46.4%
Total Employment (c) 81,120 100.0% 95,589 100.0% 13,852 17.8% California
Major Industry Sector Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Private Sector
Farm 407,000 2.5% 425,499 2.1% 18,499 4.5%
Construction 857,000 5.2% 963,681 4.7% 106,681 12.4%
Manufacturing 1,264,000 7.6% 1,293,873 6.3% 29,873 2.4% Transportation, Utilities 732,000 4.4% 1,139,190 5.5% 407,190 55.6% Wholesale & Retail Trade 2,170,000 13.1% 2,340,120 11.4% 170,120 7.8% Financial Activities 818,000 4.9% 849,182 4.1% 31,182 3.8% Professional Services 2,600,000 15.7% 3,206,576 15.6% 606,576 23.3% Information 536,000 3.2% 651,323 3.2% 115,323 21.5%
Health & Education 2,737,000 16.5% 3,786,644 18.4% 1,049,644 38.4% Leisure 1,484,000 8.9% 2,432,950 11.8% 948,950 63.9%
Government 2,493,000 15.0% 2,817,898 13.7% 324,898 13.0% Unclassified 497,000 3.0% 691,054 3.4% 194,054 39.0%
Total Employment (c) 16,595,000 100.0% 20,597,990 100.0% 3,808,936 24.1% 2020 2050 Change 2020-2050
2020 2050 Change 2020-2050

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-17 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

3.2 REAL ESTATE CONDITIONS
For-Sale Residential Market Conditions
Between June 2022 and April 2023, 176 full and verified home sales were recorded in Atwater, consisting almost entirely of single-family residences, as displayed in Table 3.2-1. Larger single-family residential units with three or more bedrooms were the most commonly sold unit type during this period. The median home sale price for single-family units was $360,000 and the median sale price for condominiums (based on a very limited number of sales) was $335,000.

TABLE 3.2-1: CHARACTERISTICS OF HOME SALES BY TYPE, CITY OF ATWATER, JUNE 2022 THROUGH APRIL 2023 NOTE: DATA REFLECTS SINGLE-FAMILY AND CONDOMINIUMS SOLD FROM JUNE 2022 THROUGH APRIL 2023 (MOST RECENT DATA AVAILABLE AT TIME OF RESEARCH).

SOURCES: LISTSOURCE; BAE, 2023.

Rental Residential Market Conditions
While the Census data provides insights into long-term trends regarding housing market conditions in Atwater, data from CoStar, a private data vendor tracking the real estate inventory across residential, industrial, retail, and commercial properties, reports more recent information on rents, vacancies, absorption, and new construction. CoStar multifamily data captures only a sample of the residential rental market and is not an exhaustive survey of the city or the county rental inventory; for instance, the total rental inventory includes single-family homes not counted by CoStar.

Single-Family Residences
Sale Price Range 1 BD 2 BD 3 BD 4+ BD Total % Total
Less than $550,000 1 8 110 48 167 97.7%
$550,000-$599,999 0 0 3 1 4 2.3%
$600,000-$649,999 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%
$650,000 or more 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%
Total, SFR Sales 1 8 113 49 171 100.0%
% of Total 0.6% 4.7% 66.1% 28.7% 100.0%
Median Sale Price n.a. $261,000 $350,000 $381,000 $360,000 Average Sale Price n.a. $258,625 $354,239 $398,255 $361,711 Average Living Area (sq. ft.) n.a. 1,154 1,498 1,961 1,608 Average Lot Size (sq. ft.) n.a. 7,656 12,746 7,609 11,004 Average Price per Living sq. ft. n.a. $226 $242 $210 $234 Condominium
Sale Price Range 1 BD 2 BD 3 BD 4+ BD Total % Total
Less than $400,000 0 0 4 1 5 100.0%
$400,000-$499,999 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%
$500,000 or more 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%
Total, Condominium Sales 0 0 4 1 5 100.0%
% of Total 0.0% 0.0% 80.0% 20.0% 100.0%
Median Sale Price n.a. n.a. $325,000 $350,000 $335,000
Average Sale Price n.a. n.a. $333,750 $350,000 $337,000 Average Living Area (sq. ft.) n.a. n.a. 1,453 2,247 1,611 Average Lot Size (sq. ft.) n.a. n.a. 4,986 2,945 4,578
Average Price per Living sq. ft. n.a. n.a. $239 $156 $222

