Atwater City Council
July 14, 2025

83744.00600\43431268.1
that aspect of the Project Infrastructure that necessitated acquisition of the Offsite Land shall terminate and be of no further force or effect in accordance with Government Code section 66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act.

6. Obligations of City.

The Parties acknowledge and agree that Owner's agreement to perform and abide by its covenants and obligations set forth in this Agreement, including Owner's decision to annex the Property to the City and process siting of the Project in the City, is material consideration for City's agreement to perform and abide by the covenants and obligations of City, as set forth in this Agreement.

6.1 Reserved.

6.2 Cooperation in Subsequent Approvals.

6.2.1 Owner's Application for Subsequent Approvals. Owner shall be obligated to obtain any and all required Subsequent Approvals to develop the Project. Owner's obligations under this Section 6.2.1 apply to those approvals that are under City's jurisdiction and also to those approvals that may be required by other governmental or quasi-governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the implementation of any aspect of the Project (including, without limitation, the Department of Transportation; agencies having jurisdiction over boundary changes or district formation, flood control, sewer service, water service or fire protection; and agencies having jurisdiction over air quality, biological resources, solid wastes and hazardous wastes and materials). City shall cooperate with Owner in its efforts to obtain such approvals from other agencies and shall at the request of Owner use its best efforts to ensure the timely availability of such approvals.

6.2.2 City's Processing of Subsequent Approvals. City shall cooperate and diligently work to promptly process and consider all applications for Subsequent Approvals, provided they are in a proper form and include payment of any applicable fees and provided that Owner is in compliance with this Agreement. In the event that City and Owner mutually determine that additional personnel or outside consultants need to be retained to assist City to expeditiously process any Subsequent Approval, the cost of any such personnel or consultants shall be paid by Owner but shall be under the direction of City. City shall retain its discretion in its consideration of any and all Subsequent Approvals but shall exercise that discretion in a manner consistent with the Master Plan and this Agreement.

6.3 Availability of Public Services.

6.3.1 Sewage Capacity. To the extent permitted by law, City shall reserve or provide such capacity for sewage transmission and treatment as may be necessary to serve the Project.

Owner will consult and cooperate with City from time to time in determining the anticipated timing, sequence and amount of development in the Project so as to give City sufficient advance notice to ensure that adequate capacity is available when needed, so as to avoid delaying development or occupancy of any portion of the Project.

83744.00600\43431268.1

6.3.2 Water System. To the extent required to ensure adequate domestic and firefighting water capacity and redundancy for the Project, City shall cooperate in connecting the Project's water supply system with the City's. City acknowledges that such connection also benefits City by providing similar redundancy from the Project's water well.

6.3.3 Construction Water. Until the Project's own water supply infrastructure is installed and operating, City agrees to make construction water available to the Project by permitting the Project to connect with the existing City water supply infrastructure at one or more locations Owner may from time to time request, subject to City approval in its reasonable discretion, at Owner's cost and on those terms and conditions and charges customarily applied by City to similar requests consistent with City standards. City also shall permit Owner to install such temporary construction water pipelines and related infrastructure as reasonably necessary to provide construction water to various portions of the Property for Owner's use in any and all Project grading and construction operations.

6.4 Right to Rebuild. City agrees that Owner, in Owner's sole discretion, may renovate or rebuild the Project or portions thereof during the Term should it become necessary due to natural disaster, changes in seismic, flood or other requirements, or other causes. Any such renovation or rebuilding shall comply with the terms of this Agreement and shall be subject to CEQA as may be required under applicable law.

7. Financing Mechanisms and Owner Funding.

7.1 Assessment Districts or Other Funding Mechanisms. The Parties acknowledge that each of them requires financial assistance to build the infrastructure and improvements required to support the Project and serve the Annexation Area, and that City's assurances to cooperate in arranging such assistance is a material consideration for Owner agreeing to proceed with development of the Project. City also acknowledges that development of the Project will provide material benefits, including but limited to employment opportunities for City's residents and tax revenues to support City operations, constituting consideration for City to enter into this Agreement and to provide the assurances in this Section 7.
(a) City shall cooperate in the formation of, or annexation to, one or more assessment districts, geologic hazard abatement districts, landscaping and lighting districts, community facilities districts, utility authority, lease leasebacks, project-specific tax reimbursement tax-exempt financing mechanisms, or other funding mechanisms related to public safety, traffic, sewer, water, fire, storm water, recreation or other infrastructure or public service needs (collectively, "Funding Mechanisms") that include the Property and to the extent permitted by law include other properties within or outside the City, to the extent such Funding Mechanism and its provisions are permitted under applicable law, that Owner requests to help fund infrastructure improvements and to ensure the orderly development of the Project.
(b) City shall diligently and expeditiously process applications by Owner necessary to establish such Funding Mechanisms, as long as (i) the application complies with law, (ii) is consistent with City standards, and (iii) will result in no commitment of City general funds.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, while City agrees to cooperate in the process of formation of Funding Mechanisms, the final determination as to City's participation in any Funding Mechanism, including an EIFD as defined below (either by pledging property tax increment or otherwise) or any other financing

83744.00600\43431268.1
district shall be made by the City Council in its sole and absolute discretion.. City shall cooperate in good faith with Owner's efforts to obtain the participation of Merced County or other public agencies as needed to establish and implement such Funding Mechanisms. Without limiting the foregoing, among the Financing Mechanisms Owner may request, City acknowledges that Owner initially proposes utilizing one or more Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts ("EIFD") pursuant to Government Code section 53398.50 et seq. with participation by Merced County to fund infrastructure of regional significance within and outside the City.
(c) City shall diligently seek to sell any bonds to be issued and secured by such Funding Mechanisms upon the best terms reasonably available in the marketplace. (d) Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owner retains all its rights to oppose the formation or proposed assessments of new Funding Mechanisms, or any new or increased assessment under a Funding Mechanism, or to request or pursue assessment credits or reductions, unless otherwise provided for herein. Notwithstanding any terms to the contrary, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as waiving City's discretion to the extent required under applicable law in deciding whether and in what form to establish a Funding Mechanism, impose and collect assessments, issue and sell bonds, or undertake any other discretionary action related thereto. Any and all costs associated with forming or joining and then implementing Funding Mechanisms under this Section 7.1 shall be shared equally by City (50%) and Owner and other benefitting property owners (50%).

7.2 Owner Reimbursement by Benefitting Properties.

7.2.1 Reimbursement Obligation. City acknowledges that Owner has expended and will expend considerable funds for approvals and improvements which may benefit properties within the Annexation Area but outside the Property (collectively, the "Benefitted Properties") by facilitating their development and use. To the extent that the owner of a Benefitted Property either (i) applies for and is approved to develop the Benefitted Property relying on the Benefitting Approvals (as defined below), or (ii) makes use of a Benefitting Improvement (as defined below) to support either the current use on the Benefitted Property or some new development or use on the Benefitted Property, Owner shall be entitled to reimbursement based on a pro rata, fair share apportionment of the Reimbursable Expenses (as defined below), such reimbursement to come directly from the owner of the Benefitted Property unless Owner agrees to reimbursement via a Financing Mechanism.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owner agrees that residential development will not be required to provide any payment, and the Reimbursable Expenses will be shared by development on the Property and non-residential development on the Benefitted Properties.

7.2.2 Reimbursable Expenses. City agrees that expenditures by Owner for the following items will qualify for fair share reimbursement by the Benefitted Properties pursuant to the terms of this Section 7.2 (collectively, the "Reimbursable Expenses");:
(a) Preparation, processing and approval of the EIR, General Plan Amendment, Prezoning, Master Plan, Agricultural Designation Removal, Annexation, and General Plan Housing Element update, including related consultant studies and work (collectively, the "Benefitting Approvals");

83744.00600\43431268.1
(b) Those portions of Project-Related Infrastructure (as defined in Section 8.1) to be built or funded by Owner as part of developing the Project, that either are (i) oversized to accommodate use by the Benefitted Properties or (ii) extend services that as of June 22, 2017 were not available to the Benefitted Properties, including related consultant studies and work (collectively, the "Benefitting Improvements");
(c) Consultant and legal fees to manage and implement the planning, design, approval and implementation effort, payments to subsidize or reimburse City approval processing and other expenses, and expenses to determine the appropriate water service entity and other utility service providers (collectively, the "Benefitting Labor Costs")

7.2.3 Reimbursement Procedure.
(a) If Owner seeks reimbursement from time to time under this Section 7.2, City shall negotiate in good faith with Owner to enter into one or more reimbursement agreements with Owner, in which among other things City will (i) identify the improvements qualifying as Benefitting Improvements, (ii) identify the properties qualifying as Benefitted Properties as to each Benefitting Approval or Benefitting Improvement, (iii) determine the Owner costs qualifying as Reimbursable Expenses, (iv) establish the allocation of Reimbursable Expenses to each Benefitted Property, and (v) establish the timing and method of reimbursement to Owner. (b) City thereafter shall use its best efforts, to the extent permitted under applicable law, (i) to require as a condition to approval of development or use on the Benefitted Property that Owner be reimbursed by the owner of the Benefitted Property at the earliest opportunity, and (ii) to form, consistent with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations (including without limitation Proposition 218), a local benefit district for the purpose of facilitating the reimbursement of Owner, to the extent such reimbursement is not otherwise provided. Owner shall pay all of City's costs associated therewith and shall indemnify and hold City harmless from and against all claims in connection therewith. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owner agrees that City's obligations hereunder are limited to facilitating reimbursement from other private property owners as set forth above, and City shall have no obligation to reimburse Owner.

7.2.4 Reimbursement by Financing Mechanisms. To the extent not reimbursed by the Benefitted Properties, Owner shall be entitled to reimbursement from the Financing Mechanisms for Owner's actual costs to install improvements that are included in the Financing Mechanisms beyond Owner's fair share for such improvements, including but not limited to a share of the costs to plan and design such improvements. The details of such reimbursement shall be included as part of establishing each Financing Mechanism.

7.2.5 Credit Against Traffic Fees.
(a) In return for Owner's obligation to install any of the "City Fee Program" facilities listed in Table 9 of the Transportation Improvement Plan ("TIP"), such Table 9 attached hereto as Exhibit C (the "Local Traffic Improvements"), Owner shall be entitled to credit its costs against City's Traffic Circulation Fee that otherwise would be payable for development of the Project.

83744.00600\43431268.1
(b) In return for Owner's obligation to install any of the "Regional Fee Program" facilities (or portions thereof) listed in Table 9 of the TIP, as shown in Exhibit C (the "Regional Traffic Improvements"), Owner shall be entitled to credit its costs against the RTIF that otherwise would be payable for development of the Project. (c) City agrees that credit against City's Traffic Circulation Fee and against the RTIF is justified by the many traffic improvements beyond CEQA-required mitigation measures that Owner will provide, in addition to the substantial employment, tax and other benefits that the Project will provide City, the County and their residents.

8. Owner Obligations.

8.1 Project-Related Infrastructure. As part of developing the Project, Owner shall build or cause to be built the following public improvements (collectively, the "Project Related Infrastructure"):
(a) Any remaining water storage, transmission and distribution facilities that are necessary beyond any such infrastructure that is to be federally funded. Such infrastructure is shown in Figure 20 of the Master Plan and in Sheet 7 of the Vesting Map (collectively, the "Water Facilities"); provided, the Master Plan shall govern if there is any inconsistency between them;
(b) Any remaining sanitary sewer facilities that are necessary beyond any such infrastructure that is to be federally funded. Such infrastructure is shown in Figure 23 of the Master Plan and in Sheet 7 of the Vesting Map (collectively, the "Sewer Facilities"); provided, the Master Plan shall govern if there is any inconsistency between them; (c) Any remaining storm drainage facilities that are necessary beyond any such infrastructure that is to be federally funded. Such infrastructure is shown in Figure 26 of the Master Plan and in Sheet 7 of the Vesting Map (collectively, the "Storm Drainage Facilities"); provided, the Master Plan shall govern if there is any inconsistency between them; and (d) The traffic, roadway and transportation facilities shown in Figures 14 and 15(a) of the Master Plan, in Sheet 2 of the Vesting Map, and in the TIP attached hereto as Exhibit D (collectively, the "Transportation Facilities"); provided, the TIP shall govern if there is any inconsistency between them.

The precise phasing of each aspect of the Project-Related Infrastructure will be determined at the time of Subsequent Approvals. Notwithstanding the above, Owner may be eligible for reimbursement by the Benefitted Properties, funding or reimbursement by the Financing Mechanisms, and/or credit against Development Fees, to the extent authorized by this Agreement as to qualifying portions of the ProjectRelated Infrastructure.

9. Amendment or Cancellation.

9.1 Amendment of Agreement.

83744.00600\43431268.1

9.1.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws. If state or federal laws or regulations enacted after May 22, 2017 or an action of any state or federal agency prevents or precludes compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or the Project Approvals or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by City, the Parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement to comply with such federal or state laws or regulations or with the actions of state or federal agencies in a manner that protects, to the greatest extent feasible, the vested rights of Owner under this Agreement. Any such amendment of this Agreement shall be consented to by Owner and considered by the City Council. Each Party agrees to extend to the other its prompt and reasonable cooperation in so modifying this Agreement or approved plans. During the interim until this Agreement is so amended, or for the remainder of the Term if this Agreement is not so amended, the provisions at issue shall be deemed suspended but the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce; provided, Owner retains the right in Owner's sole discretion to terminate this Agreement and Owner's obligations hereunder in response to suspension of such provisions.

9.1.2 Amendment or Cancellation by Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be amended (in whole or part) in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the Parties and in accordance with the procedures of Government Code section 65868. Except as otherwise permitted herein, this Agreement may be canceled in whole or in part only by an action which complies with Government Code section 65868.

9.1.3 Amendment as to Portion of Property. When a Party that is successor to Owner as to a portion of the Property ("Portion") seeks such an amendment, then such Party may only seek amendment of this Agreement as directly relates to the Portion, and the Party or Parties owning the remainder of the Property shall not be required or entitled to be a signatory or to consent to an amendment that affects only the other Party's Portion so long as such amendment does not directly or indirectly affect the rights or obligations of the Parties owning the remainder of the Property. If any Portion of the Property is subject to a document which creates an association which oversees common areas and any construction or reconstruction on or of the same, then the association shall be deemed to be the "owner" of that Portion of the Property for the purpose of amending this Agreement.

9.1.4 Administrative Agreement Amendments. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9.1.2, City's Community Development Director or designee ("Director") may, except to the extent otherwise required by law, enter into certain amendments to this Agreement on behalf of City so long as such amendment does not substantially affect (a) the Term; (b) the permitted uses of the Property; (c) provisions for significant reservation or dedication of land; (d) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions; (e) the density or intensity of use of the Property; (f) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; or (g) monetary contributions by Owner as provided in this Agreement ("Administrative Agreement Amendment"), and shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before the Parties may execute an amendment hereto. The Director shall determine whether a reservation or dedication is "significant", and shall evaluate and apply the term "substantially affect" in the context of the Project as a whole.

9.1.5 Amendment Exemptions. No amendment of an Initial Approval or Subsequent Approval, whether done as an administrative amendment or otherwise, shall require an amendment to this Agreement. Instead, any such matter automatically shall be deemed to be

83744.00600\43431268.1
incorporated into the Project and vested under this Agreement when written and executed by the Parties.

9.1.6 Amendment Limitations. In consideration of the scope of benefits to City provided by this Agreement and the Project, any amendment to this Agreement shall only be subject to such new terms and conditions, including new exactions or other obligations, as are reasonably related to impacts on City directly attributable to such amendment.

9.2 Amendment of Project Approvals. To the extent permitted by law, any Initial Approval or Subsequent Approval may, from time to time, be amended or modified in the following manner.

9.2.1 Administrative Project Amendments. Upon written request by Owner for an amendment or modification to an Initial Approval or Subsequent Approval, the Director shall determine (a) whether the requested amendment or modification is minor when considered in light of the Project as a whole, and (b) whether the requested amendment or modification is consistent with this Agreement, Applicable Law, applicable Construction Codes, and State and Federal law. If the Director finds that the proposed amendment or modification satisfies the terms of this Section 9.2.1, and will result in no new significant environmental impacts not addressed and mitigated in the EIR or mitigated by conditions to any Project Approval, it shall be determined to be an "Administrative Project Amendment" and the Director may, except to the extent otherwise required by law, approve the Administrative Project Amendment without notice or public hearing. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, lot line adjustments, reductions in the density, intensity, scale or scope of the Project, minor alterations in vehicle circulation patterns or access points, changes in pedestrian path alignments, minor variations in lot layouts, substitutions of comparable landscaping for any landscaping shown on any final development plan or landscape plan, variations in the location of structures that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, variations in the location or installation of utilities and other infrastructure that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, and minor adjustments to the Project site diagram or Property legal description shall be treated as Administrative Project Amendments.

9.2.2 Non-Administrative Project Amendments. Any request of Owner for an amendment or modification to an Initial Approval or Subsequent Approval which is determined not to be an Administrative Project Amendment pursuant to Section 9.2.1 shall be subject to review, consideration and action pursuant to Applicable Law and this Agreement.

10. Annual Review.

10.1 Initiation of Review. The annual review date for this Agreement shall be during the thirty (30) days following each anniversary of the Effective Date during the Term. The Director shall initiate the annual review, as required under Government Code section 65865.1, by giving Owner at least thirty (30) days' written notice that the City intends to undertake such review. At least ten (10) days prior to any annual review, City shall deposit in the mail and transmit by electronic mail to Owner a copy of all staff reports and related exhibits concerning contract performance that City will rely on in its annual review.

10.2 Good Faith Compliance. Owner shall provide evidence to the Director

83744.00600\43431268.1
demonstrating Owner's good faith efforts to comply with the provisions of this Agreement. Owner shall be permitted an opportunity to respond to City's documentation and City's evaluation of Owner's performance.

10.3 Procedure. Director shall review Owner's good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement, after considering any evidence and responses provided by Owner, and shall make written findings and determinations on the basis of substantial evidence as to whether or not Owner has complied in good faith with this Agreement. Director's decision may be appealed to the City Council, which shall hold a duly noticed hearing on the appeal and thereafter uphold or reverse the Director's decision.

10.4 Notice of Non-Compliance. If on the basis of the annual review, the Director, or on appeal the City Council, finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that Owner has not complied in good faith with the terms or conditions of this Agreement, or if the City determines that Owner has failed to cure a default in accordance with Section 11.2, City may commence proceedings to enforce, modify or terminate this Agreement as follows. City shall give Owner a written "Notice of Non-Compliance" and thereafter Owner shall have forty-five (45) days, or such longer period as City and Owner may agree in writing, to respond in writing to such finding by specifying either how Owner's non-compliance has been cured (or is diligently being cured) or the grounds upon which it believes that it is complying with this Agreement. If Owner's response to the Notice of NonCompliance has not been received by City within the prescribed forty-five (45) days, or such additional period of time as mutually agreed, the Notice of Non-Compliance shall be conclusively presumed to be valid, and the City may commence proceedings on termination or modification of this Agreement pursuant to Section 10.5. If Owner responds within the time period provided, the Parties agree to meet in good faith at reasonable times and from time to time for a period of at least sixty (60) days to arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution of the matters asserted in the Notice of Non-Compliance and disputed in the response. If after sixty (60) days, or any extension of time as mutually agreed to by the Parties, the Parties have failed to arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution of such matter(s), City may commence proceedings on termination or modification of this Agreement pursuant to Section 10.5.

10.5 Modification or Termination. If City determines to proceed with modification or termination of this Agreement after following the procedure under Section 10.4, City shall give notice to Owner or successor in interest thereto of its intention to do so in accordance with the procedures for such notice set forth in Government Code section 65868. Nothing in this Section 10 shall prevent or restrict Owner from providing additional evidence as to Owner's compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

10.6 Costs. Costs reasonably incurred by City in connection with the annual review shall be paid by Owner in accordance with the City's schedule of fees in effect at the time of review; provided, Owner shall not be liable for City's costs incurred to terminate this Agreement.

10.7 Written Notice of Compliance. Within thirty (30) days of a written request by Owner, City shall provide Owner with written notice of compliance, in recordable form, duly executed and acknowledged by City. Owner shall have the right in its sole discretion to record such notice of compliance.

10.8 Failure to Conduct Annual Review. If City fails to initiate or complete its annual

83744.00600\43431268.1
review in any year, then after thirty (30) days of Owner's notice regarding such failure Owner shall be deemed in compliance with the terms of this Agreement for the year in question.