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-18 Table 3.2-2 provides a summary of recent multifamily rental residential market conditions for Atwater and Merced County. As presented below, CoStar reports approximately 2,700 market-rate multifamily units in Atwater, with a vacancy rate of only 1.7 percent. The citywide average apartment rental rate is $1,153, as of the second quarter of 2023, is a 2.9 percent rent increase from Q2 2022. The city’s Q3 2023 average rent is slightly above the countywide average of $1,066, and the vacancy rate is below the county rate of

3.1 percent; nevertheless, this 3.1 percent rate is indicative of a strong apartment rental market in Merced County. CoStar reports no new multifamily rental units completed since Q2 2022, and none currently under construction. Unit absorption in Atwater has been modest since 2013. Countywide, CoStar reports 119 new units delivered from Q3 2022 through Q2 2023, with an additional 238 units under construction.

TABLE 3.2-2: COSTAR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL OVERVIEW, 2Q 2023 SOURCES: COSTAR GROUP, 2023; BAE, 2023.

City of Merced
Multifamily Summary Atwater County
Inventory, Q2 2023 (all unit sizes) (a) 2,712 13,642
% of Units 19.9% 100.0%
Average Unit Size (sq. ft.) 1,037 890
Vacant Units 45 424
Vacancy Rate 1.7% 3.1%
Average Rents, Q2 2022 - Q2 2023 (per unit)
Average Rent, Q2 2022 $1,120 $1,066
Average Rent, Q2 2023 $1,153 $1,084
% Change Q2 2022 - Q2 2023 2.9% 1.7%
Net Absorption
Ten-Year Net Absorption (units), Q3 2013 - Q2 2023 104 648 One-Year Net Absorption (units), Q3 2022 - Q2 2023 (9) 21 New Deliveries (units), Q3 2022 - Q2 2023 0 119
Under Construction (units), Q2 2023 0 238

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-19 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Retail Market Overview
Retail in Atwater is primarily concentrated in three nodes: adjacent to State Highway 99 near the Applegate Road exit, along or near Bellevue Road, and Downtown along or near Broadway.

The largest shopping center (by far) in Atwater is the Applegate Ranch Shopping Center at Applegate Road and Route 99, containing both a Walmart Supercenter and a Super Target, along with numerous other retailers in a power center configuration totaling approximately 470,000 square feet. Also at this retail node is the nearby Atwater Gateway Center, anchored by Tractor Supply.

Bellevue Road is home to several older centers anchored by supermarkets or second-generation replacement stores. Centers include the Atwater Plaza Shopping Center, Five Corners Crossings, Atwater Marketplace, Atwater Town Center, and the Atwater Shopping Center. Anchor tenants include Food 4 Less and Walgreens, Sams Foods Supermarket and Rite-Aid, Big Lots (in a former Kmart space), SaveMart and CVS, and a 99 Cents Only store.

Downtown Atwater is home to a mix of small independent retailers and service businesses along Broadway and nearby streets. The City has undertaken efforts to enhance “Old Town Atwater,” including the 2009 Atwater Downtown Revitalization Strategy; work on this strategy is ongoing.

Overall, CoStar reports approximately 1.7 million square feet of retail space in Atwater, out of a total of 12 million square feet countywide (see Table 3.2-3). Vacancies are limited, at only 1.6 percent of the inventory in Atwater and 3.1 percent in Merced County. Average triple net asking rents in Atwater have increased 40 percent since 2013, from $12.17 to $17.06 per square foot in 2Q 2023. Asking rents for the county run slightly higher, reaching an average of $17.28 per square foot triple net in 2Q 2023. Both the city and the county exhibit net positive absorption of space in the last year and the last decade. CoStar shows very limited recent retail construction activity in Atwater, and approximately 100,000 square feet of retail space either completed or under construction in the last year countywide TABLE 3.2-3: COSTAR RETAIL MARKET OVERVIEW, Q2 2023
SOURCES: COSTAR GROUP, 2023; BAE, 2023.

City of Merced
Retail Summary Atwater County
Total Inventory (sq. ft.), Q2 2023 1,690,357 12,028,975 Vacant Stock (sq. ft.) 26,584 387,102
Vacancy Rate 1.6% 3.1%
Avg. Asking NNN Rents
Avg. Asking NNN Rent per sq. ft., Q2 2013 $12.17 $13.08 Avg. Asking NNN Rent per sq. ft., Q2 2023 $17.06 $17.28 % Change, Q2 2013 - Q2 2023 40.2% 32.1%
Net Absorption
Net Absorption (sq. ft.), Q3 2013 - Q2 2023 107,315 686,692 Net Absorption (sq. ft.), Q3 2022 - Q2 2023 26,067 39,530 New Deliveries (sq. ft.), Q3 2022 - Q2 2023 1,794 35,310 Under Construction (sq. ft.), Q2 2023 0 65,425

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-20 Retail Market Overview
Echoing the data on employment by major industry, CoStar data indicates that the office market in Atwater is somewhat limited, with a total reported inventory of about 340,000 square feet, out of a total of 3.6 million square feet in Merced County.

In Atwater, office uses are scattered throughout the city, and the city’s zoning allows office uses for properties in the following categories:
• Office Commercial
• Central Commercial District
• Downtown Business District
• General Commercial District
• Business Park District Overlay (Mixed Use District)
The business park district designation provides zoning focused on encouraging more concentrated office uses on a larger scale than other areas, such downtown.

Office vacancies are extremely low at less than one percent, and the lack of available space results in no reported average asking gross rent for the city, although historically it appears that average rents are below those for the county. Office space in Atwater and Merced County has shown limited absorption and no inventory growth in the last year; the county has actually seen net negative absorption of office space for the most recent four quarters reported.

TABLE 3.2-4: COSTAR OFFICE MARKET OVERVIEW, Q4 2022
SOURCES: COSTAR GROUP, 2023; BAE, 2023.

City of Merced
Office Summary Atwater County
Total Inventory (sq. ft.), Q2 2023 337,762 3,588,724
Vacant Stock (sq. ft.) 2,250 97,098
Vacancy Rate 0.7% 2.7%
Avg. Asking Gross Rents
Avg. Asking Gross Rent per sq. ft., Q2 2013 $9.83 $12.06 Avg. Asking Gross Rent per sq. ft., Q2 2023 n.a $21.05
% Change, Q2 2013 - Q2 2023 n.a 74.5%
Net Absorption
Net Absorption (sq. ft.), Q3 2013 - Q2 2023 14,566 295,665 Net Absorption (sq. ft.), Q3 2022 - Q2 2023 6,092 (31,720) New Deliveries (sq. ft.), Q3 2022 - Q2 2023 0 0
Under Construction (sq. ft.), Q2 2023 0 0

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-21 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Industrial Real Estate Market Overview
Industrial development in Atwater is concentrated in the southern portions of the city, with a large cluster of properties to the south of Highway 99 and east of the Applegate Ranch Shopping Center. Other industrial uses, including the Teasdale Latin Foods facility, are found between the Union Pacific rail line and Highway