11. Default.

11.1 Notice and Cure. Failure or unreasonable delay by a Party to perform any material provision herein shall constitute a default of this Agreement. The Party alleging a default shall serve written notice ("Notice of Default") upon the defaulting Party, specifying the nature of the alleged default and the manner and period of time in which the default may be satisfactorily cured. If the default is not cured by the defaulting Party within thirty (30) days after actual receipt of the Notice of Default by the defaulting Party or such longer period of time that may be specified in the Notice of Default (the "Cure Period"), such uncured default shall be treated as an "Event of Default"; provided, however, that if the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within the Cure Period, no Event of Default shall be deemed to have occurred if the defaulting Party (a) begins to cure the default within the Cure Period, (b) gives the nondefaulting Party notice before the end of the Cure Period that the cure cannot practicably be completed in the Cure Period, together with an explanation and estimated cure time needed, and (c) diligently pursues such cure to completion. Failure to give notice of an alleged default shall not constitute a waiver of any default.

11.2 Right to Challenge Notice. After receiving a Notice of Default, during the Cure Period a defaulting Party may provide evidence establishing it was never in fact in breach of this Agreement, and may initiate mediation proceedings. Unless curing the alleged default in the interim is reasonably necessary to protect the public health and safety, the defaulting Party need not initiate cure efforts specified in the Notice of Default during mediation and the Cure Period shall not begin to run until mediation either concludes or is terminated by a Party.

11.3 Remedies and Damages. Following expiration of any applicable Cure Period resulting in an uncured Event of Default, the nondefaulting Party may institute legal proceedings to enforce the terms of this Agreement, or in the event of a material Event of Default (as defined in Section 12.2) may terminate this Agreement pursuant to the provisions of Section 12.2, subject to the defaulting Party's ability to require mediation. In no event shall either Party be liable in damages for any default or upon termination of this Agreement, it being expressly understood and agreed that the sole legal or equitable remedy available to either Party for a breach or violation of this Agreement by the other Party shall be an action in mandamus, specific performance or other injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce the provisions of this Agreement by the other Party, or to terminate this Agreement.

This limitation on damages shall not preclude actions by a Party to enforce payments of monies or the performance of obligations requiring an obligation of money from the other Party under the terms of this Agreement including, but not limited to obligations to pay reasonable attorneys' fees and obligations to advance monies or reimburse monies.

11.4 Default as to a Portion of the Property. When an Event of Default applies only to a Portion of the Property owned by a successor to Owner, and does not affect or involve the rights or obligations under this Agreement regarding the remainder of the Property or the separate Owner(s) of such remainder, the proceedings under this Section 11 and the remedies available to City shall be applied to and enforced against only said Portion and the Owner thereof, and this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect as to such remainder and separate Owner(s).

83744.00600\43431268.1

12. Termination of Agreement.

12.1 Termination Generally. This Agreement shall terminate (a) upon the expiration of the Term (plus any extensions mutually agreed), or (b) when the Project has been fully developed and (i) all of Owner's obligations in connection therewith and with this Agreement have been satisfied as reasonably determined by City and (ii) the Project and Property have no further need for the rights and protections provided by this Agreement as reasonably determined by Owner. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual consent of the Parties.

12.2 Termination Due to Default.

12.2.1 Default by Owner.
(a) After notice and expiration of the Cure Period process as specified in Section 11 above and completion of any mediation process, if the Event of Default has not been cured by Owner or it is not being diligently cured in the manner set forth above, then in the case of an Event of Default that is alleged to be material, City may, at its option, give notice of its intent to terminate this Agreement pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute ("Notice of Intent to Terminate"). As used herein, City's finding of materiality allowing termination shall be based on the effect of the default in relation to the size and scope of the Project. (b) The City Council shall hold a duly noticed and conducted public hearing within thirty (30) days after sending Owner the Notice of Intent to Terminate, in compliance with the requirements of the Development Agreement Statute. Owner shall have the right to offer written and oral evidence prior to or at the public hearing. (c) Following consideration of the evidence presented in said hearing, if the City Council determines that a material Event of Default has occurred and is continuing, and elects to terminate this Agreement, City shall give Owner written notice of termination of this Agreement by certified mail ("Notice of Termination"), and this Agreement shall be deemed terminated sixty (60) days following receipt of the Notice of Termination by Owner; provided, if Owner files an action to challenge City's termination of this Agreement within such sixty- (60-) day period, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect until a trial court has affirmed termination and all appeals have been exhausted (or the time for requesting any and all appellate review has expired).

12.2.2 Default by City. After notice and expiration of the Cure Period process as specified in Section 11 above and completion of any mediation process, if the Event of Default has not been cured by City or it is not being diligently cured in the manner set forth above, then in the case of a material Event of Default, Owner may, at its option, give City a Notice of Termination terminating this Agreement"), and this Agreement shall be deemed terminated sixty (60) days following receipt of the Notice of Termination by City; provided, if City files an action to challenge Owner's termination of this Agreement within such sixty (60) day period, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect until a trial court has affirmed termination and all appeals have been exhausted (or the time for requesting any and all appellate review has expired). As used herein, Owner's treatment of an Event of Default as material allowing termination shall be based on the effect of the default on Owner's rights and obligations under this Agreement, Owner's ability to develop the Project, or financial commitments and requirements to develop the Project.

83744.00600\43431268.1

12.2.3 Remaining Rights and Obligations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Notice of Termination given under this Section 12.2 is effective to terminate the obligations of the nondefaulting Party under this Agreement only if an Event of Default has occurred and such Event of Default, as a matter of law, authorizes the nondefaulting Party to terminate its obligations under this Agreement. In the event the nondefaulting Party is not so authorized to terminate, the nondefaulting Party shall have all rights and remedies provided herein or under applicable law, including, without limitation, the right to specific performance of this Agreement. Once a Party alleging an Event of Default has given a Notice of Termination, mediation proceedings may be instituted to attempt to resolve the dispute and determine the respective termination rights and obligations of the Parties under this Agreement. Where an Event of Default only involves a Portion pursuant to Section 11.4, termination of this Agreement shall only apply as to that Portion.

12.3 Release from Obligations with Respect to Individual Parcels. The Owner of a Portion may request that City provide certification in recordable form that said Owner and Portion have no further obligations under this Agreement (the "Release from Obligations"), which City in its reasonable discretion shall provide and the Owner may record. Thereafter the assignment provisions of Section 14 shall not apply, and the obligations of this Agreement shall terminate with respect to the Portion and the Owner of such Portion. Notwithstanding the above, the rights provided and protected by this Agreement shall remain in effect as to such Portion and its Owner (and successors) for the remainder of the Term, including without limitation the uses permitted and type and intensity of development.

12.4 Recordation of Termination. Upon termination of this Agreement as to all or part of the Property, City upon request by Owner shall cause a notice of termination to be duly recorded in the official records of Merced County.

13. Mortgagee Protection; Certain Rights of Cure.

13.1 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall not prevent or limit Owner, in any manner, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property ("Mortgage"). This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon the Property, or any portion thereof after the date of recording this Agreement, including the lien for any Mortgage.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed of trust beneficiary or mortgagee ("Mortgagee") who acquires title to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise.

13.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 13.1, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement, before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to construct or complete the construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion, or to pay, perform or provide any fee, dedication, improvements or other exaction or imposition; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon other than those uses or improvements provided for or authorized by the Project Approvals or by this Agreement or as may be otherwise authorized by City.

83744.00600\43431268.1

13.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure. If City receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given Owner hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then City shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to Owner, any notice given to Owner with respect to any claim by City that Owner has defaulted or committed an Event of Default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to Owner to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the default claimed set forth in the City's notice. City, through the Director, may extend the cure periods provided in Section 11 for not more than an additional sixty (60) days upon request of Owner or a Mortgagee.

14. Transfers and Assignments.

14.1 Agreement Runs with the Land. All of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and shall constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including but not limited to Civil Code section 1468. Each covenant to do, or refrain from doing, some act on all or any part of the Property, (a) is a burden upon such property, (b) is for the benefit of each other portion of the Property, (c) runs with such properties, and (d) is binding upon each Party and each successive Owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each Party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties. The provisions of this Section 14.1 are subject and subordinate to the provisions of Section 9.1 which permit amendment of this Agreement.

14.2 Owner's Right to Assign. All of Owner's rights, interests and obligations hereunder (or any portion of such rights which Owner wishes to transfer) may be transferred, sold or assigned in conjunction with the transfer, sale, or assignment of the Property, or any Portion thereof, at any time during the Term, provided that no transfer, sale or assignment of Owner's rights, interests and obligations hereunder shall occur without prior written notice to City and approval by the Director, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed and shall not be conditioned. The Director shall consider and decide the matter within twenty (20) business days after Owner's notice provided and receipt by the Director of all necessary documents, certifications and other information required by the Director to decide the matter. In considering the request, the Director shall base the decision upon the proposed assignee's reputation, experience, financial resources and access to credit and capability to successfully carry out development of the Property to completion. The Director's approval shall be for the purposes of: a) providing notice to City; b) assuring that all obligations of Owner are allocated as between Owner and the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee as provided by this Agreement; and c) assuring City that the proposed purchaser, transferee or assignee is financially capable of performing the Owner's obligations hereunder not withheld by Owner.

14.3 Release Upon Transfer. Upon the transfer, sale, or assignment of Owner's rights, interests and obligations hereunder, Owner shall be released from the obligations under this Agreement with respect to the Property transferred, sold, or assigned pertaining to the Portion of the Property transferred to such transferee, purchaser or assignee to the extent that such obligations are expressly assumed by the transferee, purchaser, or assignee. In any event, the transferee, purchaser, or assignee shall be subject to all the provisions hereof pertaining to the Portion of the Property transferred to such transferee, purchaser or assignee, and shall provide all necessary documents, certifications and other

83744.00600\43431268.1
necessary information prior to Director approval if required by the provisions of this Agreement. The allocation of rights and responsibilities between the transferor and transferee shall be set forth in the assignment agreement executed by such parties.

14.4 Owner's Right to Retain Specified Rights or Obligations. Owner may withhold from a sale, transfer or assignment of this Agreement or any Portion o the Property transferred, certain rights, interests and/or obligations which Owner wishes to retain, provided that Owner specifies such rights, interests and/or obligations in a written document to be appended to this Agreement and recorded with the Merced County Recorder prior to the sale, transfer or assignment of the Property.

Owner's purchaser, transferee or assignee shall then have no interest or obligations for such rights, interests and obligations and this Agreement shall remain applicable to Owner with respect to such retained rights, interests and/or obligations.

15. Miscellaneous.

15.1 Estoppel Certificate. Any Party may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice from the other Party requesting such Party to certify in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties, (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, and (c) to the knowledge of the certifying Party the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within twenty (20) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed to in writing by the Parties. The Director shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by Owner. The certificate shall be addressed to and may be relied upon by the requesting Party.

15.2 Severability; Conflict. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality (collectively, "illegality" or "illegal") of any provision, covenant, condition or term of this Agreement (collectively, "provision(s)") shall not render the other provisions of this Agreement illegal, and shall be considered "severed" from this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement or any provision hereof and the Project Approvals or any provision thereof, this Agreement shall control.

15.3 Attorneys' Fees and Costs.

15.3.1 Prevailing Party. If City or Owner initiates any action at law or in equity to enforce or to interpret the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in addition to any other relief to which it may otherwise be entitled.

15.3.2 Third Party Challenge. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the Parties shall cooperate in defending such action or proceeding. Owner shall bear its own costs of defense as a real party in interest in any such action, and shall reimburse City for all reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by City in defense of any such action, including but not limited to City's costs for outside counsel.

15.4 Bankruptcy. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in

83744.00600\43431268.1
bankruptcy.

15.5 Indemnification. Owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by Owner, or any actions or inactions of Owner's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Project, provided that Owner shall have no obligation under this Section 15.5 with respect to negligence or wrongful conduct of City, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time it has been delivered or dedicated to and accepted by City or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond). If City is named as a party to any legal action for which Owner has a duty to defend or indemnify City then City will cooperate with Owner, will appear in such action and will not unreasonably withhold approval of a settlement otherwise acceptable to Owner. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this Section 15.5 or elsewhere in this Agreement, it is understood that each Party or successor or transferee of Owner is providing the indemnities described in this Section 15.5 as to its respective development on its respective Portion only.

15.6 Insurance.

15.6.1 Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance. At all times that Owner is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, Owner shall maintain in effect a policy of commercial general liability insurance with a per-occurrence combined single limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) and a deductible of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) per claim. The policy so maintained by Owner shall name City as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest clause or cross-liability endorsement.

15.6.2 Workers' Compensation Insurance. At all times that Owner is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, Owner shall maintain Workers' Compensation insurance for all persons employed by Owner for work at the Project site. Owner shall require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to provide Workers' Compensation insurance for its respective employees. Owner agrees to indemnify City for any damage resulting from Owner's failure to maintain any such insurance.

15.6.3 Evidence of Insurance. Prior to commencement of construction of any improvements which will become public improvements, Owner shall furnish City satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in this Section 15.6 and evidence that the carrier is required to give City at least fifteen (15) days prior written notice of the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy.

15.7 Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing. A Party may change address by giving notice in writing to the other Party and thereafter all notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. Notices shall be deemed given and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the expiration of 48 hours after being deposited in the United States Mail. Notices may also be given by overnight courier which shall be deemed given the following business day. Notices may also be given by facsimile transmission which shall be

83744.00600\43431268.1
deemed given upon verification of receipt if received during normal business hours, otherwise on the next business day.

Notices required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows:

City Manager
City of Atwater
1160 Fifth St.

Atwater, CA 95301
Fax: (209) 357-6364
With copies to:

Frank Splendorio
Best, Best, and Krieger, LLP
City of Atwater City Attorney
500 Capitol Mall
Suite 2500
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 325-4010
Notices required to be given to Owner shall be addressed as follows:

Ferrari Ranch Owners c/o John P. Ferrari
By Mail: P.O. Box 55 Ballico, CA 95303
By Delivery: 11016 North Ballico Avenue
Ballico, CA 95303
Fax: (209) 667-1013
With copies to:

David Dolter
3068 Oakraider Drive
Alamo, CA 94507
Fax: (925) 718-8532

15.8 Agreement is Entire Understanding. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject of this Agreement.

15.9 Enforced Delay: Extension of Time of Performance. No Party shall be deemed in default of its obligations under this Agreement where a delay or default is due to an act of God, natural disaster, accident, breakage or failure of equipment, enactment of conflicting federal or state laws or regulations, third-party litigation, strikes, lockouts or other labor disturbances or disputes of any character, interruption of services by suppliers thereof, unavailability of materials or labor,

83744.00600\43431268.1
rationing or restrictions on the use of utilities or public transportation whether due to energy shortages or other causes, war, civil disturbance, riot, terrorism, inability or delay in obtaining funding through Financing Mechanisms, inability or delay in obtaining use of Offsite Land, unforeseen adverse economic circumstances, or by any other severe and unforeseeable occurrence that is beyond the control of that Party (collectively, "Enforced Delay"). Performance by a Party of its obligations shall be excused during, and extended for a period of time equal to, the period (on a day-for-day basis) for which the cause of such Enforced Delay is in effect.

15.10 Dispute Resolution.

15.10.1 Mediation. If a dispute arises related to the interpretation or enforcement of, or compliance with, the provisions of this Agreement, City and Owner shall first attempt to resolve it through informal discussions. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved in this manner within twenty-one (21) days, City and Owner shall endeavor to settle the dispute by non binding mediation using the San Jose, California office of Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. ("JAMS") or other mutually acceptable mediator. Either City or Owner may commence mediation by providing the other Party a written request for mediation setting forth the subject of the dispute and the relief requested. City and Owner shall cooperate in selecting a mediator (either from JAMS' panel of neutrals or otherwise) and in scheduling the mediation proceedings. If the Parties cannot agree on the appointment of the mediator or the date of the mediation within thirty (30) days after the written request for mediation has been received, then JAMS shall appoint the mediator at its discretion and/or set the mediation date. City and Owner agree to participate in any such mediation in good faith, and shall share equally in its costs. All offers, promises, conduct, and statements, whether oral or written, made in the course of the mediation by either of the Parties, their agents, employees, experts and attorneys, and by the mediator and any mediator employees, are confidential, privileged, and inadmissible for any purpose, including impeachment, in any other proceeding involving the Parties, provided that evidence that is otherwise admissible or discoverable shall not be rendered inadmissible or non-discoverable as a result of its use in the mediation. Either Party may seek equitable relief prior to the mediation to preserve the status quo pending completion of the mediation process. Each Party shall bear its own expenses of mediation, and shall share the mediator fees and other costs of mediation.

15.10.2 Litigation. By agreeing to the mediation process in Section

15.10.1 neither City nor Owner hereby loses or waives its right to assert the operation of any applicable statute of limitations as an affirmative defense. Except for an action for equitable relief, neither Party may commence a civil action with respect to the matters submitted to mediation until after completion of the initial mediation session or ninety (90) days after the date of filing the written request for mediation, whichever occurs first. Mediation may continue after commencement of a civil action, if the Parties agree in writing. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent the Parties from submitting a dispute to binding or non-binding arbitration if mutually acceptable.

15.11 Further Documents. Each Party shall execute and deliver to the other Party all other instruments and documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out the purpose of this Agreement in order to provide or secure to the other Party the rights and privileges granted by this Agreement.

15.12 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of each and every

83744.00600\43431268.1
covenant and obligation to be performed by the Parties hereunder.

15.13 Recordation of Agreement. Within ten (10) days of the Effective Date, City shall cause this Agreement to be duly recorded in the official records of Merced County.

15.14 Recitals: Exhibits. The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are made a part hereof. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement and are attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full:

Exhibit A: Legal Description of the Property
Exhibit B: Map of Annexation Area and Property
Exhibit C: Local and Regional Traffic Improvements
Exhibit D: Transportation Improvement Plan ("TIP")

15.15 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which is deemed to be an original.
[REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT BLANK. SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE.]

83744.00600\43431268.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.

CITY OF ATWATER
By: By: _______________________________
Christopher Hoem, City Manager John P. Ferrari, ______________ Date:_______________________________ Date:______________________________ ATTEST:

By:

Kory J. Billings, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Frank Splendorio, City Attorney

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Order Number: 5007-5395759
Page Number: 14
Real property in the unincorporated area of the County of Merced, State of California, described as follows:

PARCEL ONE:

LOTS 4A, 5, 6, 6A, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 17, 18, 24, 25, 26, 27 AND 28, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP ENTITLED, "MAP OF THE BUHACH COLONY SUBDIVISION NO. 'TWO" ALED DECEMBER 16, 1915 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF MERCED COUNTY IN VOL. 7 OF OFFICIAL Pu\TS, AT PAGE 6.

ALSO ALL THAT PORTION OF LOTS 3A, 4, 19, 20, 21 AND 21A OF SAID SUBDIVISION, LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF A DITCH, SAID CENTER LINE BEING DESCRIBED AS:

BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 4 THAT IS SOUTH 89° 29' WEST 1651.05 FEET FROM THE ONE-QUARTER CORNER ON THE EAST LINE OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 13 EAST, M.D.B. & M., THENCE ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF SAID DITCH THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES, SOUTH 28° 15' EAST 212.40 FEET; SOUTH 24° 36' EAST 158.20 FEET; SOUTH 20° 20' EAST 216.87 FEET; SOUTH 10° 15' EAST 211.88 FEET; SOUTH 32° 15' EAST 263.37 FEET; SOUTH 45° 39' EAST 284.96 FEET AND SOUTH 17° 25' EAST 1629.60 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 22 OF SAID BUHACH COLONY SUBDIVISION NO. 2.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF LOTS 24, 25, 26, 27 AND 28 AS GRANTED BY

GENERAL AMERICAN UFE INSURANCE COMPANY TO STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY DEED RECORDED MARCH 19, 1945 IN VOL 798 OF OFFIQAL RECORDS, PAGE 409.

ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION OF SAID LOTS 24, 25, 26, 27 AND 28, AS CONVEYED IN THE

DEEDS FROM MARJORIE TREADWELL MCGOWAN AND BEATRICE TREADWELL WHITE TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DATED APRIL 26, 1960 AND RECORDED JUNE 15, 1960 IN VOL 1482 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AT PAGE 353, FILE NO. 10592 (AS TO AN UNDIVIDED ½ INTEREST) AND IN THE DEED FROM SAMUEL HAMBURGER, INC., A CORPORATION TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DATED APRIL 26, 1960 AND RECORDED JUNE 15, 1960, IN VOL. 1482 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AT PAGE 349, FILE NO. 10591 (AS TO AN UNDIVIDED ½ INTEREST).

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE COUNTY OF MERCED BY GRANT DEED DATED SEPTEMBER 27, 2012, RECORDED JUNE 14, 2013 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2013-022215 IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF MERCED COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE COUNTY OF MERCED BY GRANT DEED RECORDED JUNE 14, 2013 AS DOCUMENT NO'S. 2013-022215; 2013-022217; 2013-022218; ALL OFFICIAL RECORDS OF MERCED COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE COUNTY OF MERCED BY GRANT DEED RECORDED JUNE 14, 2013 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2.013-022216 AND ALSO RERECORDED ON AUGUST 29, 2013 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2013-031670, BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF MERCED COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE COUNTY OF MERCED BY GRANT DEED RECORDED JUNE 14, 2013 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2013-022218 AND ALSO RERECORDED ON AUGUST 29, 2013 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2013-031671, BOTH OF OFFICIAL First American Title

Exhibit A: Legal Description of the Property

RECORDS OF MERCED COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

PARCEL TWO:

Order Number: 5007-5395759
Page Number: 15
ALL THAT PORTION OF BUHACH COLONY SUBDIVISION NUMBER TWO, LYING IN SECTION 8 AND SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 13 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND

MERIDIAN, BUHACH COLONY SUBDIVISION NUMBER TWO, IN THE COUNTY OF MERCED, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGES 6 AND 6A, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT A POINT THAT IS SOUTH 89° 29' WEST 50 FEET FROM THE ONE-QUARTER CORNER ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 8, THE SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 OF SAID BUHACH COLONY SUBDMSION NUMBER TWO; THENCE SOUTH 89° 29' WEST 1601.05 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOTS 1 AND 4 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE LEAVING SAID LOT LINE AND RUNNING ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF A DITCH THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: SOUTH 10° 15' EAST 212.40 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24° 36' EAST 158.20 FEET; SOUTH 20° 20' EAST 216.87 FEET; SOUTH 10° 15' EAST 211.88 FEET; SOUTH 32° 15' EAST 263.37 FEET; SOUTH 45° 39' EAST 284.96 FEET AND SOUTH 17° 25' EAST 1629.60 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 22 OF SAID BUHACH COLONY SUBDIVISION NO. 2; THENCE SOUTH 89° 04' EAST 451.58 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 22 TO.THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 0 ° 37' EAST
103.16 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 21 AND THE WEST LINE OF THE SO FOOT CANAL RESERVE OF SAID BUHACH COLONY SUBDMSION NO. 2; THENCE NORTH 0 ° 48' EAST 2638.51
FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOTS 21, 20, 19A, 3, 2 AND 1 AND THE WEST LINE OF THE 50 FOOT CANAL RESERVE Of SAID BUHACH COLONY SUBDIVISION NO. 2 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT A POINT THAT IS SOUTH 89° 29' WEST SO FEET AND SOUTH 0 ° 37' WEST
103.16 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING THE SOlITHEAST CORNER OF THE 61.06 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND CONVEYED TO HUBERT J. TRINIDADE, ET UX, BY J.W. TREADWELL, A WIDOWER, IN DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 5, 1947, IN BOOK 866, PAGE 235, OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0 ° 37' EAST 103.16 FEET
TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE NORTH 0 ° 48' EAST 367.84
FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 04' WEST 605 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT ON THE WEST UNE OF SAID 61.06 ACRE PARCEL; THENCE SOVfH 17° 25' EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 495 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID 61.06 ACRE PARCEL; THENCE SOUTH 89° 04' EAST 451.58 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE COUNTY OF MERCED BY GRANT DEED RECORDED JUNE 14, 2013 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2013-022211 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF MERCED COUN1Y, CALIFORNIA.

PARCEL THREE:

ALL THAT PORTION OF THE "50 FOOT CANAL RESERVE" LYING EAST OF LOTS 1, 2, 3, 19A AND A PORTION OF LOT 20, MAP OF BUHACH COLONY SUBDIVISION NUMBER TWO, IN THE COUNTY OF MERCED, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS, PAGES 6 AND 6A, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. THE SOLffHERLY LINE OF THAT PORTION OF SAID 50 FOOT CANAL RESERVE HEREIN BEING A LINE THAT BEGINS AT A POINT IN THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID CANAL RESERVE THAT BEARS NORTHERLY THEREON 367.84 FEET FROM THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 13 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AND BEARS SOUTH 89° 04' EAST TO A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID CANAL RESERVE.

First American Tttle

Order Number: 5007-531575!1
Page Number: 16

EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE COUNTY OF MERCED BY GRANT DEED RECORDED JUNE 14, 2013 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2013-022211 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF MERCED COUNlY, CALIFORNIA.

APN: 005-120-045-000 (Affects: Parcel One)
005-120-046-000 (Affects: Parcels Two and Three)
First American Tltle

I
•
•
.
•
�--
/. � .. -...._
..........
........... _
----
............ ___ t
' ;--.... '...... .... ._
LEGEND
I: N �
a 350 100
SCALE 1• = 700'
ANNEXAliON SOUNOA><Y - FERRARI RANCH ANNEXATION AAEA
O[HfR A�M:XAIION .�REA
,,
",
'
...L j ,..,_.,. •-••-- .. I
••-.a..• -_-;AlllS AVE.� - • •.,.,,.,. • • •- -•• - • - �ii_"� •• -- 7I ii
'•�·�
.. ,
"'-:�
·-,
'·
• '
. ·, ... , ___ "
�� ,,.
............
\/AUEYCRIIE
� • ·, .......... ·,·' "'•"-.._,
�TE: �/19L2.0•7 OOAWN: EV
I
I
'
I
I • .......
o•□ E LL , 165 Sc1111mc:Drrve. Suiu: e
ModQ;,;co, CA QS35o FERRARI RANCH ANNEXATION

EXHIBIT
JOB NO: 21250 CH£CKEO: MP
ENGINEER1NG
Modeslo PaJo Aho Pklasar1lon
?h. 209 571 1765,'fm. 209 571 2466
odellangnaar1t19 com
SCALE
AlWATER, CALIFORNIA F'IU'. NAME: 21250-UH-ANNEX ANO f£RIW!J ;Ji£Ad."9_ 1 of
Exhibit B: Map of Annexation Area and Property

TABLE9

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Sfudv Facility Deserlntlon of Ultimate lmnrovemenls
I. Buhach Road & Add overlap phasing on eastbound right-turn; New Avenue Two/Juniper Ave 150-ft lonirnorthbound LTL

2. Buhach Road & Now 200-ft long eastbowid L TL; adjust signal Avenue Ono/Lake Ridge Street phasing to a protected eight-phase signal; change east-west pbasin• from splitto nermissivo phasing

3. Buhach Road & Change eastbound and westbound approaches to Green Sands A venue protected phasing, resulting in an eight phase signal; Widen Green Sands Ave east ot'Buhach Rd to 4
lanes, and designate second westbound approach lane
to be free ri•ht-tum lane

6. Buhach Road Overcrossing & Add a second southeastbound through lane, and AshbvRoad overlap nlmsin,; to the suutheastbotlnd movement

8. Ashby Road & Add a second eastbound approach lane to the Gurr Road roundabout, and extend lane to exit at eastbound deoartute with a latte dron

9. Ashby Road & New traffic signal, new 300-ft long LTLs for Franklin Rd./NB SR 99 Ramps eastbound, westbound, and southbound approaches, new dual 300-ft LTL on northbound approach, new
20().ft southbound RTL, and new second westbound
de=..,•~lane
IO. Gurr Road & New traffic signal and new 300-ft long northbound Avenue Two LTL

11. Gurr Road & New traftic signal, new 200 ft long L TL on all Avenue One ·•00roaches. and new 200 ft lone northbound RTL

12. Avenue Two & New traftic signal, widening of Avenue Two Santa Fe Drive . approach with now LTL and RTL, new northbound L TL, and add overlap phasing for eastbound right•
turn movement
AnalySis to Support lmplell\enfation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Repon (11/3/2016)
Total
Project Fronting
CMt Develoner
$32,300
SI 10,000
$2,019,00
0 $165,000
$90,000
$718,500
$254,000
$480,000
$568,000
Regional
AnneIBtion County Fee
Area Share Share Pro«-m
$30,976 $1,324
$106,810 $3,190
$1,992,753 $26,247•
$161,205 $3,795•
$77,310 $12,690*
S260,097 $458,403*•
$122,428 $131,572
$467,!20 $12,480
$479,392 $88,608

J:.:2J./I
Exhibit C: Local and Regional Traffic Improvements

TABLE 9 (cont'd)
cosr ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Studv Fucillt. o .. crlnllon o!Ultimnto lmnrovemenls

13.AME& lmprovomo111s include: on northbound approach, three Green Sands Avenue 400-lt LTLs, two through lanes, and one 300-ft RTL; on iou1hl>ound approach, two 300-fi LTLs, three through
lanes (ono of which is only 400-ft long), and ono 400-ft L TL; on eastbound approach, two 400-ft LTLs, two
through lanes, and one free RTL: on westbound
appiQath, throo 600-ft LTLs, tiJieo llJiough lanes (one of which is added about midway between AME and Ferrari
project access), and one 300-11 RTL: on eastbound
dopanµre, three departure lanes; on southbound
depanure, four departure lanes, which merges to three
lanes and then meri1.o:s to two lanes.

14.AME& New ttaffic signal, modify westbound approach to SR 99 Northbound Rmnps Include free-right turn from off-ramp, and add third northboUl'!d lane on AME that would be an auxiliary lane lo off-ramp·into tJ,e Ferrari Ranch orolect site

15.AME& Modify southbound right-tum movement to the loop onSR 99 Southbound Rmnps ramp to be a free right-tum

16. Gurr Road & lmprQyements-include: on northbound approach, include Green Sands A venue two 450-ft L TLs, one exclusive through lane, and one 200-ft combined through/RTL; on southbound approach,
include one 100-ft LTL, one exclusive through lane, and one 300-ft combined through/RTL; on eastbound
approach, include two 150-11 LTLs, two through lanes,
llnd one "free" RTL: on westbound approach, include one I. TL, one exclusive through lane, and one combined
through/RTI.: on northbound departure, include two
depanure lanes, which merge to one lane 300-11 north of intersection.

Analysis to Support Implementation ofFer;nui Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Tr-dllSportation Improvement Plan ffIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
Total
Project Fronting
Cost ·oeveloner
$1,156,500
$539,000
$36,000
$486,000
Anneutlon County Regional Fee
Area Share Sbaro Pn>l!rom
$1,134,527 Sll,974*
$522,291 $16,709*
$34,884 Sl,116*
$473,850 $12,150*

l:.:JJIJ

TABLE 9 (cont'd)

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Studv Facllltv Descrlpilon of Ultimate Improvements
Freewav Rumn Junctions

21. Northbound SR 99 Extend length of northbouud off-ramp deceleration off-ramp to Atwater Blvd. lane TO 925 ft

27. Southbolllld SR 99 Add a third soulhbound·mainline lane on SR99 at on-ramp from Atwater Blvd. the Atwater Blvd SB ou-ramp
Site Access Intersection Imnrovemenls

41. Gurr Road & New Traffic Signal and new 200-ft nonhboun\! LTL Project Site Access Driveway # I

42. Gurr Road & New traffic signal, new 200-ft northbolllld LTF, Project Site Access Driveway #2 new 150-ft southbound RTL, and widen Gurr Rd to 2 through lanes in each direction through
intersections 42 and 43,

44. Gurr Road & New traffic signal, add second 300-ft eastbound Project Site Access Driveway #4 LTL, new 200-ft nonhbolllld LTL, new 200-ft southboll!ld RTL, and widen Gurr Rd to 2 through
lanes in each direction through intersections 44 and
4S.

46. Green Sands Avenue & New traffic signal, add second eastbolllld and Project Site Access Driveway #6 we,tbolllld through lanes, new eastbolllld RTL extending from inter,oction 13, add second 300-ft
northbound LTL, and two now 200-ft westbound
LTLs.

47. Ashby Road & New 100-ft eastboll!ld LTL and now TWL TL for Project Site Access Driveway #7 departures from project silo driveway.

Analysis to Suppon Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Rcpon (11/3/2016)
Total
Project Fronting
Cost Dovel oner
$166,500
$0
$261,000 5261,000
$633,800 $633,800
$727,400 $727,400
$570,000 $570,000
$54,000 s�.ooo
Regional
Annexation County Fee
Area Share Share Pro2ram
$166,�00 $0
$0 $0

t::JJ,t/

TABLE 9 (cont'd)

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Study Facllltv De.,scrlptlon of Ultlmato lmnrcivcmcnb

48. Ashby Road & New traffic signal with protected eastbou11d left-tum Project Site Access Driveway #8 phasing, new 200-ft southeastbound L TL, now 200-l\ southwestbound LTL, and new TWLTL for
depanures from the driveway.

49. Ashby Road & New 150-ft southbound LTL.

Project Site Access Driveway #9

50. Ashby Road & New I 00-ft eastbound LTL, new 150-ft southbound Project Site Access Driveway #10 LTL, and new TWLTL for receiving departures from lhenroieci site driveway.

SI. Ashby Road & New traffic signal, now 300-ft eastbound L TL, and Regional Medical Center new 300-ft westbound RTL.

Collector Road

52. Green Sands A venue New traffic signal, two 300-ft westbound LTLs, two Regional Medical Center westbound through lanes, two eastbound through Collector Road lanes, eastbound RTL, northbound LTL, and "free" northbound LTL that would extend to intersection

13. Roadwav SP<nneots'
Avenue One- Widen Avenue One from 2 to 4 lanes
Gµrr Road to Trindade Road
Gurr Road Widen Gurr Road from 2 to 4 lanes
North of Green Sands Ave
Gre011 Sands Ave. - Add six through lanes on Green Sands Ave between Buhach Road to AME Ferrari project access and AME
Analysis 10 Suppon Implementation ofFemui Project EIR
Mitigation Trans-2 Tr.msportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
Total
Project Fronting
co,t Dovcloner
$333,000 $333,000
$27,000 S27,000
$81,000 $81,000
$308,000 $308,000
$750,000 $750,000
$1,125,000
$1,452,000
$2,694,000
Aone:u.tlon County Regional Fee
Area Shore Share Prom-am
5859,500 S265,500
$1,430,220 $21,780
$2,675,142 $18,858•

J:.':b,(J

TABLE 9 (cont'd)

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Total Project Fronting Anoeiation County
Studv Facllitv Descrlntion or Ultlmate.huorovements Cost Developer Area Share Share Green Sands Ave. Widen Green Sands Ave from 2 to 4 lanes $1,164,000 Sl,119,768 $44,232• AME to Gun· Road
Green Sands Ave. (Belcher Ave.) Extend Green Sands Ave ( 4 lanes) $2,808,000 Gurr Road to Franklin Road
Atwater-Merced Expressway AME project (6 lanes)
$66,200,000
Santa Fe Dr. to Green Sands Ave
Atwater-Merced Expressway AME project from Santa Fe Dr to Bellevue Rd, 6 $83,900,000 Northeast of Santa Fe Drive lanes
Atwaicr-Merced Expressway Widen Atwater-Mercod Expressway from 2 to 6 $2,928,000 Green Sands Ave. to SR 99 lanes
State Route 99 Widen SR99 from 4 to 6 lanes $5,I00,000 Sl,ll6,900 $178,500 Atwater Blvd. to AME
State Route 99 Widen SR99 from 4 to 6 lanes $5,400,000 $1,652,400 $102,600 AME to franklin Road
TOTAL $183,337,000 $3,745,200 $14,884,472 $1,421,728
(*
)maybe attributed to RTIF, Total for Merood County •hare of ltema J, 6, ff, 13, 14, 15, 16 and Green Sands Avenue seaments is St57,771 (**) may be covered by Frankll11 Beachwood Community Brldae & Thoroughfare Fn Total for Merced county share of Item 9 is $458,403 •••i balance or lmorovements cnst borne bv others and totals 57-431,600

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Bullllch Road/ SP Avenue Interim Signal
Ashby Rd/ Trindade Rd Rmmdabout or turn lanes
/',shby Rd / Franklin Road Roundabout or turn lanes
TOTAL
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project BIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation lmprovemeot Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
Aoclllnrv Locations
$354,900
$322,283
$298,422
$975,605
$330,767 $24,133
$236,233 $86,050
$218,743 $79,679
$785,744 $189,861
Regional Fee
Promun
.
$2,808,000
$66,200,000
$83,900,000
$2,918,000
('U)
cu•)
$155,836,000

J:':h,4

LEGEND
0 0 a:,o 12110 SCALE:1'•1200'
�
TIP lrHfRS(CMN lo',IP/lOVi:Aif.�TS NUMtlE�
J1f' 1l0,4!Ji'IAY �LGl./[Nt lt.lf>liO'vLI.ILN•�
ffflR'Jil RANCt1 Pi<OJEC\ -1.R(A
□�DELL 1 16$ So:c,,1:: Qfv•, ai-1. a
lk-CA�
WoclaMQ
ENUlNEERlNG Pnl'l:lll.171 �9C<Q
,�..,200,11.2.u.e
p;uo,ua Plaau.�1<1n F1uno
�
.,..
l
0/

FERRARI RANCH

ATWATER, CALIFORNIA

TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT PLAN (flP)

MITIGATION MEASURES
1 of
1

FERRARI RANctt
Atwater, MHced CountY, califmni.

Planned Development Master Plan •
Commercial, Retail, Medical, Office
NOlTaScull
Street Section Key Map
Figure
14 Exhibit D: Transportation Improvement Plan ("TIP")

..
�- ..... A. -.. ..tl~-: .::.. .......... ��- --1.-• ;- -�T.:i.-i1 -_ ,.. C •·- -------i. = ��
IKOOt,Q c-rypkiiSre1t�-A>nt11A-l�l-'/lllll2�l--""-'ll
•
•
'"'Jr'T':·r�-!'"'
� .., --U..==� .� 1 �""
IIC1!0N(t
u-�s1ri1111Sli:iiril,IW,idl�
�-
H•l�Slicilt$�-ftStaim,.,.l.lllilt.lloc!ln!ir�
}!Cl01@
rT)'JIQIISQ111SIICGon-llr�11Wmol�Rolld
�-,!,--r__,� .,, __ :..__ T ____ ·• i tJ..:IW I· ::. .... ti .o-i.---- .,.., 1
IB:llOH,t,
D • T� Slld� • (! �_;"Sp,:lmPartc
���-t� \�;��· 1�
�--x:w_&_
E•l);:lcaliimt�•�Slrl>elG�cnalR,,u,I
----- -'� ._,.,
;-.�--:,...., :--T • -� i·..t.: .. :.T ,, • .:. '.:: r�'::11 ..,..._,=·
�
..0 ·= =·-� -�""'=
ncnCHOO
K·kh/fAvl<'l\l6'•W<1$1cl�&r._l,LRegion•Mll<bl
Atwater, Merced Councy, Celifamia
Planned Development Master Plan -
Commerclal, Retail, Medical, Office
r
Typical Street
Sections
Figure
158
--

-,··---"'
-. .- ,
-,. ........
.... ,.,.. ,.,.
- ·- ..
,.. .. _
\ ( '
...
'
/',
' --.
r
I
f,
·•::•�- .,
Et•i=i!I -ENCilNE£RlNCi
. __ , .._.,
� ... -...
/ ,("·, •
' ;-t l
f ' I 1-·-
;-
j
l •-•--- I
f, ! --� ... ,.
.._✓..:,.
;, •
,, .. <.
2 ,
7

ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF

FERRARI PROJECT EIR
MITIGATION 'fRANS-2 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TIP)

FINAL REPORT
Prepared By:

KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
3853 Taylor Road, Suite G
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 660-1555
November 3, 20 I 6
Job No. 3241-03
FerrmiRMo:hTIP ll•J.2016
I: 1> ,,q� C ./l�le&., JHC.
• ,. • •a•�•- •- �-• • • •• ·•-••• -•••""'
Transportation Engineers

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. -....................... -........... -.. -...... 1 BACKGROUND YEAR 2016 TRAFFIC CONDITIONS .......... _ ......................................................... 3 Daily Traffic Volumes and LOS ...................................................................................................... 3 Peak Hour Levels of Service ......................................................................................................... ,. 4 Traffic Signal Warrants ................................................................................................................... 6 LAND USE & TRIP GENERATION .................................. ____ ......... ·--······ ................... _ ..• 7 Land Use Summary .......................................................................................................................... 7 Trip Generation ................................................................................ ,____ .............................. 7 Trip AS5ignment ............................................................................................................................ 10 FAIR SHARE PERCENTAGES-..................................................... _ ............................. -........... 11 Approach .................................................................................... _______ ............... l I COST ESTIMATES I FEE PROGRAM ALLOCATION ..... _ .......... _ ................... --................... 18 Cost Estimates ............................................................................................................................... 18 Fair Share Allocation ............................................................................... ___ .. .
..................... lS
PHASING ANALYSIS ... -....... -.............................. -...................... -.................................... -......... 25 Approach ........................................................................................................................................ 25 Land Use Assumptions/Trip Generation ........................................ ____ ............................ 26 Traffic Conditions with Initial Projects ......................................................................................... 34 APPENDIX (Under Separate Cover)
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transponation Improvement Plan {TIP) Final Report(! 1/312016)
Page I

INTRODUCTION
The Ferrari Project Draft Program Environmental hnpact Report (DEIR) includes a mitigation, TRANS-2, that requires preparation of a Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) that would be included in the Project Development Agreement. The need for mitigation measure TRANS-2 is based on analysis contained in the DEIR, which in tum was based on information in the Ferrari Annexation, General Plan Amendment, and Planned Development Master Plan Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by KDA, dated February 27, 2015. The traffic impact analysis was included in Appendix N of the DEIR. The TIP expands upon the DEIR's mitigation discussion to identify the roadway and intersection improvements that will ultimately be installed and notes the improvements required to mitigate the impacts of individual elements of the overall development plan. The information in this document has been developed to support implementation of mitigation measure TRANS-2. This document also includes information to address Merced County's comments on the DEIR requesting collaboration to address effects on the County's circulation network. As part of the collaboration process, County staff was consulted regarding the TIP study methodology and scope. Preparation of the TIP represents an effort to advance the implementation of mitigation measure TRANS-2, and to coordinate with the County regarding mitigation for facilities under its jurisdiction.