99. Much of the city south of Highway 99 is zoned for manufacturing, industrial and business park uses, along with some areas near the airport and in the westernmost areas of the city north of Highway 99. The city has three zones where industrial development is allowed:
• Business Park Overlay
• Light Industrial
• Heavy Industrial
CoStar reports approximately 1.2 million square feet of existing industrial space in Atwater, and 12.0 million in Merced County overall, as shown in Table 3.2-5. Vacancies for industrial space are extremely low, at 1.0 percent for Atwater and 2.3 percent for the county. The strong local market in Atwater is also shown through the relatively high average asking rents, at $12.00 per square foot, or twice the countywide average. The low Atwater vacancy rate and high rent levels may be due in part to a constrained supply, with little increase in the inventory and limited absorption since 2013. Over the same period, the county has seen absorption of almost 700,000 square feet. The county has shown very little new industrial space developed or under development since mid-2022; Atwater shows no additions to the industrial space inventory over the same period. The net absorption since 2013 as a percent of total industrial space is of the same order of magnitude as the limited gains in manufacturing employment.

TABLE 3.2-5: INDUSTRIAL MARKET OVERVIEW, Q3 2023
SOURCES: COSTAR GROUP, 2023; BAE, 2023.

City of Merced
Industrial Summary Atwater County
Total Inventory (sq. ft.), Q2 2023 1,174,741 12,010,172 Vacant Stock (sq. ft.) 11,372 281,264
Vacancy Rate 1.0% 2.3%
Avg. Asking NNN Rents
Avg. Asking NNN Rent per sq. ft., Q2 2013 $3.00 $3.14
Avg. Asking NNN Rent per sq. ft., Q2 2023 $12.00 $5.99
% Change, Q2 2013 - Q2 2023 300.0% 90.8%
Net Absorption
Net Absorption (sq. ft.), Q3 2013 - Q2 2023 1,728 699,806 Net Absorption (sq. ft.), Q3 2022 - Q2 2023 (6,372) 34,835 New Deliveries (sq. ft.), Q3 2022 - Q2 2023 0 0
Under Construction (sq. ft.), Q2 2023 0 15,000

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-22

3.3 FISCAL CONDITIONS
The following section provides an overview of the City’s fiscal condition, including a summary of general fund revenue and expenditure trends. This also includes an assessment of the property tax generated within various locations throughout the City of Atwater, including potential annexation areas that may accommodate the projected residential and non-residential growth.

EXISTING SETTING
General Fund Balance
General Fund revenues and expenditures vary annually based on the changing conditions in the city. The majority of revenue generated within Atwater is attributed to property and sales taxes, while General Fund expenditures are primarily associated with police and fire services. Chart 3.3-1, below, shows City of Atwater General Fund revenues and expenditures from Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 through FY 2023-24.

Historically, General Fund revenues have exceeded expenditures, resulting in fiscal surpluses. As seen in Chart 3.3-1 annual General Fund revenues in Atwater have fluctuated between $14.2 and $19.4 million over the past several years. From FY 17-18 through FY 2021-22 revenues increased, and since then revenues have declined slightly or are projected to decline slightly, to $19.4 million in FY 2023-24.

Over the same seven-year period, General Fund expenditures have also fluctuated, with expenditures declining from $13.4 million in FY 201718 to $12.0 million in FY 2018-19, and then increasing each year and projected to reach $22.3 million in FY 2023-24.

CHART 3.3-1 GENERAL FUND REVENUE & EXPENDITURE TRENDS, FY 2017-18 TO FY 2023-24 SOURCES: CITY OF ATWATER FINANCE DEPARTMENT, CITY BUDGETS, 2023; BAE, 2023 $14.2 $14.2
$15.4
$18.9
$20.1 $18.6 $19.4
$13.4
$12.0 $13.0
$15.2 $14.2
$18.3
$22.3
$0.0
$5.0
$10.0
$15.0
$20.0
$25.0
FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19 FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22 FY 2022-23 (Amended)
FY 2023-24
(Budget)
General Fund Revenue ($ in Millions) General Fund Expenditures ($ in Millions)

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-23 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater General Fund Revenue by Type
The City of Atwater relies on a mix of revenue sources to support its General Fund. As illustrated in Chart

3.3-2, the primary revenues assumed in the FY 2023-24 budget are taxes, with property tax and sales tax together providing over half of General Fund revenues. The other significant source of revenue is charges for services, which provide more than one-fourth of the General Fund revenue. The remaining revenues include but are not limited to other taxes, intergovernmental transfers, and miscellaneous revenues.