The methodology employed to allocate the costs for improvements is based on current traffic volumes and the traffic contribution of development that is anticipated within the area that will contribute to the costs of improvements. The report has five sections:

I. Summary Of Current Traffic Conditions

2. Land Use I Trip Generation from Future Development in Annexation Area and adjoining Merced County

3. Fair Share Traffic Contribution ofldentified Development

4. Cost Estimates for Improvements

5. Phasing Analysis for Initial Ferrari Ranch Development Study Area. This analysis is intended to evaluate the need to implement mitigation measures at key locations noted in the DEIR. Other locations of interest to Merced County are discussed to assist with refining traffic improvement needs for County facilities.

Intersections. The following off-site intersections were investigated in the DEIR and found to be impacted under short term conditions (i.e., Year 2015 with AME and Annexation Area).

1. Hubach Road/ Avenue Two

2. Hubach Road/ Avenue One

3. Hubach Road / Green Sands Avenue

4. Hubach Road Overcrossing I Ashby Road

5. Ashby Road/ Gurr Road
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (I l/3n0I6)
Page I

6. Ashby Road/ Franklin Road

7. Gurr Road/ Avenue Two

8. Gurr Road / Avenue One

9. Avenue Two I Santa Fe Drive

10. AME Expressway / Green Sands Avenue

11. AME Expressway/ NB SR 99 ramps

12. Gurr Road / Green Sands A venue
One additional intersection has been addressed based on consultation with Merced County.

13. Buhach Road/ SP Avenue (2016)
Roadway Segments. The following roadway segments were investigated in the DEIR and found to be impacted under short tenn conditions (i,e., Year 2015 with AME, Ferrari Ranch and Balance of Annexation). One additional location has been evaluated.

I. Ashby Road from Gurr Road to Franklin Road

2. Avenue Two from Gurr Road to Santa Fe Drive

3. Avenue One from Gurr Road to Trindade Road

4. Gurr Road from Avenue Two to Green Sands Avenue

5. Gurr Road from Green Sands Avenue to Ashby Road

6. Green Sands Avenue from Buhach Road to AME

7. Green Sands Avenue from AME to Gurr Road

8. AME Expressway from Green Sands Avenue to SR 99

9. SR 99 from Atwater Blvd to AME

10. SR 99 from AME to Franklin Road
One additional location has been evaluated.

11. Buhach Road from SP Avenue to Mulberry Road
Analy.'iis to Support £mp!ementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
•
Page2

BACKGROUND YEAR 2016 TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
For this analysis traffic counts were conducted at key locations to determine how completion of the AME Phase IA Reduced improvements affected the background traffic conditions originally presented in the DEIR traffic study, and volumes were adjusted accordingly or replaced to support the cost al19cation methodology.

Daily roadway segment and intersection peak hour traffic counts were conducted on May 3, 2016, May 24, 2016 and August 23, 2016 when area schools were in session.

Daily Traffic Volumes and LOS
Overall, the traffic data indicated that AME aud Green Sands Avenue west of AME carried roughly 8,000 vehicles per day in the area north of the State Route 99 northbound ramps. Traffic volumes are shown in Table 1. All study area roads carried volumes that indicate LOS C or D conditions and meet current City of Atwater or Merced County minimum LOS standards. A daily volume is shown, and recent traffic volume data was collected for SR 99 from Caltrans PeMS system. The current peak hour volume was used for Level of Service analysis.

Analysis to Support Implementation ofFerrwi Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation [mprovement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
Pe:ge3

TABLE!
-
VEAR 2016 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Road Location Classification Daily Volume LOS (2016)
AshbvRoad Gurr Road to Franklin Road (l) 2,357 A
Avenue Two Gurr Road to Santa Fe Drive (21 5.830 c·
Avenue One Gurr Road to Trindade Road '2) !,JOO C
BuhachRoad SP A venue to MulbPTTV Road (21 5.634 C
Avenue Two to Green Sands Avenue (2) 2,858 C Gurr Road Green Sands A venue to Ashby Road (21 2,025 C Buhach Road to AME (J) 8,000 D
Green Sands A venue AME to Gurr Road D) 3,300 C
AME Green Sands Avenue to NB SR 99 ramns ,,, 8.073 C
Franklin Road to AME (S) 51,7271
') C State Route 99 AME to Atwater Blvd (5) 45.483 C
0) Rural I-lane road Uninterrupted (LOS C is 8,600 ADT,LOS Dis 13,800 (21 Rural 2 lane road with Isolated Srops (LOS C is 8,000 ADT, LOS D is JO, 700 ADT) ()) Urban Arterial (LOS C is 7,000 ADT, LOS Dis 13,600) (4) Urban Highway (LOS C is 13,100 and LOS Dis 15,500)
'" Four lane freeway (HCM)
(6) PeMS (6/29/2016)
Source of Classification/ Thresholds: Merced Connru GPU EIR Peak Hour Levels of Service
Figure I presents Year 2016 intersection volumes. The Levels of Service occurring at study area intersections were evaluated using the methodology employed for the DEIR traffic study, and the results are presented in Table 2. As shown, most intersections operate within the minimum LOS C or LOS D standard established by the City of Atwater or Merced County. However, in the morning peak hour the Avenue Two / Gurr Road intersection operates with LOS F on the eastbound approach. This is primarily the result of peak traffic accompanying Buhach Colony HS, and conditions in the p.m. peak hour are much better. One intersection operates with delays that approach but do not yet reach LOS E. The Santa Fe Drive / Avenue Two intersection operates at LOS D with average delay on the Avenue Two approach that is within one second of LOSE.

Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigatioi1 Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report ( 11/Jn0 16)
Page4

1 5
� e)
�'&!
.,. I\
"'
��
◊�::;., 'i;
(!,"> �,-
Avenue Two a: Santa Fe Dr
Ashby Rd ft Gurr Rd
,,...
:!<>
11,' "' -�&
-!:'
Atwater-Merced Expressway ft
ht Lane
13 Q)"" rgl i�2 00
i' � � � 145 {195)
35 (92)
58 (74)
Buhach Rd' a: Green Sands Ave
2 i;;-�e
;:g;;,;
---4,
(163) 285{ 41-
(20) 74 .-� .,0
R1--p
--
�in
-�
Gurr Rd a Avenue Two
6 +- 227 (429)
.( 0 (0)
..... r+
(311)444 .. ( 00
10> □ I ee
I
Green Sands Ave & Medical Center
Atwater-Merced Expressway a
SR 99 NS Ramps
m
Buhach Rd a: Clover A-.Je
3 ;;,-;;,;:; �!t.� 9•1-1
... .,� _,..�
R1-I +
t 45 (12}
22 (19}
-er 10 (4)
..LL (24)37+ +•1-1
(11} 38 ., � �
(7) 31 -M- ---
R1•-p M_.,- _,.._N
-£-
Gurr Rd Ei Avenue One
T 00
- b'l. \',ll
b'l. \A3) '
.,....,, I"
�$ "',:,
�g ,::

Atwater-Merced Expressway ft
Green Sands Ave ..
'
[;
�:?;
---4,
(104) 95 J .,t
(92} 5B). �N ..-�
Oin
:-::!:.C
Gurr Ave Ii
Green Sands Ave
•
+- 124 (97}
.( 4 (0)
(201) 156-+; 4', r+
(0)0). 00
I ss
I
Green Sands Ave/ Retail
11 [i) 12
(80) 89
(192)237
(94) 185
Buhach Rd Ei Avenue Two
15 Rf.1
-er
_;:: - cfR1·1 !;;t A 21 (35}
� � i "t° 34 (51)
+ 23(66}
..LL
(89)47 t RM
(118)79 � fri !ij!
(74) 50 -N- --�
R1·l'
�OM ---
Buhach Rd 6: SP Ave
Buhach Rd a Avenue One
18 ... M_
---� -M 9"'·'
M,..__M
�- t 29(31) --� 39 (49)
-er
Rt-1 + 12 (18)
+ ..LL (211) 172+ RM (98) 99 MN ...
(26) 21
..-o_ --M
R1·t �-- .... �-
_,£
Ashby Rd & franklin Rd

1.mn!I
NA Peak Hour Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Signal
Stop Sign
Future Roadway
'l(!DJl114m0n&)l.ssociates, Inc. 2016 TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS Transportation Engineers
[I]
3241-01 RA ll/3/Wl6 figure 1

TABLE2
YEAR 2016 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection Control Average Signal Average Signal
Delay LOS Warrants Delay LOS Warrants
lsec/vehl Met? rsec/vebl Met?
Santa Fe Drive/ Avenue Two
(overall) NB Stop (9) (A) Yes (5) (A) Yes
Westbound left turn II B 12 B
Northbound aooroach 34 D 21 C
Gurr Road/ Avenue Two
(overall) EB Stop (44) (E) No (5) (A) No
Northbound left tum 8 A 8 A
EB Aooroach 83 F 15 B
Gurr Road/ Avenue One AWS 10 A No 8 A No
GreenSandsAve/GurrRoad Signal 8 A n.a. 8 A n.a.

Ashhv Road/ Gurr Road Roundabout 4 A n.a. 4 A n.a
Green Sands Ave/ AME Signal 9 A n.a. s A n.n.

AME/ NB SR 99 ramps
(overall) NB Stop (3) A No (6) (A) No
Off ramo �nl'oach 10 A 12 B
BuhachRoad/ AvenueTwo Siena! 31 C n.a 25 C n.a
Buhach Road/ Avenue One I Signal 31 C n.a 17 B n.a
Buhach Road I Green Sands Ave Si...,J 22 C n.a 23 C n.a Buhach Road/ Clover Ave Signal 14 B n.a 14 B n.a
Buhach Road/ SP Avenue AWS 18 C No 12 B No
IAshby Road/ Franklin Road AWS IS B No 17 C No
Traffic Signal Warrants
The peak hour traffic volwnes at un-signaled intersections were compared to MUTCD warrant No. 3 (Peak Hour volume: Urban conditions) to determine whether traffic signals or alternative traffic control may already be justified. The results of this investigation are also shown in Table

2. As indicated, the Santa Fe Drive / Avenue Two intersection carries volwnes that satisfy warrant requirements. However, as nearly all of the traffic on the Avenue Two approach turns right, a traffic signal has not been needed.

Aruilysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project era Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation lmprovement Plan (T1P) Final Report (11/3/2016)
Page6

..

LAND USE & TRIP GENERATION
To provide basis for implementing TRANS-2 the TIP analysis identifies the land uses within the area that are tributary to the streets and intersections to be addressed by the TIP and identifies the use of those facilities based on the trip generation associated with these uses. The identified land uses within the Ferrari Project annexation area were identified in the DEIR, while anticipated development in the adjoining areas of Merced County north of SR 99 were identified in the County's recent Franklin-Beachwood Transportation Study and Impact Fee Update1 . Future
development in the County south of SR 99 was identified from the MCAG traffic model's land use data base.

Additional areas beyond the study area limits were not included. While undeveloped areas exist within the City's sphere north of Green Sands Avenue, development would be speculative at this time. No mechanism exists to collect additional fees from approved development in other areas of Atwater. Subsequent environmental review of future annexations may require participation in study area improvements as mitigation. These areas were excluded to avoid allocating costs to development that may not occur.

Land Use Summary
Table 3 summarizes the land uses to be developed in the study area bounded by and including the annexation area on the west, the Franklin-Beachwood area on the east, Santa Fe Drive on the north and SR 99 on the south. Information for the Merced County area was taken from the Franklin-Beachwood Transportation Study in the fonn of residential dwelling units and employees. The nwnber of employees was converted to building square footage based on the typical conversion factors noted.

Trip Generation
Table 4 summarizes the trip generation associated with the land uses to be developed in the study area. Information for the annexation area was taken from the DEIR. 1 Franklin-Beachwood Transportation Study and Impact Fee Update, Omni-Means, 2016 Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Tr.sns-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TJP) Final Report (11/312016)
Page7

TABLE3
- FUTURE GROWTH
Land Use
Location Residential RetaU Medlul BP/ Office Industrial (Du's) (l<sl) tksl) lk!ll) fk•l)
Annexation Area
Sub Area I Station I Manchester 128 60 0 0 0
Sub Area 2 Canafcreek 0 0 0 777 0
Sub Area 3 Ferrari Ranch• 0 l.49S 666 0 0
Sub Area 4 - 6.3-Acre Parcel 0 0 0 83 0
•
Sub Area 5 - Vallev 63 0 0 0 0
Merced County
East of Gurr Road to Franklin-Beachwood limit I, 8 0 0 0 0 Franklin-Beachwood Area 464 93"'" 0 0 1,260 ..

Mcswain area south of SR 99 60 0 0 0 0
Note:
(•) Ferrari RW1ch also includes 180 room hotel and 6 field sports. complex ( .. ) Merced County non-residential land use employee data converted to ksf@2 retail employees per 1,000 sf, 4 office employees per 1,000 sf and 2.2 industrial employees per 1,000 sf.

Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project (!JR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/312016)

t:JJ./J

---------------------------------------------------------- --'"--- TABLE4

TRIP GENERATION ASSOCIATED WITH FUTURE GROWTH
Location Residential Retail
(Du's) (K,,11
Annexation Area
Sub Area I Station / Manchester 128 60
Sub Area 2 Canal Creek 0 0
Sub Area 3 Ferrari Ranch 0 1,495
Sub Area 4-6.3-Acre Parcel 0
Sub Area 5 - Valley 63 0
Subtotal
Merced Coumv
East of Gurr Road to Franklin 8 0 Beachwood limit
Franklin Beachwood Area 464 93
McSwain Area 60 0
Subtotal
Total
1'. oce: ITE rates applied to Merced County non&residential land use Retail trips are "new'' less pass-by
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Tnms-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (II/Jn016)
Land Use
Medical BP/ Office Industrial
(ksO lksn (ksO
0 0 0
0 777 0
666 0 0
0 83 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 1,260
0 0 0
Trio Generation
Daily AM Peak PM Peak
Hour Hour
3,890 158 361
9,666 1,088 979
64,481 2,578 5,871
1,037 117 105
600 47 63
79,674 3,988 7,379
76 6 8
15,806 1,573 1,905
571 45 60
16,453 1,624 1,973
96,127 5.612 9,352

Trip Assignment
For the purpose of implementing the TIP, the new trips associated with identified development were manually assigned to the study area circulation system under Year 2016 plus Project conditions. The manual assignment process differs from the regional model based approach taken for both the DEIR and Merced County's Franklin-Beachwood Transportation Study and Impact Fee Update, but is useful for the purpose ofidentifying relative facility utilization.

The trip distribution assumptions identified in the DEIR were employed to assign trips associated with this portion of the study area. No similar distribution assumptions were presented in Franklin-Beachwood Transportation Study for growth in the County. To identify trip assignment assumptions for locations in the County a "select-link" analysis was performed using the short term traffic model created for the DEIR traffic study. Buildout assumptions for FranklinBeachwood were added, and the trips associated with specific residential and non-residential zones in the Franklin-Beachwood and McSwain areas were tracked. Table 5 presents the general assumptions made for those areas.
. TABLES

MERCED COUNTY LAND USE TRIP DISTRIBUTION ASSUMPTIONS
Direction- Route
West on State Route 99
Santa Fe Drive west ofBuhach Road
Atwater north of SR 99 and west ofBuhach Road
Atwater betm:en Buhach Road and Gurr Road
Atwater south of SR 99 and west ofFranklin Road
Santa Fe Drive easl of Avenue Two
Men:ed east ;,rFranklin Beachwood
SR 99 east of Franklin Beachwood
Buhach Road south of State Route 99
Franklin Road south of State Route 99
Total
(•) Access to SR 99 occur, outside of study area
Analysis to Sllpport [mplementation of Ferrari Project BIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation fmprovement Plan {TIP) Final Project (11/3/2016)
'
Share of Total External Trips
Frnkllll Beachwood McSwain
Rmdential Residential
N .. Residential
6% 14% 0%•
6% go;. 3%
9% 8% 9%
19% 6% 18%
1% 2% 30%
0% 0% 1%
26% 44% 4%
23% 8% 3%
1% 1% 32%
7% 9% 0%

98.00% 100.00% 100.00%

FAIR SHARE PERCENTAGES
Approach
Traffic Volumes/ Calculations. Tables 6, 7 and 8 summarize the resulting traffic volumes at subject intersections and on roadway segments created by superimposing the trips associated with identified development onto current volumes. The tables identify the contribution of specific development areas and calculate each area's share of the total traffic under two scenarios. The ftrst scenario includes current traffic in the allocation, while the second scenario excludes the current traffic volume. Under Merced County policy, fair share calculations omit the contribution of "existing traffic" for those facilities where current conditions satisfy minimum standards.

Typically fair share calculation is based on p.m. peak hour volumes as this is the hourly period with the greatest traffic volume. This is the approach taken by Merced County. However, a.m. peak hour calculation has been employed when the traffic impact occurs during that time period, and because daily traffic volume is the DEIR evaluation criteria it has been employed to allocate fair share on roadway segments.

Analysis to Support Implementation ofFenari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Project (I l/3i2016)
Page lt

TABLE6

AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Sub
Location Existing Areal
Ferrari
Ranch
�•nta Fe Drive/ 1,740 468
Avenue Two 66% 18%
0% 53%
Gurr Road I 788 536
AvenµcTwo 50% 34%
0% 69%
Gurr Road/ 517 635
Avenue One 37% 46%
0% 73%
Oreon Snnds Ave/ 368 1,106
Gurr Road 19% 58%
0% 72%
Ashby Road/ 210 497
Gurr Road 17% 41%
0% 49%
Green Sands Ave/ 802 1,539
25% 48%
0% 63%
AME/ 655 1,219
NB SR 99 ramps 26% 48%
0% 64%
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EJR Mitigation Trans-2 Trausportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)

PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC
Annexation Area Franklin Beachwood
Sub Sub Sub Sub Residential NonArea 1 Areo2 Area4 Areas Residential 29 163 16 7 40 159
1% 6% 1% <1% 2% 6%
3% 18% 2% 1% 5% 18%
29 163 18 7 7 12
2% 10% 1% <1% <1% 1%
4% 21% 2% 1% 1% 2%
16 163 20 s 21 12
1% 12% 1% 1% 2% 1%
2% 19% 2% 1% 2% 1%
16 163 54 23 23 150
1% 9% 3% [% 1% 8%
1% 11% 4% 2% 2% 10%
17 87 50 22 55 283
1% 7% 4% 2% 4% 23%
2% 9% 5% 2% 5% 28%
99 577 35 15 13 153
3% 18% 1% <1% <1% 5%
4% 24% 1% 1% 1% 6%
75 391 32 13 5 158
3% 15% 1% 1% <1% 6%
4% 21% 2% 1% <1% 8%
McSwain TOTAL
0 2,619
0% 100%
0% 100%
2 1,561
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
0 1,391
0% "100%
0% 100%
0 1,903
0% JOO%
0% 100%
1 I.224
0% 100%
0% 100%
0 3;232
0% 100%
0% 100%
0 2,553
0% 100%
0% 100%

TABLE 6 (cont'd)

AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Location Existing SubArea3
-Ferrari
Ranch
Buhach Road/ 1,798 531
Avenue Two 68% 20%
0% 64%
Buhach Road / 1,165 528 IA venue One 58% 26%
0% 63%
Buhach Road/ 1,234 674
Green Sands Ave 50% 27%
0% 54%
Buhach Rd / Clover Ave 602 388
39% 25%
0% 41%
Buhach Road / 825 376
SP Avenue 58%- 26%
0% 63%
Ashby Road/ 872 177
Franklin Road 47% 9%
18%
Analysis to Sup[>ort Implementation of Ferrari Project ElR Mitigation Trans-2 1'ranspartation Improvement Plan {T[P) Fmal Roport (11/3/2016)

PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC
Annexation Area Franklin Beachwood
Sub Sub Sub Sub NonArea Resldeollal 1 Area2 Area4 Areas Residential 50 175 18 8 14 39
2% 7% 1% <1% 1% 1%
6% 21% 2% 1% 2% 5%
53 196 18 8 7 27
3% 10% 1% <1% <1% 1%
6% 23% 2% 1% 1% 3%
183 358 19 8 7 15
7% 14% 1% <]% <1% 1%
15% 28% 2% 1% 1% 1%
76 423 15 6 JO 16
5% 27% 1% <!% 1% 1%
8% 45% 2% 1% 1% 2%
23 120 12 5 I 50
2% 8% 1% <!% <1% 4%
4% 20% 2% 1% <1% 8%
II 55 10 4 113 620
1% 3% 1% <1% 6% 33%
1% 6% 1% <}% 11% 62%
Mcswain TOTAL
2 2,632
<]% 100%
>)% 100%
3 2,005
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
3 2,493
<1% 100%
<I% 100%
3 1,540
<!% 100%
<]% 100%
12 1,424
1% 100%
2% 100%
2 1,865
<]% 100%
<)% 100%

K:bll

TABLE7

PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Loeatlon Existing SubArea3.

Ferrari
Ranch
Santa Fe Drive/ l,89Q l,Q5I
Avenue Two 55% 31%
0% 68%
Gurr Road/ 652 1,250
Avenue Two 30% 58%
0% 82%
Gurr Road/ 400 1,498
A.venue One 19% 69%
0% 85%
Green Sands Ave/ 369 2,769
GurrRoad 11% 80%
0% 89%
AShbyRoad/ 205 1,183
Gurr Road 11% 65%
0% 74%
Qrcen Sands Ave / 903 3,238
t\¥8 18% 64%
0% 78%
MIEI 770 2,740
NB SR 99 ramps 18% 65%
0% 80%
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari P�ect ElR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Repon (l l/312016)

PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC
Annexation Al'ea Franklin Beachwood
Sub Sub Sub Sub Non• Residential Areal Area2 Area4 Areas Residential 74 146 15 9 52 186
2% 4% <1% <1% 2% 5%
5% JO% 1% 1% 3% 12%
74 146 16 IO 8 14
3% 7% 1% <1% <1% 1%
5% 10% 1% 1% 1% 1%
41 146 17 II 32 14
2% 7% 1% 1% 1% 1%
2% 8% 1% 1% 2% 1%
41 146 47 29 40 37
1% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1%
1% 5% 2% 1% 1% 1%
45 78 45 27 78 150
2% 4% 2% 1% 4% 8%
3% 5% 3% 2% 5% 9%
264 519 30 18 26 55
5% 10% 1% <1% 1% 1%
6% 13% 1% <1% 1% 1%
200 352 27 17 16 91
5% 8% ]% <I% <1% 2%
6% 10% 1% <1% <1% 3%
McSwain TOTAL
0 3,425
0% JOO%
0% 100%
0 2,172
0% 100%
0% JOO%
0 2,159
0% l00%
0% 100%
0 3,480
0% JOO%
0% 100%
3 1,809
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
0 5,052
0% 100%
0% )00%
0 4,212
0% 100%
0% 100%

l:JJ./1

--------------------------------------------------------------- - TABLE 7 (cont'd)

PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Location Emling SubAreaJ
-Ferrari
Ranch
Buhach Road / 1,412 1,199
Avenue,Two 47% 40%
0% 76%
Buhach Road / 1,055 1,150
Avenue One 41% 44%
0% 75%
Buhach Road / 1,029 1443
Oreen Sands Ave 31% 43%
0% 63%
Buhach Road / Clover Ave 491 930
24% 45%
0% 59%
Buhach Road-, SP Avenue 877 843
44% 43%
0% 76%
Ashby Road/ 959 399
Franklin Road 42% 17%
0% 30%
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project BIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (I 1/312016)

PERCENT OF TOTAL TRAFFIC
Annexation Are• Franklin Beachwood
Sub Sob Sub Sub Residential Non�
Area I Areal Area4 Areas Residential
129 157 16 10 ti 46
4% 5% l% <1% 1% 2%
8% 10% 1% 1% 1% 3%
141 176 17 10 8 32
.5% 7% 1% <1% <1% 1%
9% 11% 1% 1 o/o 1% 2%
482 320 17 11 8 18
14% 10% 1% <1% <1% 1%
21% 14% 1% <1% <1% 1%
201 381 14 8 12 19
10% 18% 1% <1% 1% 1%
13% 24% 1% 1% 1% 4%
61 108 12 6 1 S9
3% 5% 1% <1% <1% 3%
6% 10% 1% 1% <1% 5%
28 49 8 s 156 707
1% 2% <1% <1% 7% 31%
2% 4% 1% <1% 12% 52%
• McSwain TOTAL
3 2,988
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
3 2,594
<}% 100%
<1% 100%
3 3,333
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
3 2,061
<1% 100%
1% 100%
17 1,982
1% 100%
2% 100%
6 2,311
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
Page IS

TABLES

DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL TRAFFIC
Road Location Existing �
Ashby Road GUtT Rood to Franklin Road
Avenue Two Gurr Road to Santa Fe Drive
Avenue One Gurr Road to Trindado Raad
Buhach Road SP Avenue to Mulberry Road
Avenue Two to Green Sands Ave
Gurr Road
Green Sands Ave to Ashby Raad
Analysis to Support lmplementatiou ofFtimui Project ElR Mitigation Trans-2 TrBDsportotion lmprovement Plan (TIP) Final Report (i l/312016)
2,351
17%
0%
5,830
29%
0%
1,100
38%
0%
5,634
41%
0%
2,858
13%
0%
'.2,025
7%
0%
Sub A.-ea Sub J --Ferrari Area I Ranch
6,960 490
,50% 4%
61% 4%
11,700 825
58% 4%
81% 6%
1,280 90
44% 3%
70% 5%
3,010 670
22% 5%
38% 8%
16,740 460
76% 2%
87% 2%

24.640 0
86% 0%
93% 0
Daily Volume
Sub Sub Area Frankliu Beachwood
Areal 4 ands Non� Residential Re!lidential
775 180 720 2,310
6% 1% 5% 17%
7% 1% 6% 20%
1,450 230 15 140
7% 1% <1% 1%
10% 2% 1% 1%
0 20 290 135
0% 1% 10% 5%
0% I& )6% 8%
1,06S 80 10 0
8% 1% <1% 0%
13% 1% <1% 0%
1,450 270 290 0
7% 1% 1% 0%
8% 1% 2% 0%
0 750 190 !,00S
0% 3% 1% 4%
0 3% 1% 4%
Mcswain Total
25 13,820
<1% 100%
<1% JOO%
s 20,250
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
5 2,920
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
160 13,640
1% JOO%
2% 8,000
10 22,070
<1% 100%
<1% 18,950
0 28,610
0% 100%
O"lo 100%

--------------------------------------------------------·--· TABLE 8 (cont'd)

DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL TRAFFIC
Road Location Existing
8,000
Buhach Road to AME 21%
Green Sands Ave 0%
3,300
AME to Gurr Road 9%
0%
8,073
Green Sands Ave to NB Right 21%
Tum 0%
AM£ 8,073
NB Righl mm to NB SR 99 ramps 18%
0%
51,727
Franklin Raad to AME 68%
0%
State Route 99 45,483
AME ta Atwattir Blvd 15%
0%
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transpoltfttion Improvement Plan (TlP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
Sub An:11. Sub 3. Ferrari Area 1 R.nch

21.460 2,895
57% 8%
72% 10%

27.530 705
79% 2%
87% 2%
21,470 2,195
56% 6%
71% 7%
30,525 2,195
66% 5%
80% 6%
19,450 1,400
25% 2%
78% 6%
11,060 790
18% 1%
74% 5" ,.

Dall" Volume
Sub SubAru Franklin Be11.chwood
Al'elll 41ndS Noo- Resld•ntial Residential
l,!25 40 9S llO
14% <1% <1% <1%
17% <1% <]% <1%
1,640 480 210 1,0-05
5% 1% 1% 3%
5% 2% 1% 3%
l,060 440 115 1,005
13% )
11 /o >I 3%
1?% 1% <1% 4%
3,480 4•10 211 1,327
8% 1% 1% 3%
9% 1% 1% 4%
2,225 330 115 1,325
3% <1% <1% 2%
9% 1% <1%< 5%
1,260 110 230 2.010·
2% <1% <1% 3%
9% 1% 2% 14%
McSw1in Total
5 37,730
<1% 100%
<1% 100%
s 34,870
<]% 100%
<1% 100%
0 38,255
0% 100%
0% 100%
0 46,160
0% ]00%
0% 100%
s 76,580
<1% 100%
<l% 100%
5 60,360
>1% 100%
>1% 100%

COST ESTIMATES I FEE PROGRAM ALLOCATION
Cost Estimates
Table 9 summarizes the costs of DEIR mitigations as well as the costs of ancillary improvements to be made based on consultation with Merced County staff. As indicated the total cost of DEIR improvements is $183.3 million, and ancillary costs total roughly $1 million.

Fair Share Allocation
These costs have been allocated to these funding sources. • Fronting developer responsibility
• The Annexation Area's portion of a local area fee program • The County portion of a local area fee program
• The existing Regional Transportation Improvement Fee (RTIF) program rt is important to note additional local funding mechanisms exist within Merced County. The Franklin-Beachwood Community Bridge and Major Thoroughfare addresses facilities within that community. In addition, some of the projects to be funded locally may also fall under the umbrella of the RTIF. Thus, while an allocation has been attnbuted to development in Merced County in order to calculate "fair share", these alternative mechanism may be the source of actual funds.

Assumptions. In the case of the local area fee program, the allocation to Annexation area and to County development based on traffic and described in the previous chapter has been employed.

With a few exceptions, the allocation is based on p.m. peak hour (intersections) or daily traffic (segments), and the allocation assumes no contribution based on existing traffic. The fullowing exceptions to that approach are noted.

Buhach Road I Avenue Two: Because a current deficiency exists in the a.rn. peak hour, the allocation includes existing traffic and is based on conditions during the a.m. peak hour.

State Route 99: The allocation for SR 99 widening assumed contribution from existing traffic.

Results. The total allocation for DEIR improvements can be summarized as follows:
• Fronting developer responsibility
• The Annexation Area's portion of a local area fee program • The Merced County portion of a local area fee program or paid through other mechanisms
• The existing regional fee program (RTIF)
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Tmns-2 Transportation fmprovement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
$ 3,735,200
$ 14,884,472
$ 1,421,728
$ 155,836,000

For ancillary locations:
• The Annexation Area's portion ofa local area fee program • The Merced County portion of a local area fee program or paid through other mechanisms
AnaJysis to s'upport rmplementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans---2 Transportatlon Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report ( ll/312016)
785,744
189,861

1'ABLE9

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
$huh F••llltv Descrlntlon or Ultimate lmnrovemenlll
I. Buhach Road & Add ove,lap phasing on eastbound right-turn; New Avenue Two/Juni""'r Ave 150-ft Ion• northbowtd LTL

2. Buhach Road & New 200-ft long eastbound LTL; adjust signal A venue One/Lake Ridge Street phasing to a protected eight•phase signal; change east-west nbasinn from snlit to nermissive nhaslon

3. Buhach Road & Change eastbound and westbound approaches to Green Sands A venue protected phasing, resulting in an eight phase signal; Widen Green Sands Ave east of Bubach Rd to 4
lanes, and designate second westbound approach lane
to be fteo ..laht-tum lane

6. Buhach Road Overcrossing & Add a second southeastbound through lane, and AshbvRoad overlap nhasina. to the southeastbound movement

8. Ashby Road & Add a second eastbound approach lane to the Gurr Road rowidabout, Wld extend lane to exit at e1tStbou11d demuturc With a lane drop

9. Ashby Road & New tramc ·signal, now 300-ft long L TL, for Franklin Rd.JNB SR 99 Ramps eastbound, westbound, and southbound approaches, new dual 300-tl L TL on northbound opproach, naw
200-tl southbound RTL, and new second wosthound
dcoanuro lane

10. GUJT Road & New traffic signal and new 300-ft long northbound Avenue Two LTL

11. Gurr ·Road & New trat!ic signal, new 200 ft long L TL on all -Avenue One annroachcs, and new.ZOO ft Iona northbound RTL

12.AvcnueTwo& New traffic signal, widening of A venue Two Santa Fe Drive approach with new LTL and RTL, new northbound LTLl and add overlap phasing for eastbound rightturn movement Analysis to Support Implementation of Ft:rrari Project EIR Miligation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Repon(ll/312016)
Total
Project Fronting
Cost Develoner
$32,300
$110,000
$2,019,00
0 $165,000
$90,000
$718,500
$254,000
$480,000
$568,000
Regional
Anneutioa Couty Fee
Area Shue Share Pro ... --
$30,976 $1,324
Sl06,8l0 $3,190
Sl,992,753 $26,247•
'
$161,205 $3,795•
S77,310 $12,690•
$260,097 $458,403°
Sl22,428 $131,572
$467,520 $12,480
.
$479,392 $88,608

/:::LJ,(/

TABLE 9 (cont'd)
COST ESTIMATES AND •·EE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Studv Facllitv

13.AME&
Green Sands A venue

14.AME&
SR 99 Northbound Ramps
IS.AME&
SR 99 Southbound Ramps

16. Gurr Road &
Green Sands A venue
Descrlntlon or Ultlmate lmorovements
Improvements include: on northbowid approach, three
400-11 LTLs, two through lanes, and one 300-fl RTL; on
southbound approach, two 300-ft LTLs, three through
lanes (one of which is only 400-ft long), and one 400-ft LTL; on eastbound approach, two 400-ft L TLs, two
thri:>ugh lanes1 and one free RTL; on westbound
app.roach, three 600-ft LTLs, three through Innes (one of which is added about midway between AME and Ferrari
project access), and one 300-fl RTL; on eastbound
deJ)anure1 three departure lanes; on southbound
depanure1 four departure lanes, which merges to three
lanes·and then mera:es to two lanes.

New traffic signal, modify westbound approach to
include free-right tum from off-ramp, am! add third
northbound lane an AME that would be aQ, auxiliary lune to off-ramn Into the Ferrari Rllnch nroi«t site
Modify southbound right-turn movement to lhe loop on•
ramP to be a· free right-turn
lmpro\iements include: on northbourid approach, include two 450-fl LTLs, one exclusive through lane1 and one
200•!! combined through/RTL; on southbound approach,
include one I 00-fl LTL, one exclusive through lane, and one 300-ft combined through/RTL; on eastbound
approach, include two 150-ft L TLs, two through lanes1
and one 11free11 RTL; on westbound approach, include one LTL, one ex.elusive through lanei and one combined
through/RTL; on northbound departure, include two
departure lanes, which merge to one lane 300-ft north of intersection.

Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Proj�cl EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan {TIP) Final Repon (11/3/2016)
Total
Project Fronling
Cost Develooer
$1,156,500
$539,000
$36,000
$486,000
Anne:iatlon ,County Regional Fee
Area Shore Share Pro-m
$1,134,527 $21,974•
$522,291 $16,709"
$34,884 $1,116*
$473,850 $12,150'
4

K:l>A

TABLE 9 (cont'd)

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Sludv Facllltv Description or Ultimate lmorovemeots
Freewov Ramo Juoctloos

21. Northbound SR99 Extend length of northbound Off-ramp deceler�ion off-romp to Atwater Blvd. lane to 925 ft

27. Southbound SR 99 Add a tltird southbound mainline lane on SR99 at on-rJ.mp from Atwater Blvd. the Atwater Blvd SB on-romp Site Access Intersection lmnrovements

41. Gurr Road & New Traffic Signal and new 200-ft northbo,md LTL Project Site Access Driveway #1

42. Gurr Road & New traffic sib11utl, now 200-ft northbound LTF, Project Site Access Driveway #2 new 150-ft southbound RTL, and widen Gurr Rd to 2 through lanes in each direction through
intersections 42 and 43.

44. Gurr Road & New traffic signol, add second 300-ft eostbound Project Site Access Driveway #4 LTL, new 200-ft northbound L TL, new 200-ft southbound RTL, ond widen Gurr Rd to 2 through
lanes in each direction through Intersections 44 and

45. 46. Green Sands A venue & New traffic signal, add second eastbound and Project Site Access Driveway #6 westbound through lanes, new eastbound RTL extending from intersection 13, add second 300-ft
northbound L TL, ond two new 200-ft westbound
LTLs.
4 7. Ashby Road & New 100-ft eastbound LTL and newTWLTL for Project Site Access Driveway #7 departures from project site driveway.

Analysis to Support huplementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Jmprovement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/312016)
Total
Project Fronting
Cost Developer
$166,500
$0
$261,000 $261,000
$633,800 $633,800
$727,400 $727,400
$570,000 $570,000
$54,000 S54,000
Regional
Annexation County Fee
Area Share Share ProPnm
$166,500 $0
$0 so
Page22
�:hll

TABLE 9 (cont'd)

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Studv Facliltv Descrlotlon or Ultlmate imnrovemcnts

48. Ashby Road & New traffic signal with protected eastbound left-tum Project Site Access Driveway #8 phosing, new 200-ft southeastbom1d LTL, new 200-ft southwestbo1tt1d LTL, and new TWLTL for
departures from the driveway.

49. Ashby Road & New I 50-fl souU1bound L TL,
Project Site.Access Driveway #9

50. Ashby Road & New 100-ft eastbound L TL, new 150,ft southbound Project Site Access Driveway #10 LTL, and new TWL TL for receiving departures from Ute oroiect site drivcvmv.
5 I. Ashby Road & New traffic •ignal, new 300-ft eastbound !,TL, and Regional Medical Center now JOO-ft westbound RTL.

Collector Road
S2. Green Sands A venue New traffic signal, two 300-ft westbound L TLs, two Regional Medical Center westbound through lanes, two eastbound through Collector Road lan,;s, eastbound RTL, northbo1tt1d LTL, and "free" northbound L TL that would extend to intersection

13. Roadwav SePmeots
Avenue One� Widen A venue One from 2 to 4 lanes
Gurr-Road toTrindade Road
Gurr Road- Widen Gurr Road from 2 to 4 lanes
North of Green Sands Ave
Green Sands Ave. - Add six through lanes on Green Sands Ave between Buhach Road to AME Ferrari project access and AME
Analysis to Support lmplemeoiation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trnns-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report(ll/3/2016)
Total
Prqjecl Fronting
Cost Dove loner
$333,000 $333,000
$27,000 $27,000
$81,000 581,000
$308,000 $308,000
$750,000 $750,000
$1,125,000
$1,452,000
$2,694,000
Anneution County Regional Fee
Area Share Share ProPram
5859,500 $265,500
$1,430,220 $21,780
$2,675,142 $18,858*
Page23
l:bll

TABLE 9 ( cont'd)

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Totol Project Fronting Anaention County
Stndv Focilltv Descrintlon oflJ!tlmate lmnrovements Cost Develoucr Area Share Share Green Sands Ave .• Widen Green Sands Ave from 2 to 4 lanes $1,164,000, $1,119,768 544,232* AME to Gurr Road
Green Sands Ave. (Belcher Ave.)• Extend Green Sands Ave (4 lanes) $2,808,000 Gurr Road to Franklin Road
Atwater•Mercod Expressway AME project (6 lanes) $66,200,000 Santa Fe Dr. to Green Sands Ave
Atwnter•Merced Expressway A� project from Santa Fe Dr to Bellevue Rd, 6 $83,900,000 Northeast of Santa Fe Drive lanes
Atwater-Merced E•pressway Widen Atwater-Merced Expressway from 2 to 6 $2,928,000 Green Sands Ave. to SR 99 lanes
State Route 99 • Widen SR99 from 4 to 6 lanes $5,100,000 $1,116,900 $178,500 Atwater Blvd. to AME
State Route 99 Widen SR99 from 4 to 6 lanes $5,400,000 Sl,652,400 $102,600 AME to Franklin Road
TOTAL $183,337,000 $3,745,200 $14,884,472 Sl,421,728
(*}maybe attributed to RTIF, Total for Merced County share oflloms J, 6, 8, 13, 14, IS, 16 and Green Sands Avenue segments is $157,771 (u) may be covered by Franklin Beachwood Community Bridge & Thoroughfare Fee Total for Merced county share of item 9 Is $458,403 •••\ balance of Improvements cost borne by others nnd totals $7,431,600

COST ESTIMATES AND FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION
Buhach Road/ SP Avenue Interim Signal
Ashby Rd/ Trindede Rd Roundabout or turn lanes
Ashby Rd / Franklin Road Roundabout or turn i.nc,
TOTAL
Analysis to Support implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Tnms-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Fmal Roport (11/3/2016)
Anclll•'"" Locations
$354,900
$322,283
$298,422
$975.605
$330,767 $24,133
$236,233 $86,050
$218,743 $79,679
$785.744 $!89,861
Regional Fee
Pro-�
52,808,000
$66,200,000
$83,900,000
$2,928,000
(•••)
(***)
$155,836,000
Pege24
/:_':1),4

PHASING ANALYSIS
Approaeh
Because the annexation area is large, pieces of the area might be developed at any given time, and the entire area will take many years to be developed. As a result, evaluation of every possible combination and order of individual projects would be speculative and is beyond the scope of this analysis. Instead, this traffic analysis addresses four specific "projects" that might reasonably be assumed to proceed first. The impacts of these individual projects under Year 2016 plus Project conditions have been identified, and the improvements required to provide Levels of Service meeting adopted City of Atwater, Caltrans or Merced County standards have been identified. The TIP acknowledges that individual traffic studies will be required for each new individual • development project proposed within the annexation area to identify the improvement requirements that each triggers, either to address the combined effects of assumed projects or to address alternative elements of the overall annexation project that are not evaluated as part of this analysis.