CHART 3.3-2 GENERAL FUND REVENUE SOURCES, FY 2023-24
SOURCES: CITY OF ATWATER FINANCE DEPARTMENT, CITY BUDGETS, 2023; BAE, 2023.

Tax Revenue
Taxes are the primary source of funding for Atwater’s General Fund, projected to account for nearly twothirds of the total revenue in FY 2023-24 (see Table 3.3-1). Of the taxes that the City anticipates accruing, sales and use taxes are the largest source of revenue ($3,932,988), while motor vehicle in-lieu tax ($3,315,123) and secured-roll property tax ($2,480,100) represent the second and third largest share of revenue. Transient occupancy tax, collected from overnight visitors by lodging places, is a relatively small source of General Fund revenue. Given Atwater’s location along State Route 99, additional lodging development may represent an opportunity for further revenue diversification.

Property Tax,
$6,742,300
Sales Tax,
$5,155,902
Franchise Tax,
$679,737
Business License
Tax, $223,600
Transient
Occupancy Tax,
$33,274
Property Transfer
Tax, $110,000
License & Permits,
$309,125
Intergovernmental,
$945,290
Charges for
Services,
$4,657,964
Fines & Forfeitures …
Miscellaneous
Revenue, $308,533 Transfers-In,
$202,375

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-24 TABLE 3.3-1: GENERAL FUND REVENUE – TAXES, FY 2023-24
SOURCES: CITY OF ATWATER, CITY FINANCE DEPARTMENT; BAE, 2023 Property Tax Allocation Factors by TRA
Property taxes are a critical source of revenue for the City. Figure 3.3-1 shows the proportion of the one percent ad valorem property tax that flows to either the City General Fund or the Fire District for different tax rate areas (TRAs) in Atwater. The TRA tax share for Atwater properties falls in two ranges. As shown, TRAs covering most of the city provide between 31 percent and 32 percent of the total one percent tax rate to the city, but some peripheral areas, representing more recent annexations, only provide between 17 percent and 18 percent based on revenue sharing agreements with Merced County. For a given type of development, it will generally be more fiscally beneficial for the City to focus that development in areas where the City receives the highest share of the new property tax revenue. BAE also considered the potential property tax revenue that would flow to the City for parcels within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) that could potentially annex to the City for future development. Based on the City-County master revenue sharing agreement from 2017, the City would receive 25 percent of the General Fund property tax increment that would otherwise be allocated to the Merced County General Fund in these areas, while the County would continue to receive 100 percent of the share from the property tax base as of the date of annexation. The County Fire District would also continue to receive 100 percent of its base allocation, while the Atwater Fire District would receive 100 percent of the increment. These allocations of property tax would provide the City with a share of the tax increment roughly equivalent or marginally above the 17 percent to 18 percent from recent annexations, depending on the particular TRA in question. Much of the unincorporated area in the SOI is currently in agricultural uses, and the tax increment as the area is developed is likely to end up providing the majority of the overall property value and tax generation. In any case, the ability of the City’s share of property taxes from potential annexations along with other funding sources to support the services required in that area should be evaluated carefully for any annexations under consideration.