Study Area. This analysis is intended to evaluate the need to implement mitigation measures noted in the DEIR. As a result, the analysis does not necessarily address all locations originally considered in the DEIR traffic study. Study locations include those intersections impacted under the DEIR's "Year 2015 Plus Ferrari Ranch Subarea Alone" analysis, as noted below:

Intersections. The following eight intersections were found to be impacted by the Ferrari Ranch Subarea alone or were identified in comments on the DEIR, and these locations are included in this traffic analysis.
• Ashby Road/ Franklin Road
• Gurr Road/ Avenue Two
• Gurr Road/ Avenue One
• A venue Two/ Santa Fe Drive
• AME Expressway/ Green Sands Avenue
• AME Expressway/ NB SR 99 ramps
• Gurr Road / Green Sands Avenue
• Buhach Road I SP Avenue
On-site intersections were investigated in the DEIR. The three intersections noted below will provide the main access to initial portions of the Ferrari Ranch Subarea and are addressed in this study.
• Green Sands Avenue/ Project Driveway 46
• Green Sands Avenue/ Regional Medical Center Collector Road • AME I right turn access
Roadway Segments. The following eight segments were impacted by development anticipated within the Ferrari Ranch subarea or were noted in comments on the DEIR, and are addressed in this study.

Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project ETR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Pl1m (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)

• Ashby Road from Gurr Road to Franklin Road
• Avenue Two from Gurr Road to Santa Fe Drive
• Gurr Road from Avenue Two to Green Sands Avenue
• Green Sands Avenue from Buhach Road to AME
• Green Sands Avenue from AME to Gurr Road
• AME Expressway from Green Sands A venue to SR 99
• SR 99 from Atwater Blvd to AME
• SR 99 from AME to Franklin Road
Land Use Assumptions/ Trip Generation
Individual Ferrari Ranch Sub-Area Projects. Four individual projects are addressed by this analysis, as noted in Tabie·10.

TABLE 10
INITIAL SlH!AKEA 3 - FERRARI RANCH DEVELOPMENT SCENAllIOS Scenario De.-elonateDt Pro;,ct Quntlty
I Medical Center 267 lcsfHo-ital and 25 ksfMOB
2 Green Sands Ave Retail 50 ksfSunennarket. 8 ksf retail. 16.9 ksf fast food restaurants 3 Big Box Store 150 ksfSuperstore and 20 ksfretail
4 Lifestyle Center 500 ksfShoppln"' Center
These development scenarios represent portions of the overall development scenario assumed for Subarea 3 -Ferrari Ranch as assumed in the DEIR traffic study.

Trip Generation Estimates. The number of vehicle trips associated with the development assumed under each initial scenario has been identified based on published trip generation rates and pass-by trip assumptions that are relative to the types of uses anticipated and their location adjoining existing streets. The trip generation rates employed for this analysis are noted in Table 11, and the resulting trip generation forecasts are presented in Table 12.

As noted in Table 12, assumptions have been made regarding the share of retail trips than would be drawn from current traffic on streets adjoining the project. Applicable pass-by rates have been identified based on the volume of traffic using AME and Green Sands Avenue today, and because these volumes are relatively low, standard pass-by rates have been reduced for this analysis.

As noted, the total net new daily trip estimates for these scenarios ranges from 4,253 daily trips with initial development in the Medical Center area to a high of 17,397 with assumed development of the first phase of the lifestyle center. As a comparison, these values represent 5% to 22% of the 79,074 total net new trips identified in the DEIR traffic analysis for the entire annexation area, including Subarea 3 - Ferrari Ranch.

Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report ( 11/312016)
Pagc26

Scenario Description
I
W,soitlil
Medical Office Bµildinl!
sunermarke, 20% pass hv
2 Retail 0% pass by
fast Food Restaurant 35% pass by
Free-Standing DiscountSunerstore 10% nass by
Retail 0% oass bv
4 Shopping Center I 0% pass bv
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (l l/3/2016)
TABLE 11

TRIP GENERATION RATES
I'fE
Code Unit Dally
610 ksf 13.22
720 ksf 36.13
850 ksf 102.24
826 ksf 44,32
934 ksf 496.12
813 ksf 50.15
826 ksf 44,32
820 ksf 38.66
Trip Per Unit
AMPeakHonr PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
63% 37% 0.95 38% 62% 0.93
79% 21% 2.39 28% 72% 3.57
62% 38% 3.40 51% 49"/a 9.48
51% 43% 0.61 44% 56% 2.71
51% 49% 45.42 52% 48% 32,65
56% 44% 1.85 49% 51% 4.35
51% 43% 0,61 44% 56% 2.71
62% 38% 0.83 48% 52% 3.52

Scenario
I
3 4
. -
Description
Hosoital
Medical Office Building
Total
Supermarket
Pass-bv 20% daily and n.m.

Net New Trins
Retail
Fast Food Restaurant
Pass-by 35%
Net New Trins
Total Net New Trios
Free-Standina Discount Sunerstore
Pass-by I 0% daily and n.m.

Net New Trins
Retail
Total Net New Trins
Shonnine cCllter
Pass-bv I 0% dailv and o.m.

Net New Tri""'
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TlP) F,nal Repon (11/3/2016)
TABLE 12

TRIP GENERATION FORECASTS
ITE Quantity Code Daily lo
610 267 ksf 3,530 160
720 20 ksf 723 38
4,253 198
850 so ksf 5,1!2 105
1,022 0
4,090 !OS
826 8 ksf 355 3
934 16.92 ksf 8,394 393
2,938 137
5,456 256
9,901 364
813 150 ksf. 7 613 155
761 0
6,852 155
826 20 ksf 886 7
7,738 162
820 500 ksf 19,330 257
1,933 0

17.397 257
Trio Per Unit
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Out Total Ju Out Total
94 254 94 154 248
10 48 20 51 71
104 302 114 205 319
65 170 241 233 474
0 0 48 46 94
65 170 193 187 380
2 5 10 12 22
376 769 287 265 552
132 269 100 93 193
244 500 187 172 359
311 675 390 371 761
123 278 320 333 653
0 0 32 33 65
123 278 288 300 588
5 12 24 30 54
128 290 312 330 642
156 415 845 915 1,760
0 0 84 92 176
156 415 761 823 1,584

Trip Distribution and Assignment. The overall regional trip distribution assumptions made in the DEIR traffic analysis were re-used for this assessment, and these assumptions are reprinted in Table 13.

TABLE 13

TRIP DISTRIBUTION ASSUMPTIONS
Direction Route PercenUi!e of Total
State Roule 99 west of AME 13%
Broadw= west ofBuhach Road 8%
West Lake Ridee Street and Juniner Avenue west of Bubach Road 9% Bellevue Road west ofBuhach Road 5%
Santa Fe Drive west ofBuhach Road 8%
Santa Fe Drive east of A venue Two 11%
Avenue One east of Gurr Road 4%
East Ashhv Road east of Franklin Road 4%
Franklin Road north of Ashhv Road 1%
State Route 99 east of AME 24%
South Buhach Road south of Ashbv Road 10%
Franklin Road south of Ashhv Road 3%
Total 100%
The trips associated with each initial development scenario were assigned to the study area street system assuming portions of the access that is contemplated in the DEIR traffic study. The most appreciable access change with regards to existing conditions would be the construction of the direct connecting right turn lane from northbound AME into the Ferrari Ranch subarea. This improvement is assumed to accompany Scenarios 2 (Supermarket + Fast Food) and 4 (Lifestyle Center), but not Scenarios 1 or 3 (Big Box Retail). Other portions of the overall project area circulation system are not assumed to be in place in these initial phases, including the extension of Ashby Road beneath Mffi and the completion of the Medical Center collector from Green Sands Avenue to Ashby Road.

Resulting illustrations of the trip assignments under each scenario are presented in Figures 2 through 5.

Analysis to Sup(Jort Implementation of Ferrari ProjectElR Mitigation Trani;-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Fmal Roport (l l/312016)

1 Avenue Two Ii Santa Fe Dr
5 Ashby Rd a Gurr Rd
9 Atwater-Merced Expressway Et
R htlane
'l(fD Jl,uiemm &: fesodates, Inc.

Transoortatloii Cilqioeers
3241-01 RA 11/3/2016
z
(0) 0 _f (O)Oy
.,.,j:,
Gurr Rd It Avenue Two
_a_9RM
e.;::;-e. 0{0}
-,:,- �.- 6 (3) RM o_,;:: t 0 (0)
(0)
(0)0
0 _J_T (0) O h RMI
+ -"-•1-1
Gurr Rd &. Avenue One
4 (31) 15 _f
(18) 8 ),
Gurr Ave Ii
Green Sands Ave
6 7 III a
(0)0� (48) 85 •
4'1�
Green Sands Ave/ Medical Center
10 Atwater-Merced Expressway fi:

SR 99 NB- Ramps
Atwater-Merced Expressway Et
Green Sands Ave
11 RM
..,,..
(5) 8 _J_
1010 T (0) 0 ,k
Rf•'t'
+� 000 -�-
e€e.

Buhach Ref ft SP Ave
2016 PROJECT ONLY
PHASE 1 HOSPITAL AND MOB
.-46 (26)
't 0(0)
(48) 23-+
(0) 0 ),
Green Sands Ave/ Retail
12 (2) 1 _J_
(9J4T (0) 0 .,.,j:,
000
Ashby Rd ft FrankUn Rd
,f'"IX
,f'(XX)
9RH
AM Peak Hour Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Signal
Stop Sign
Future Roadway

TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
00 figure 2

1 9
Avenue Two 8: Santa fe Or
Ashby Rd 9: Gurr Rd
t­ �� "'"
-:::: Al'
Atwater·Merced Expressway a:

Rf t lane
'I(fD.)11r,{,,m,n & Jwoaates, Irrc.

Transpcirtatlon Engineers

32.41-01 RA 11/3/ZoiD
2 6
�
(0) 0 _, (11) 10 •
RMP
Gurr Rd &: Avenue Two
+-108 (127)
,( 0 (0)
(135) 126..., (OJ 0
Green Sands Ave/ Medial Cent.er
Atwater-Merced Expressway&.

SR 99 NB 'Ramps
_fa'_ c{R!.I
'=-;;;' 8. 0 (0)
Rl-1 oz+ 0(0)
7'"" �.- 14 (15)
7 (0)0 _1. (OJOT
(3) 3 I.- R1-1t'
+•1-1 _,,_
MON -"' � M-- -� .... !!?.!:.

Gurr Rd a Avenue One
Atwater-Merced Expressway&.
11 RM
...,,...

Green Sands Ave
(14) 13 t (0) 0
(0) O I.­
R1·1r
Buhach Rd a SP Ave
�
(30) 26 J- � t
(73) 68 • :g ::!
�$
Gurr Ave a
Green Sands Ave
(35) 37 -+
(202) 194 •
+- 39 (54)
,( 56 (55)
Green Sands Ave/ Retail
12 cj.,., 0 (0) t 15(161
0 (0)
(4) 3 _1. (1sJ 12T
(0) 0 Rt•tp
... co
Ashby Rd &. franklin Rd
l&i!!lJI
AM Peak Hour Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Signal
Stop Sfgn
Future Roadway
2016 PROJECT ONLY

SUPERMARKET AND FAST FOOD

TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
[ii
figure 3

1 otg.
,>
0 �"o ,.-: ':7 �
0 �!<.

Avenue Two &. Santa Fe Dr
5 S'�. =�
0�
Ashby Rd 8: Gurr Rd
9 Atwater-Merced Expressway tt
Ri tlane
'I(JD}l,u{mr,n &)lssociat,s, Ini:.

Transportatton Engineers
3241-01 RA 11/3/2016
2 _,..
0 oON --
�
(OJO{ '4-f-
(8J 4 M-0 -- Rf•lf ., -- ....
:!:,
Gurr Rd ft Avenue Two
6 +-43 (112)
£ 0 (OJ
(108J 56 "'( ..,,.
00 (OJ 0 e.e.

Green Sands Ave/ Medical Center
10 "' �� ��'-' %r.,
�, " <Sr, .,9) "J'
Atwater-Merced Expressway Et
SRIJ9NBRamps
3 RM
7 -�-cfRM
e,;;-e t O(O> ONO + Q(Q)
5(9)
(0)0
+ (OJ 0
· + t,:;- MC- ... (8J 4 p .,
----o RM -o-
!!, -
Gurr Rd Ii: Avenue One
43 \1141
41 \\1.9)
o!::; '7 �-:;. !:! ��
[i]
Atwater-Merced Expressway 8:

Green Sands Ave
11 ��E 9"'·13 (6l
..- ..,.., to<oJ � + 0(0)
(11) 6
(0) 0 + ,+ii7.i o,-.o
(0)0 p RM Si€
Buhach Rd tt SP Ave
2016 PROJECT ONLY BIG BOX
4 -� 7 :e -OM ...
�
(-3) 0 .J +..,t
(221) 102 -. 0-0 c- "' --..,_;t:::.

Gurr Ave&.

Green Sands Ave
It
+- 90(254J
£ O(OJ
(218J 102 -+ ..,,,.
(OJO), 00
e:s
Green Sands Ave/ Retail
12 ce.e.. 9"1·' 0(0) NCO + 7(13)
...,,..

Rf-1 + 0(0)
(3)1+ + t,:;- (13) 5 ..- 0 0
(0)0 ::so ••-•p -o--
Ashby Rd &: Franklin Rd
,.-xx
.f" IXX)
9RH
AM Peak H'1Ur Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Signal
Stop Sfgn
Future Roadway
Ill

TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
figure 4

1 Avenue Two E't Santa Fe Or
Ashby Rd a Gurr Rd
9 Atwater-Merced Expressway ft
R" ht Lane
'I(JD }f.ruier.ron & Arsociates, Inc.

Transoortallon Enalneers·
3241-01 RA 11/3)2016
2 (OJ OJ' (11J41'
"'"'P
Gurr Rd fi: Avenue Two
s
(276) 94--r (0)0
+-58 (307)
,( 0 (0)
00 Green Sands Ave/ Medical Center
Atwate,-Merced Expressway 8:

SR 99 NB Ramps
3 7
_[_9RM
!:!.;;'S t a (OJ 0,.,. 0 ..... 0 (0)
6(17)
(OJ O ..!._
(O)OT
(8) 3 h R1-11""
+ ..<l..R1-1
Gurr Rd &: Avenue One
Atwater-Merced Expressway a
Green Sands Ave
11 Ri-1
,:,-
(27J 9 ..!._
1010 T (0► 0 h
Rf.It'
Buhach Rd 6: SP Ave
4 (68) 13
(142) 47
-=
�t:::,
Gurr Ave&:

Green Sands Ave
+- 36 (183)
,( 26 (84)
(112J44-+
(269J 83 1'
Green Sands Ave/ Retaft
12 cf••·•
�ss o (Ol
RM "'...'I.:' t 10 (30)
,:r -.� 0(01
(8) 2 ,_
(3ll oT
(0)0 Rf•'P
+�
Ashby Rd Ii Franklin Rd
l.mn!l
AM Peak Hour Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Signal
Stop Sign
Future Roadway
2016 PROJECT ONLY PHASE 1 LIFESTYLE CENTER

TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
00 figure 5

Traffic Condition« with Initial Projects
Roadway Improvement Assumptions. The initial development phases of the Ferrari Ranch subarea would be accompanied by some elements of the overall circulation system, but other elements would be reserved for later installation.

Ashby Road Extension to Buhach Road. While the ultimate plan is to extend Ashby Road westerly under Al\,IE to Buhach Road, this improvement is not assumed to accompany any of the four development scenarios addressed in this analysis.

Medical Center Collector Street between Green Sands Avenue and Ashby Road. The initial portion of the Medical Center area will extend the new collector street south from Green Sands Avenue, but this road will not extend to Ashby Avenue under any of the four development scenarios.

AME Right Tllfn Lane. The connection to Al\,IE has been assumed to be created under two of the four development scenarios. The connection would be made under Scenario 2 (supermarket and fast food) and under Scenario 4 (Lifestyle Center).

As development proceeds ·frontage improvements can reasonably be expected along the City streets abutting individual projects. While these improvements may be installed at locations that are commensurate with the ultimate plan for the area, this analysis does not assume uniform widening of all roads in order to identify the specific capacity improvements needed for each scenario.

Traffic Volumes. The trips associated with each of the four initial development scenarios were assigned to the study area street system, and these volumes were then used to calculate operating Levels of Service assuming no improvements were made. These volume forecasts are included in the appendix to this report.

Impacts / Improvements based on Peak Hour Levels of Service with Initial Phases. Table 14 compares current Levels of Service at each study intersection with and without the traffic associated with the fuur individual development scenarios. The individual LOS calculation worksheets are included in the appendix. Those locations where conditions in excess of adopted minimum LOS standards are anticipated have been highlighted.

Santa Fe Drive I Avenue Two. Because current conditions at this intersection are within one second of the LOS E threshold, any development in the Ferrari Ranch area would technically move the morning peak hour conditions to LOS E, which exceeds Merced County's LOS D minimum standard. However, the Merced County General Plan allows the County to accept LOS E conditions on side street approaches. The addition of Ferrari Ranch development in the area east of AME would result in conditions that exceed the LOS D minimum in the p.m. peak hour.

The DEIR traffic study identified this traffic impact and noted that a traffic signal would be required. Merced County has noted that the intersection improvements at this location should be coordinated with realignment of Avenue Two from the Gurr Road intersection to Santa Fe Drive.

Analysi9 to Support Implementation or Ferrari Project f.rR Mitigation Tmns-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)

Gurr Road I Avenue Two. Any development in Ferrari Ranch will exacerbate the LOS F conditions that already occur in the a.m. peak hour at the Gurr Road/ Avenue Two intersection.

However, conditions in the p.m. peak hour will continue to be LOS C or better, and the volume of traffic at the intersection will not reach the level that satisfies MUTCD warrants during either tilJle period.

The DEIR traffic study identified this impact with Ferrari Ranch subarea buildout and noted that the intersection would need to be signalized. However, alternatives are available. If the intersection was realigned to eliminate the "northern" Gurr Road leg and instead extended Avenue Two easterly to Santa Fe Drive, then an intersection controlled by a stop sign on the Gurr Road approach would operate with an adequate Level of Service (i.e. LOS D or better) with the four development alternatives. Alternatively, a roundabout intersection would deliver good Level of Service.

The other public street intersections addressed by this analysis will operate with Levels of Service that satisfy minimum LOS standards under each of the four development scenarios.

Ferrari Ranch Sub Area Access Intersections. Development within the Ferrari Ranch subarea will result in new intersections, and traffic conditions at new major intersections on Green Sands Avenue have been investigated. Development in the Medical Center/ Sports area west of AME will create a new Medical Center connection on Green Sands A venue. This intersection will initially include a separate westbound left turn lane and the ultimate northbound approach will be available (i.e., separate left and right tum lanes). However, while a traffic signal is ultimately required, the intersection could operate adequately with a stop sign on the northbound approach if only Scenario I development proceeded.

Retail development under Scenarios 2 and 4 will create Retail Access to Greens Sands Avenue.

This location would be provided with a separate westbound left tum lane and the exit would have separate left turn and right turn lanes under either scenario. If Scenario 2 proceeds (Supermarket and Fast Fooo) alone, this location would operate adequately with a side street stop control.

However, additional improvements will be needed to accommodate the greater trip generation associated with Scenario 4 (Lifestyle Center), and these improvements are consistent with the mitigation requirements of the DEIR traffic study. A traffic signal will be required. The intersection would need to be widened to provide auxiliary lanes, including an eastbound right tum lane on Green Sands Avenue and dual northbound left turn lanes from the retail center.

The retail scenarios will take Retail Access to Gurr Road at various locations in the area south of Green Sands Avenue. These locations may ultimately require a four-lane Gurr Road, and the DEJR notes that some locations will eventually need to be signalized. However, excluding City requirements for frontage improvements, initial access on Gurr Road would be adequate without signals, and at a minimum northbound left turn lanes would be needed where access is created.

Analysis to Support lrnplenumtation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)

�-------------------------------------------
TABLE 14
YEAR 2016 PLUS SUBAREA 3 - FERR,\RI RANC'1 DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE Intersection
Santa Fe Dr I
Avenue Two
Gurr Rd/
Avenue Two
Gurr Rd/
Avenue One
Green Sonds Ave I
Gurr Rd
Ashby Rd/
Gurr Rd
Green Sands Ave/
Medical Center
Scenario
2016
Hosnitul
LOS Mitl�ated LOS
AM Iumact PM lmnact AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Improvements LOS Average LOS Average LOS Average LOS Average
Delav <sec) Delav (sec Delav (sec' Delav rsu)
Realign A venue Two
C 24
2016 A 10 A 8
Hosnital
Sunemllll'ket / FF
Bio Box
Lifestvle
2016
Hospital
Su=rmarket I FF
Bin Box
Lifesrvle Center
2016
Hosoital
Sunennarket / FF
Bi2Box
Lifestvle Center
2016
Hospital
Su=rmarket / FF
Bia Box
Lill:stvlc Center
A 10 A 9
0 IO A 10
A JO A 10
A 10 8 11
A 8 A 8
8 13 8 9
8 10 8 10
8 16 B 17
A 9 a 15
A 4 A 4
A 4 A 4
A 4 A 4
A 4 A 5
A 4 A 5
C 25 C 17
None
None
None
None
Analysis to Support ImpleJO.entation ofFerrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
Page36
K'JJII

YEAJl
TABLE 14 (cont'd)
2016 PLUS SUBAREA J - f'ERRARI RACNH DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE LOS
AMJmnact PMlmoacl
Intersection Scenario
LOS
�
Green Sands Ave/ 2016 A
ME Hosnital A
Sunerrnarket / FF B
I Bi• Box A
' Lifestvle Center A
'jGrcen Sands Ave/ 2016 .

Retail Hosnital .

Sunermarlcet / FF B
Bi•Box .

Lifestvle Center B
AMEi 016 A
NB ramps Hosnital B
su..,,rmarket I FF B
Bi•Box B
Lifes ... ·lo Center 8
B_uhach Rd/ '016 C
SP Avenue Hosnltal C
Suaermorket I FF C
Bio Box C
Lifestvle Center C
Ashby Rd/ '016 B
Franklin Rd Hosaital B
Sunennarket / FF C
Bio.Box C
Llfestvlo Center B
Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation lmpmvement Plan (TIP} Final Ri;port (1113/2016)
Average Average LOS Delay (sec) Delay (sec)
9 A 8
10 A
J1 B 11
9 B 10
9 D 37
. . -
. . .
13 C 23
. . .
12 )f!M•-�:; } .1J.S.rz
..:,_
10 B 12
IO B 13

II B IS
10 B 14
10 C 19
18 B 12
19 B 13
21 B 13
19 B 13
20 B 15
15 C 17
13 C 15
15 C 17
15 C 18
14 C 21
Mitl•ated LOS
AMPeakHour PMPeakHour
Improvements Average Average
LOS LOS Deloy Delay (sec) (sec\
Nooe . . . .

Lifestyle Center requires
traffic signal and 4 lane - .
. .

Green Sands Ave from
AME to Gurr Rd B 14
None . . . .

None . . . .

None . . . .

/:.:bll

Impacts / Improvements based on Roadway Segment Volumes. The daily or peak hour traffic volume associated with each development scenario was identified and added to current background volumes to create the "plus Projects" conditions noted in Table 15. As indicated, while most roads would not need to be widened to deliver Levels of Service satisfying the applicable minimum standard, under one scenario Green Sands Avenue would need to be widened to meet the minimum Level of Service.

Development of the first phase of the Lifestyle Center will increase the traffic volume on Green Sands Avenue, and a four lane section (i.e., two travel lanes in each direction) would be needed from Buhach Road to Gurr Road.

Development under each development scenario will add traffic to the circuitous section of Avenue Two berween Gurr Road and Santa Fe Drive. While improvement is not needed based on Level of Service, this roadway should be realigned when adjoining intersection improvements are made.

Analysis to Support Implementation of Ferrari Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan. (TIP) Final Report (ll/3/2016)
Page38

TABLE lS
EXISTING PLUS SUBAREA 3 FERRARI RANCH DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS ROADWAY SEGMENT LOS Roadway Scenario
Buliacb Road South of SP Ave 2016
rural uninterrupted LOS C is <8,600, Hosoital
Q is <13,800) Su"•rmarket / FF
Bfo·Box
Lifostvlc Center
Asbby Road - Gurr Road to Franklin 2016
Rd (Rural isolated stops, LOS C is Hosnital
<8,000, LOS Dis <J0,700) Su""rinarket / FF
Bi•Box
Lifestvle Center
Avenue Two -Gurr Road to Santa 2016
Fe Drive(Rural isolated stops, LOS C Hosnital
is <8,000, LOS Dis <J0,700) Sunennarket-l'F
BluBox
Lifcs"-'le Center
Gurr Road - Green Sands to A venue 2016
One (Rural Isolated stops ( < 8,000 Hosnl!lll
LOS C, LOS Dis <10,700) Suoermarket I FF
Bi�Dox
Llfestvlc Center
Gurr Road-Avenue One to Avenue !2016
rrwo (Rural Isolated Stops is LOS C Hosoital
<8,000 and LOS D <10,700) Su=rmarket / FF
Bi�Box
Lifestvlo
Green Sands Ave- Buhach to 2016
Medical Center (Urban Arterial LOS Hosoital
C is <7,000, LOS D is <13,600 suoermnrket I FF
-
BieBox
Lifestvle center
Analysis to Support Implementation ofFemtri Project ElR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportalion Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Repon(l11312016)
Exlst1n11
5,634
2,357
5,830

2.600
2,858
8,000
Dailv Traffic
Prolect Total Lanes LOS Mitigation
C
no 5,854 C
445 6,079 2 C None Required
335 S,969 C
785 6,419 C
. A
355 2.8�2 8
845 3,202 2 8 N,one Required
910 3,267 8
1,915 4,272 8
C
500 6,330 C Realignment needed for 1,315 7,245 2 C
950 6 780 C
safety
2,430 8,260 D
. C
620 3,220
2,010 4,610 2 C None Required
I S50 4,150 C
3,175 S,775 C
.
500 3.358
1,570 4.428 2 C Nono Required
1,140 3,998 C
2,645 5 503 C
. D

1.820 9,820 D None Required
3,385 11,385 2 D

2.545 10,545 D None

6.400 14,400 ', fl i Widen to 4 laoes " .••

TABLE 15 (cont'd)
EXISTING PLUS SUBAREA 3 -FERRARI RACNH DEVELOPEMNT SCENARIOS ROADWAY SEGMENT LOS Roadway Scenario
Green Sands Ave-Medical Center 2016
to AME(Urban Arterial LOS C is HoSnitnl i<7,000, LOS D is <13,600 Suoennarketl FF Sig Sox
Lifestvlo Center
Gn:en Sands Ave-AME to Retail 2016
access (Urban Arterial LOS C is Hospital <7,000, LOS D is <13,600 Suoermarket / FF Bitt Box
Lifestvlo Center
Green Sands- Ret1lil to Gurr 2016
Road(Urban Arterial LOS C is Hosr:,ital <7,000, LOS Dis <13,600 Supennarket / FF Bio:Sox
Lifestyle Center
AME- SR 99 NB to right tum 2016
Urban Highway LOS C is <13,100 flos�ital and LOS Dis <15,500) Supermarket/ FF 810:Box
Lifestvlo Center
IAJ\IE -Rigl1t turn to Green Sands 2016
Urbnn Highway LOS C is <13,100 Hosoilal !aiid LOS Dis <15,500) Suoennarket / FF Ble Box
Lifesl:;le Center
Analysis to Support lmplementation ofFCJllll1 Project EIR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) FmaJ Report (11/3/2016)
Existlna
8,000
.
3,300
3,300
8,073
8,073
Dallv 'frafilc Lanes ws Mitigation Project Total
-
2,615 10,615 D
3,385 11,385 2 D
• None Required
2,545 10,545 D
6,400 14,400 Widen to 4 lanes
.
975 4,275 C
5,775 9075 2 D
None required
4,985 8,285 D
{0,705 14,005 -Widen to 4 lanes
. C
975 4,275 C None 2,850 6,150 2 D
4,985 8,285 D
4,615 7,915 (') Widening required to
make intersections function
. C
1,640 9,723 C
3570 11,643 2 C None Required
2,440 10,513 C
5,915 13,988 D
. C
1,640 9,723 C
2,390 10,463 2 C None Required
2,440 10,513 C
•1,305 12,378 C
Page40

TABLE 15 (cont'd)
EXISTING PLUS SUBAREA 3 -FERRARI RACNH DEVELOPEMTN SCENARIOS ROADWAY SEGMENT LOS Roadway Scenario
SR 99 -Franklin to AME 2016
Northbound Hospital
Supermarket / FF
Bia Box
Lifestyle Center
SR 99 - Franklin lo AME - 20]6
Southbound Hosoilal
Sonermarket / FF
Bi£Box
Lifestyle Center
SR 99 - AME to Atwater Blvd - 2016
Northbound Hosoilal
Suoermorket / FF
Bia Box
Lifestyle Ce11ter
SR 99 -AME to Atwater Blvd - 016
Southbound Hospital
Suoermaiket
BieBox
Lifestyle Center
Analysis to Support lmplemeolation of Ferrari Project ElR Mitigation Trans-2 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Final Report (11/3/2016)
Doil� Traffic
Eldstln" Prolect
2,250 .
28 89
49 137
1,6S0
S3
89 79
198
2,250
28 48
43 l07
1,6S0
15 89
41 99
Total Lanes LOS Mitigation
C
2,278 C
2,339 4 C None 2,299 C
2,387 C
21 nclmi/ln
B
1,703 B
1,739 4 B ,;one
1,729 B
1,848 B
16 ""Jmi/in
2,278 C
2,298 4 C None

2.293 C
2,357 C
21 ndln/mi
1,66S B
1,739 4 B None
1,691 B
1,749 B
15 oc/ln/mi
Page4I

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA REPORT

MEETING
DATE:

July 14, 2025
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Christopher Hoem, City Manager

PREPARED
BY:

Julia Coronado
SUBJECT: Confirming the Engineer’s Reports and Ordering the Annual Levy for the Lighting and Drainage and Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts for Fiscal Year 2025/26 (City Manager Hoem)

RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Opening the Public Hearing and taking any testimony given:

Close the Public Hearing and consider comments from the public; and Adopt Resolution No. 3554-25 Confirming and/or amending the Engineer’s Reports and Ordering the Continued Maintenance of the City of Atwater Lighting and Drainage and Landscape Assessment Maintenance Districts and Levy of Assessments for Fiscal Year 2025/26; or
Motion to approve staff's recommendation as presented.

I. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:

The City of Atwater currently operates various maintenance districts within its jurisdiction. These districts provide for the ongoing care, operations and maintenance of storm drainage facilities, street lighting and landscaping improvements through assessments paid primarily by the property owners who are direct beneficiaries of the specific services provided.

As in the past, the Engineer’s Reports show the maximum assessment amount that can be levied to the parcels of each District. The annual maximum assessment rates of a portion of the Districts can be increased annually in order to offset inflation. The actual assessment that is being recommended is the amount needed to provide the services required to maintain the improvements in the Districts, including administration costs and to fund capital improvements that may be required. None of the proposed assessment rates exceed the maximum rate allowed.

CITY COUNCIL
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Danny Ambriz Brian Raymond
John Cale Kalisa Rochester

Agenda Report - Confirming the Engineer’s Reports and Ordering the Annual Levy for the Lighting and Drainage and Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts for Fiscal Year 2025/26 (City Manager Hoem) Page 2

1. ANALYSIS:

The City is required to perform specific steps necessary to collect the annual levy for the various maintenance districts for the next fiscal year. As part of that process, the City is required to generate and finalize Engineer’s Reports for the Lighting and Drainage Districts and Landscape Maintenance Districts. After the City has declared its intent to levy assessments, a public hearing is held where all interested persons are afforded the opportunity to provide comments to the proposed assessments. Upon conclusion of the public hearing, Council may adopt the resolution approving the Engineer’s Reports and setting the annual levy of assessments for fiscal year 2025/2026. This is the final step of the City Council in that process.

Pursuant to Proposition 218, The Right to Vote on Taxes Act, new or increased assessments must be approved by a balloting (vote) of the owners of the property to be assessed. Since the assessment rates are not to be increased by any amount other than an approved CPI increase, there is no balloting or property owner vote to be considered in approving this year’s assessments.

A comparison chart showing the changes from the previous year’s assessment rates can be found within each Engineer’s Report. Refer to Pages 34 and 35 for the Lighting and Drainage Districts and Pages 34 and 35 for the Landscape Maintenance Districts for this information.

The assessments must be filed with the County Assessor by August 15th. The City Council may order changes to the proposed rates shown in the Engineer's Reports and adopt the resolution approving the Engineer’s Report(s) either as presented or as amended. The resolution before the Council, if ordered, allows for changes to the proposed rates shown in the Engineer’s Report without the need for further Council action. Upon approval of the resolution, any such changes so ordered shall be reflected in the levy of assessments.

II. FISCAL IMPACTS:

Collection of special assessments will result in restricted revenue to specifically fund maintenance and administrative costs for these benefited districts.

III. LEGAL REVIEW:

This item has been reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office IV. EXISTING POLICY:

Should the City Council elect not to take action, services in these districts must be eliminated or funded from the General Fund. Each property owner within their respective district pays for the services through an assessment placed onto the County

Agenda Report - Confirming the Engineer’s Reports and Ordering the Annual Levy for the Lighting and Drainage and Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts for Fiscal Year 2025/26 (City Manager Hoem) Page 3

tax roll. Without this revenue, the General Fund would be required to fund the work, if the work were to be completed.

V. ALTERNATIVES:

N/A
VI. INTERDEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

This item has been reviewed by all relevant departments.

VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:

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

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

This item, and the maintenance contemplated by this action are all located within existing facilities of approved projects throughout the City. As they represent existing facilities, they are considered an exempt activity as defined under section 15301 “existing facilities” of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

IX. STEPS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Upon adoption of the resolution, Willdan submits Levy to County.

Submitted and Approved by:

Chris Hoem, City Manager
Attachments:

1. 25-26 Atwater (PH) LMD LD Draft Reso No. __-25 Ordering Levy to City 6-27-25 (1)

2. 2025-26 Atwater LD Engineers Report (For 7-14-25 PH) to client 6-27-25

3. 2025-26 Atwater LMD Engineers Report (For 7-14-25 PH) to client 6-27-25

Resolution No. XXXX-XX Page 1

CITY COUNCIL
OF THE

CITY OF ATWATER

RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-25

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF ATWATER CONFIRMING AND/OR AMENDING THE

ENGINEER'S REPORTS AND ORDERING THE

CONTINUED MAINTENANCE OF THE CITY OF

ATWATER LIGHTING AND DRAINAGE AND

LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT

DISTRICTS AND LEVY OF ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2025-26
WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law for the 2025-26 levy of assessments under the Benefit Assessment Act of 1982 for the City of Atwater (the “City”) Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Assessment Districts; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law for the 2025-26 levy of assessments under the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 for the City’s Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atwater (the “City Council”) previously adopted a Resolution to initiate proceedings to levy and collect assessments against the parcels within the City’s Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts for Fiscal Year 2025-26 to pay for the costs of operations and maintenance therein; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously ordered Willdan Financial Services (the City’s “Assessment Engineer”) to prepare the Engineer’s Reports showing the detailed work, boundaries of the City’s Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Assessment Districts and Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts (collectively the “Districts”) together with the maximum and proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-26 and to file the Engineer’s Reports with the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the City Council previously approved each Engineer's Report, as presented (or amended), on a preliminary basis and each Engineer's Report, shall be used for all

Resolution No. XXXX-25 Page 2
subsequent proceedings related to the levy of assessments to the Districts for Fiscal Year 2025-26; and
WHEREAS, each Engineer's Report provides the Fiscal Year 2025-26 maximum assessment rates of each District, including those Districts with approved annual inflators to the maximum rates, and in such cases, the Engineer's Reports provide the applicable annual increase to each maximum assessment rate; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 218, the “Right to Vote on Taxes Act” requires that if an assessment rate is to be increased above a previously approved annual rate, a notice of the proposed assessment along with a ballot shall be mailed to each owner of identified parcels within the District, and that the agency shall conduct a public hearing not less than 45 days after the mailing of said notice; and
WHEREAS, the maximum assessment rates for Fiscal Year 2025-26 are not proposed to be increased above the approved rates after applying the duly approved annual inflator increases for those Districts with approved annual inflators; and WHEREAS, mailed notices and Assessment Ballots are not required if assessments are not increased above the approved maximum assessment rates, including any increases due to a previously approved annual inflator; and
WHEREAS, said City Council has duly received and considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the jurisdictional facts in the proceedings, concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and the proposed assessments, and said City Council has confirmed its jurisdiction to order the proposed work.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the City Council of the City of Atwater does hereby resolve, order, and determine as follows:

Section 1: The above recitals are true and correct; and Section 2: Following notices duly given, the City Council has held a full and fair Public Hearing regarding the Districts, the levy and collection of assessments, the Engineer’s Reports prepared in connection therewith, and has considered all oral and written statements, protests and communications made or filed by interested persons regarding these matters; and
Section 3: The Engineer’s Reports prepared by the City’s Assessment Engineer, as presented (or amended) and described in the previously adopted Resolutions, are hereby ordered finally approved with ordered changes, if any; and Section 4: The methods of assessment described within each Engineer's Report are hereby approved; and
Section 5: The public interest and convenience require the continuation of assessment procedures for the Districts, and the City Council hereby orders that the work and

Resolution No. XXXX-25 Page 3
assessments, as set forth and described in the Engineer’s Reports and previously adopted Resolutions, be done and made; and
Section 6: The City Council hereby approves the annual levy within the Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts and Landscape Maintenance Districts listed below, as fully described in the Engineer’s Reports, (or as duly amended), for the period July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026.

Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts:

Northwood Village; Orchard Park; Wildwood Estates;
Woodview Garland; Shaffer Lakes West; Woodhaven; Sierra Park 2; Shaffer Lakes East; Price Annexation; Sandlewood Square; Pajaro Dunes; Redwood Estates; Cottage Gardens; Airport Business Park; Silva Ranch; Mello Ranch 1; Mello Ranch 2; Camellia Estates; Juniper Meadows; Camellia
Meadows; Stone Creek; America West Business Park; Bell
Crossing; Atwater South; Beluga Court; Meadow View
Estates; Aspenwood; Applegate Ranch; The Reserve;
Juniper Meadows II and Simon.

Landscape Maintenance Districts:

Price Annexation; Sandlewood Square; Pajaro Dunes;
Redwood Estates; Cottage Gardens; Silva Ranch; Mello
Ranch 1; Mello Ranch 2; Juniper Meadows; Camellia
Meadows; Stone Creek; America West Business Park; Bell
Crossing; Atwater South; Meadow View Estates; Aspenwood; Applegate Ranch, the Reserve and Simon.

Section 7: The City Council hereby authorizes and directs Willdan Financial Services to submit the levy of Fiscal Year 2025-26 special assessments and required forms on to the County Auditor on behalf of the City. The City Clerk is directed to deliver a certified and attested copy of this adopted Resolution to Willdan Financial Services within 14 days of its adoption via e-mail to [email protected].

Resolution No. XXXX-25 Page 4
The foregoing resolution is hereby adopted this 14th day of July 2025.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
_____________________________
MICHAEL G. NELSON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
KORY J. BILLINGS, CITY CLERK

City of Atwater

Lighting and Drainage
Maintenance Districts

CONSOLIDATED ENGINEER’S REPORT
FISCAL YEAR 2025/26

Intent Meeting: June 23, 2025
Public Hearing: July 14, 2025

27368 Via Industria
Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590
T 951.587.3500 | 800.755.6864
F 951.587.3510
www.willdan.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................... 1 A. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 B. FUNDING AUTHORIZED BY THE 1982 ACT ..................................................... 3 C. IMPROVEMENTS AUTHORIZED BY THE 1972 ACT .......................................... 3 II. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS .......................................................................... 5 A. GENERAL MAINTENANCE AND SERVICES WITHIN THE DISTRICTS ............ 5 B. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND IMPROVEMENTS .............................................. 5 III. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT ........................................................................... 23 A. PROPOSITION 218 BENEFIT ANALYSIS .......................................................... 23 B. BENEFIT ANALYSIS .......................................................................................... 24 C. ADJUSTMENT FACTOR TO OFFSET INFLATION ............................................ 26 D. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 27 E. CALCULATION OF ASSESSMENTS ................................................................. 27 IV. DISTRICT BUDGET & RATE TABLES ............................................................ 29 A. BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY .............................................. 29 B. MAXIMUM RATES - INFLATIONARY DISTRICTS ............................................. 29 C. FY 2025/26 ESTIMATED COSTS ..................................................................... 30 D. FY 2025/26 ESTIMATED BUDGETS, RATES, AND FUND BALANCES .......... 31 E. FY 2025/26 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET INFORMATION ................................ 32 F. RATE INCREASE OR DECREASE FROM PRIOR YEAR ................................. 34 APPENDIX A - DISTRICT DIAGRAMS ........................................................................ 36 APPENDIX B - ASSESSMENT ROLLS ....................................................................... 68

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 1
I. OVERVIEW
A. INTRODUCTION
The City of Atwater (“City”) annually levies and collects special assessments in order to fund the maintenance and servicing of streetlights and storm drainage facilities within the Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts (“Districts”). The Districts were formed between 1984 and 2017 and are levied annually pursuant to the Benefit Assessment Act of 1982, Chapter 6.4 of Division 2 of the California Government Code (“1982 Act”) or the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (“1972 Act”).