General Fund Revenue - Taxes
Category Number Percent
Sales & Use Tax $4,426,700 35.7%
Sales & Use Tax-Public Safety $199,202 1.6%
Business License Tax $220,000 1.8%
Franchise Tax $679,737 5.5%
Property Tax In Lieu Vehicle License Tax $3,690,000 29.7% Property Tax , Current Secure $2,800,000 22.6%
Property Tax, Current Unsecure $175,000 1.4%
Property Tax, Prior Secured $300 0.002%
Property Tax, Prior Unsecure $2,000 0.02%
Property Tax, Supplemental $50,000 0.4%
Property Tax, Miscellaneous $3,000 0.02%
Property Tax, Homeowner Exempt $18,000 0.1%
Transient Occupancy Tax $33,274 0.3%
Document Stamp Tax $110,000 0.9%
Total Revenue, All Taxes $12,407,213 100.0%

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS 3-25 General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater Figure 3.3-1 Property Tax Allocation to City
Sources: Esri; County of Merced

3.0 ECONOMIC, REAL ESTATE MARKET, AND FISCAL CONDITIONS City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 3-26 General Fund Expenditures
General Fund expenditures in Fiscal Year 2023-2024 are anticipated to be $22.3 million, of which Police and Fire constitute the largest shares, as shown in Chart 1.3-4 Police account for 28 percent, or $6.3 million of the total expenses, with Fire services at 19 percent, or $4.2 million. Community Development expenditures are budgeted at 11 percent ($2.5 million) of the General Fund total, miscellaneous nondepartment expenses at $2.9 million and the Finance department at $1.4 million. In descending order, the remaining expenses are Operating Transfers Out, Parks, City Administration/City Clerk, Human Resources, Recreation & Community Events, City Council, and City Treasurer.

Chart 3.3-3 General Fund Expenditure Sources, FY 2023-24 SOURCES: CITY OF ATWATER FINANCE DEPARTMENT, CITY BUDGETS, 2023; BAE, 2023 Fiscal Considerations
With the exception of the proposed budget for the current fiscal year, Atwater’s General Fund has maintained a positive annual balance, allowing the City to build a reserve that even with this year’s imbalance remains at 25 percent. Revenues and expenses have both increased gradually over the last several years. The substantial reserve could assist the City during any future periods of declining revenues and/or increasing expenses. The City should carefully assess the fiscal impacts of any annexation to ensure that the cost to provide services to the new areas does not exceed the revenue generated by the annexation. Given that Police and Fire services consume more than half of the City General Fund revenues, particular attention should be paid to the needs for expansion of these services in areas that the updated General Plan Land Use Element would plan for growth. Typically, providing services to infill development is more efficient than for newly annexed properties. Considering the more limited property tax allocated to the City from annexed properties this suggests the City could benefit from focusing new development as much as possible within infill areas where the City receives more robust property tax shares.

Police,
$6,306,867
Fire, $4,156,118
Community
Development,
$2,529,826
NonDepartmental
Miscellaneous,
$2,930,217
Finance,
$1,354,332
Human
Resources,
$795,930
Parks, $821,458
City
Administration /
City Clerk,
$796,902
Operating
Transfers Out,
$1,935,114
Other ,
$694,646

City of Atwater | General Plan Existing Conditions Report 4-0

Chapter 4
Community Services, Recreation, & Facilities
This Chapter includes the following topics:

4.1 Fire Protection

4.2 Law Enforcement

4.3 Parks and Recreation

4.4 Schools, Libraries, and Other Community
Facilities

The Community Services, Recreation, & Facilities chapter addresses community services within Atwater. Community services include fire protection, law enforcement, parks and recreation, schools, libraries, and other public facilities.

4.0 COMMUNITY SERVICES, RECREATION, AND FACILITIES
4‐1  General Plan Existing Conditions Report | City of Atwater

4.0 COMMUNITY SERVICES, RECREATION, AND FACILITIES
This chapter addresses community services and facilities within the City of Atwater. Community services and facilities include fire protection, law enforcement, parks and recreation, schools, libraries, and other public facilities.  The information and analysis is intended to inform the General Plan Update process by providing both historical context and a baseline of existing community services and physical facilities. The location of the community services, recreation and facilities are shown on Figure 4.0‐1. This chapter includes the following sections:

4.1 Fire Protection

4.2 Law Enforcement

4.3 Parks and Recreation

4.4 Schools, Libraries, and Other Community Facilities

Longview Ave
N Winton Way
Shasta Dr
Co Rd 37
Olive Ave
Franklin Rd
E Juniper Ave
1st St
E Bellevue Rd
Campbell Blvd
Wallace Rd
N Gurr Rd
Shaffer Rd
Camellia Dr
Steinberg Rd
3rd St
Bell Dr
Elm Ave
5th
St
Liberty Ave
Giannini Rd
Southern Pacific Ave
Hospital Rd
Co Rd J18
Cedar Ave
W Bellevue Rd
6th St
Gertrude Ave
Arena Way
Juniper Ave
Valley St
Center St
Lagoon Ave
Crest Rd
Nebela Dr
Virginia St
Augusta Ln
Almond Ave
Fairway Dr
Canal Dr
Broadway Ave
E Holly Ave
High St
Linden St
Ashby Rd
Bellevue Rd
Moran Rd
Swan Rd
Stein Rd
Bert Crane Rd
Orchard Park
Applegate Rd
Central Ave
W Ave 2
Sunset Dr
W Ave 1
Commerce Ave
Trindade Rd
Fruitland Ave
Truckee Dr
Sultana Ave Sultana Dr
Rose Ave
Rogers Rd
Bell Dr W Cardella Rd
Longview Rd
Atwater Jordan Rd
Hull Rd
Vine Ave
Magnolia Rd
White Crane Rd
W Belcher Ave
Elk Rd
99 140
Industry Wy
Power
Line Park
Osborn
Park
Veterans
Park
Joan Faul
Park
Albiani Park
Rancho Del
Rey Golf
Course
Shaffer
Tot
Lot
Community
Center
Civic Center
Manuel Bairos Park
Castle AFB
Sports Fields
Castle Memorial Parade Ground
Sybil Crookham
Elementary
Schelby
School
Frank Sparkes
Elementary
Winton Middle
Peggy Heller
Elementary
Atwater
High Atwater Castle
Head Start
Elmer Wood
Elementary
Bellevue
Elementary
Thomas
Olaeta
Elementary
Buhach
Colony High
Shaffer
Elementary
Franklin
Elementary
Joe Stefani
Elementary
Valley
Community
School
Winton Fire
Station
Castle Fire
Station
Merced County
Fire Station
Atwater Fire Station 42
Gettysburg
Medical
Clinic
Castle Family
Health Center
Castle Family
Health Center
CASTLE

AIRPORT
Atwater
Police
Department Merced County
Animal Services
WINTON
Figure 4.0-1. Community and Recreation Facilities
Produced by De Novo Planning Group for the City of Atwater February 28, 2024
Sources: Merced County GIS; City of Atwater GIS; USGS Roads Database. 0 ½ 1
Miles

L E G E N D
Atwater City Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Fire Stations
Medical Facilities
Law Enforcement Stations
Schools
Library
Park
Golf Course
Sandlewood
Park
Heller
Park
Winton
Way Park
E.L.

Walters
Park
Ralston Park
Bloss
Park
Memorial
Ball Park
Library Open Space
Mitchell
Senior
Elementary
Aileen Colburn
Elementary
Mitchell
Elementary
Mitchell
Head Start
Atwater
City Fire
Station
Castle Family Health Center
1st St Olive Ave
Bell Dr
Eucalyptus St
Mitchell St
Castle St
Sycamore Ave
7th St
Elm Ave
Mitchell Ave
Suncrest St
5th St
3rd St
Grove Ave
Broadway Ave
Drakeley Ave
Cedar Ave
N Winton Way
Heights Ave
6th St
Applegate
Rd
Atwater Blvd
Maple
St
High St
Mulberry Ave
Redwood Ave Canal Dr
Quince Ave
Juniper Ave
Linden St
Palm Ave
Second St
Liberty Ave
Ivy Ave
Herman St
Fir Ave
Sierra Vista St
4th St
Park St
Marguerite St
Kadota Ave
Laurel Ave
Willow St
Bell Ln
99 SEE INSET MAP

INSET MAP