This Consolidated Engineer’s Annual Levy Report (“Report”) describes the Districts and improvements, any proposed changes to the Districts or improvements and the proposed budgets and assessments to be levied (against properties) in connection with the special benefits the properties will receive from the maintenance and servicing of the District improvements and facilities for Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2025/26. The assessments are based on the City’s estimate of the direct expenditures, incidental expenses, and fund balances that will be necessary to maintain and service the street lighting and storm drain system that provides special benefits to parcel(s) within the respective Districts. The improvements within the Districts and the corresponding costs and the annual levy are budgeted and assessed for each separate District, including all expenditures, deficits, surpluses, revenues, and reserves.

For the purposes of this Report, the word “parcel” refers to an individual property assigned its own Assessor’s Parcel Number by the Merced County (“County”) Assessor’s Office. The County Auditor/Controller uses Assessor’s Parcel Numbers and specific Fund Numbers to identify properties assessed for special district benefit assessments on the County tax roll.

Following consideration of public comments and written protests at a noticed public hearing, the City Council may order amendments to this Report or confirm the Report as submitted.

Following final approval of the Report and confirmation of the assessments, the Council may then order the levy and collection of assessments for FY 2025/26. In such case, the assessment information will be submitted to the County Auditor/Controller and included on the property tax roll for each benefiting parcel in FY 2025/26.

The City formed and maintains thirty-one (31) individual lighting and drainage maintenance districts, which are identified in the following table:

Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts
Northwood Village No. 2 Mello Ranch 1
Orchard Park Estates Camellia Estates
Wildwood Estates Juniper Meadows
Woodhaven Garland Camellia Meadows
Shaffer Lakes West Stone Creek
Woodhaven America West Business Park
Sierra Park 2 Bell Crossing
Shaffer Lakes East Atwater South

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 2
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts
Price Annexation Beluga Court
Sandlewood Square Mello Ranch 2
Pajaro Dunes Meadow View Estates
Redwood Estates Aspenwood
Cottage Gardens Applegate Ranch Subdivision
Airport Business Park The Reserve
Silva Ranch Simon
Juniper Meadows II
The following Districts were formed pursuant to the 1982 Act:
1982 Act Districts
Northwood Village No. 2 Cottage Gardens
Orchard Park Estates Airport Business Park
Wildwood Estates Price Annexation
Woodhaven Garland Pajaro Dunes
Shaffer Lakes East Silva Ranch
Woodhaven Mello Ranch Unit 1 & Unit 2 (Las Casas)
Sierra Park 2 Camellia Estates
Shaffer Lakes West Juniper Meadows
Sandlewood Square Camellia Meadows
Redwood Estates Stone Creek
The Reserve Simon
Juniper Meadows II
The following Districts were formed pursuant to the 1972 Act:
1972 Act Districts
America West Business Park Meadow View Estates
Bell Crossing Aspenwood
Atwater South Applegate Ranch Subdivision
Beluga Court

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 3
B. FUNDING AUTHORIZED BY THE 1982 ACT
As generally defined by the Benefit Assessment Act of 1982 and applicable to these Districts, the City may impose a benefit assessment to finance the maintenance and operation costs of the following improvements:
• Drainage and Flood Control
• Street Maintenance
• Streets Lighting
The improvements to be serviced and maintained in each district, are public drainage improvements and City streets, including, but not limited to personnel, electrical energy costs, pumps, lift stations, detention basins, storm drain pipelines, and all appurtenant facilities required for operation and maintenance of the above-mentioned improvements. Maintenance, servicing and operation shall include, but are not limited to repairing outlets if damaged, cleaning retention basins and repairing damage related to flooding together with implementation of and compliance to applicable municipal storm water quality objectives and State and Regional water quality regulations.

In addition to imposing a benefit assessment for the annual maintenance, servicing and operation of the District improvements, the City may also authorize an assessment or utilize existing assessment revenues to finance the installation, operation, construction or replacement of drainage and flood control facilities, as well as the street and road improvements (with some limitations). While such activities are permitted under the 1982 Act, the budget and assessments for this District only provide for normal maintenance and operation of the improvements and systematic replacement of pumps, motors and equipment.

Since some major rehabilitation or reconstruction projects for such improvements may result from unforeseen damages, the extent and cost of such projects are not easily predicted and to accumulate funds as part of the annual assessments is not considered to be appropriate or practical at this time. If such funding becomes necessary, the City may present a new or increased assessment to the property owners to support the projects. However, as part of the annual assessments, the District may collect and accumulate a reserve fund for to address periodic maintenance and replacements.

C. IMPROVEMENTS AUTHORIZED BY THE 1972 ACT
As applicable or may be applicable to these Districts, the 1972 Act defines improvements to mean one or any combination of the following:
• The installation or planting of landscaping.
• The installation or construction of statuary, fountains, and other ornamental structures and facilities.
• The installation or construction of public lighting facilities. • The installation or construction of any facilities which are appurtenant to any of the foregoing, or which are necessary or convenient for the maintenance or servicing thereof, including, but not limited to, grading, clearing, removal of debris, the installation or construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalks, or paving, or water, irrigation, drainage, or electrical facilities.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 4
• The maintenance or servicing, or both, of any of the foregoing. • The acquisition of any existing improvement otherwise authorized pursuant to this section.

Incidental expenses associated with the improvements including, but not limited to:
• The cost of preparation of the engineer’s report, including plans, specifications, estimates, diagram, and assessment;
• The costs of printing, advertising, and the publishing, posting and mailing of notices;
• Compensation payable to the County for collection of assessments; • Compensation of any engineer or attorney employed to render services; • Any other expenses incidental to the construction, installation, or maintenance and servicing of the improvements;
• Any expenses incidental to the issuance of bonds or notes pursuant to Section 22662.5.
• Costs associated with any elections held for the approval of a new or increased assessment.

The 1972 Act defines "Maintain" or "maintenance" to mean furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, and servicing of any improvement, including:
• Repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any improvement. • Providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury.
• The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste. • The cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls and other improvements to remove or cover graffiti.

Furthermore, the 1972 Act specifies that where the cost of improvements (other than maintenance and operations) is greater than can be conveniently raised from a single annual assessment, an assessment to be levied and collected in annual installments. In that event, the governing body may choose to do any of the following:
• Provide for the accumulation of the moneys in an improvement fund until there are sufficient moneys to pay all or part of the cost of the improvements. • Provide for a temporary advance to the improvement fund from any available and unencumbered funds of the local agency to pay all or part of the cost of the improvements and collect those advanced moneys from the annual installments collected through the assessments.
• Borrow an amount necessary to finance the estimated cost of the proposed improvements. The amount borrowed, including amounts for bonds issued to finance the estimated cost of the proposed improvements.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 5
II. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
A. GENERAL MAINTENANCE AND SERVICES WITHIN THE DISTRICTS The Districts provide for the collection of annual assessments to fund the installation and ongoing maintenance and servicing of street lighting and applicable storm drainage facilities, including but not limited to, the cost of personnel, materials, energy, equipment, contracting services, and other items necessary for the satisfactory operation of these services in each District.

The maintenance and services for the Districts may be generally described as follows:
• The operation, maintenance and servicing of existing city owned streetlights including, but not limited to, streetlights and traffic signals. Costs associated with these maintenance and services are the costs of energy and P.G. & E maintenance costs all of which are authorized under either the 1972 Act or the 1982 Act.
• The 1982 Act Districts provide for operation, maintenance, and servicing of all storm drainage facilities serving the Districts including but not limited to, drainage basins, catch basins, lift stations, storm drain pipelines, pumps, and all appurtenant facilities and the replacement thereof. Maintenance, servicing and operation shall also include cleaning retention basins and repairing damage related to flooding together with soil testing, removal and disposal of contaminated soil and implementation of and compliance to applicable municipal storm water quality objectives and State and Regional water quality regulations. • The 1982 Act Districts provide for maintenance and servicing of landscape and hardscape areas as well as areas without landscaping, including drainage areas and drainage basins.

Maintenance includes weed abatement, the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste and the cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls, fences or other improvements to remove or cover graffiti.

The plans and specifications for the improvements for the Districts are voluminous and are not included in this Report but are on file in the office of the City Engineer and are by reference herein made a part of this Report.

B. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND IMPROVEMENTS
The boundaries of each District together with the approximate location of the improvements of each are depicted in Appendix A – District Diagrams.

Northwood Village No. 2
Northwood Village is a residential development comprised of 168 Single Family residential lots and an exempt drainage basin parcel. This development is located in the northern portion of the City, generally north of the Livingston Canal, west of Shaffer Road and south of the Shaffer Lakes West development.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 6
also share in the cost of maintaining common storm drainage facilities. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Northwood Village on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Northwood Village include a total of 25 streetlights, 23 being identified as internal street lighting and 2 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for the Northwood Village, which are located within the boundaries of the District include a total of 7 catch basins and the Northwood Village drainage basin. The cost of the Northwood Village drainage basin and a storm drainage pump station, which is in proximity to the Northwood Village drainage basin, is shared by Northwood Village, Shaffer Lake West and property outside of the District.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Orchard Park Estates
Orchard Park Estates is comprised of 141 Single Family residences and an exempt drainage basin parcel. This development is located in the western portion of the City, with Davey Avenue along the northern boundary, Fruitland Avenue on the southern boundary, and Orchard Park along the western boundary of this development. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Orchard Park Estates on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development.

The lighting improvements for Orchard Park Estates includes a total of 28 streetlights, 26 being identified as internal street lighting and 2 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Orchard Park Estates includes a total of 15 catch basins located within the District. The drainage basin for Orchard Park Estates is located on the southeast side of the intersection of Mission Way and Nonpareil Drive on the east side of the development. The maintenance costs of the Orchard Park Estates drainage basin improvements are shared by all of the District’s assessable parcels.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.
.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 7
Wildwood Estates
Wildwood Estates is a development currently comprised of 53 Single Family residential lots and an exempt drainage basin parcel. This development is located in the southeastern portion of the City, generally south of Juniper Avenue, east of Shaffer Road, west of the Price Annexation development and north of Broadway Avenue.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Wildwood Estates on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Wildwood Estates include a total of 8 internal streetlights.

The drainage improvements for Wildwood Estates include a total of 6 catch basins located within the District. The drainage basin located at the southwest corner of Wildwood Estates and adjacent to Andy Albiani Park directly serves and benefits Wildwood Estates. This drainage basin also serves and is funded in part by Juniper Meadows I, Juniper Meadows II, and surrounding developments including a portion of Price Annexation.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Woodview Garland
Woodhaven Garland is comprised of 31 Single Family residential lots and is located in the western portion of the City. This development is generally located north of the Woodhaven development and northeast of Highway 99.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. Woodhaven Garland parcels also share in the cost of drainage maintenance and operations associated with this development.

The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Woodview Garland on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Woodview Garland include a total of 5 internal streetlights.

The Woodview Garland District does not have any catch basins but this development is served by the Woodhaven drainage basin located in the southern portion of the Woodhaven development south of Vine Circle; the maintenance costs of the Woodhaven drainage basin improvements are shared with the Woodview Garland District and property located outside the District.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 8
the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Shaffer Lakes West
Shaffer Lakes West is a residential development comprised of 75 Single Family lots and one exempt common area (Lake) parcel. This development is located in the northern portion of the City, generally south of Camellia Drive, west of Shaffer Road and north of the Northwood Village development.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The costs of maintaining a common drainage basin and storm water pumps are shared between Shaffer Lake West and Northwood Village. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Shaffer Lakes West on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Shaffer Lakes West include a total of 13 streetlights, 12 being identified as internal street lighting and 1 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Shaffer Lakes West includes a total of 7 catch basins located within the District. The cost of the Northwood Village drainage basin and a storm drainage pump station, which is in proximity to the above drainage basin, is shared by Northwood Village, Shaffer Lake West and property outside of the District.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Woodhaven
Woodhaven is comprised of 51 Single Family Residential parcels and one exempt drainage basin parcel. The District is located in the western portion of the City. This development is generally located south of the Woodview Garland development and northeast of Highway 99.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. Woodhaven parcels also share in the cost of drainage maintenance and operations associated with this development. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Woodhaven on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Woodhaven include a total of 5 internal streetlights.

The drainage improvements for Woodhaven include a total of 2 catch basins located within the District. This development is served by the Woodhaven drainage basin located in the southern portion of the development south of Vine Circle, which is shared by the Woodview Garland District, the maintenance costs of the Woodhaven drainage basin improvements are shared with the Woodview Garland District and property located outside the District.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 9
A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Sierra Park 2
Sierra Park 2 is a development currently comprised of 33 Single Family Residential parcels, 2 commercial parcels totaling 2.95 non-residential acres and 2 exempt drainage related parcels.

This development is located in the northern portion of the City, generally south of Bellevue Road, east of Shaffer Road and west of the Stone Creek development.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage for Sierra Park 2 are apportioned and assessed on a per Lot/Parcel basis to both the Residential and Commercial properties.

The lighting improvements for Sierra Park 2 include a total of 7 streetlights, 5 being internal District lighting and 2 being perimeter lights.

The drainage improvements for Sierra Park 2 includes a total of 8 catch basins, 7 being catch basins on streets within the development and 1 catch basin on the perimeter of the District.

The Sierra Park 2 drainage basin is located in the southeast corner of the District off of Centennial Way and serves all parcels in the District. The maintenance costs of the Sierra Park 2 drainage basin improvements are shared by all of the District’s assessable parcels.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Shaffer Lakes East
Shaffer Lakes East is a residential development currently comprised of 312 Single Family residential lots, 1 multiple family parcel and 3 exempt parcels (1 drainage basin parcel and 2 easement or other public area parcels). This development is located in the northern portion of the City, generally south of Camellia Drive, east of Shaffer Road and north of Bellevue Road.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property and Multi-Family Residential property within Sandlewood Square on a per Lot/Parcel basis at four different assessment rates.

The lighting improvements for Shaffer Lakes East include a total of 56 streetlights, 49 being internal District lighting and 7 being perimeter lights.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 10
The drainage improvements for Shaffer Lakes East includes a total of 20 catch basins, 19 being catch basins on streets internal to the development and 1 catch basins on a perimeter street. The drainage basin within Shaffer Lakes East is located in the southwest corner of the District south of Manzanita Drive and north of the Channel way. The maintenance costs of the Shaffer Lakes East drainage basin improvements are shared by all of the District’s assessable parcels.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Price Annexation (Nine Sub-Zones)
Price Annexation is comprised of nine Sub-Zones with 976 residential lots, 20 undeveloped residential use parcels of 29.4 acres, one 4.20-acre non-residential parcel and two exempt drainage basin parcels in total. This District is located in the southeastern portion of the City, north of Highway 99, south of the Livingston Canal and west of Buhach Road.

Streetlights within this area are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within the nine Sub-Zones. The parcels within these developments share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities and drainage basin improvements. The lighting and drainage maintenance assessments for parcels within the District varies between a number of subdivisions within the District. The maintenance district is contained in all of the lands of the Price Subdivision, Tract 89-1, recorded 38 Maps 35-39.

The lighting improvements for Price Annexation includes a total of 168 streetlights, 128 being internal District lighting and 40 being perimeter lights.

The drainage improvements for Price Annexation includes a total of 150 catch basins, 115 being catch basins on streets internal to the development and 35 catch basins on perimeter streets.

Of the two drainage basins within Price Annexation, one is located at the southwest corner of Station Avenue and Green Sands Avenue (within the Cottages at Ventana Del Rey #1 development) and one on the west side of Woodside Court and adjacent to Joan Faul Park (within the Vista Del Rey developments). Price Annexation is also served by an off-site drainage basin located at the southwest corner of Wildwood Estates and adjacent to Andy Albiani Park.

The maintenance costs of the on-site Station Avenue drainage basin and Woodside Court drainage basin are shared by Price Annexation parcels and property outside of the District.

The drainage maintenance costs of the Andy Albiani Park/Drainage Basin are funded in part by Price Annexation and surrounding developments, including Juniper Meadows I, Juniper Meadows II and Wildwood Estates.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within this District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 11
the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Sandlewood Square
Sandlewood Square is a residential development comprised of 112 Single Family parcels and an exempt drainage basin parcel. This development is located in the western portion of the City, generally east of Winton Way, south of Bellevue Way, north of Juniper Way and west of 7th Street.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. Sandlewood Square parcels share in the cost of a drainage basin and perimeter fencing as well as the maintenance and operation of the drainage system associated with this development. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Sandlewood Square on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Sandlewood Square includes a total of 17 streetlights, 15 being identified as internal street lighting and 2 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Sandlewood Square includes a total of 12 catch basins, 9 being catch basins located within the District and 3 catch basins located on the perimeter of the District. The Drainage basin within Sandlewood Square is located north of Redwood Avenue at Peppertree Lane. The maintenance costs of the Sandlewood Square drainage basin improvements are shared by all of the District’s assessable parcels.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Pajaro Dunes
Pajaro Dunes is comprised of 58 Single Family residential lots and an exempt drainage basin parcel and is located in the southern portion of the City. This development is generally located north of Broadway Avenue, south of the Silva Ranch development, west of the Price Annexation development and east of Shaffer Road.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities, including a storm drain percolation basin and perimeter fencing. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Pajaro Dunes on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Pajaro Dunes includes a total of 8 streetlights, 6 being identified as internal street lighting and 2 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 12
The drainage improvements for Pajaro Dunes includes a total of 4 catch basins located within the District. The drainage basin for Pajaro Dunes is located in the southern portion of the development at the northwest corner of Broadway Avenue and Malibu Lane. The maintenance costs of the Pajaro Dunes drainage basin improvements are shared by all of the District’s assessable parcels.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Redwood Estates (Sub-Zones A, B and C)
Redwood Estates is comprised of 107 Single Family residential lots, Sub-Zone A and 8 improved commercial parcels totaling 17.68 acres, 2 undeveloped non-residential parcels totaling 8.65 acres in Sub-Zones B and C. This development is located in the northern portion of the City and is generally located south of Fruitland Avenue, west of Shaffer Avenue and north of Bellevue Road.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities, including a storm drain percolation basin.

The lighting improvements for Redwood Estates include a total of 26 streetlights, 19 being internal lighting and 7 being perimeter lights. Three of the identified streetlights are in the commercial areas Sub-Zones B and C and are shared between the Sub-Zones.

The drainage improvements for Redwood Estates include a total of 15 catch basins, 13 being catch basins on streets internal to the development and 2 catch basins on perimeter streets.

Two of the identified catch basins are in the commercial areas which are Sub-Zones B and C and are shared between the Sub-Zones.

The Drainage Basin within Redwood Estates is comprised of two adjacent parcels located between the Residential and Commercial properties west of Redwood Avenue.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Cottage Gardens
Cottage Gardens is comprised of 14 Single Family residential lots. This development is located in the western portion of the City and is generally located south of Highway 99 and north of Atwater Boulevard.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 13
also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities, including a storm drain percolation basin. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Cottage Gardens on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Cottage Gardens include a total of 3 streetlights, 2 being identified as internal street lighting and 1 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Cottage Gardens includes a total of 5 catch basins located within the District. The maintenance costs of the Pajaro Dunes drainage improvements are shared by all of the District’s assessable parcels.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights and catch basins within the District boundaries.

Airport Business Park
Airport Business Park is a development comprised of 16 non-residential parcels totaling 33.5 acres and one exempt drainage basin parcel. This development is located in the southern portion of the City, generally north of Aviator Drive, west of Giannini Road and south of the Beluga development.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities. The special benefit costs for street lighting within Airport Business Park are apportioned and assessed to each NonResidential property on a per Lot/Parcel basis, while drainage is proportionately allocated and assessed on a per Acre basis for both developed and undeveloped properties.

The lighting improvements for Airport Business Park include a total of 11 streetlights, each identified as internal street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Airport Business Park includes a total of 17 catch basins, 16 located on the streets within the development and one catch basin located on the perimeter of the development. The drainage basin within Airport Business Park is located on the west side of Industry Way. Airport Business Park shares certain costs to maintain this on-site drainage basin parcel with Beluga Court and property outside of the District.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 14
Camellia Estates
Camellia Estates is comprised of 38 Single Family residential lots and an exempt drainage basin parcel. This development is generally located south of Gertrude Avenue, north of Camellia Avenue and east of the Camellia Meadows development in the northern portion of the City.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities, including a storm drain basin.

The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Camellia Estates on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Camellia Estates includes a total of 13 streetlights, 10 being identified as internal street lighting and 3 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Camellia Estates includes a total of 6 catch basins within the District. The parcels within Camellia Estates and Camellia Meadows share in the cost of maintenance of a drainage basin that serves both subdivisions. The shared basin is located on two parcels, one parcel from each District.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Silva Ranch
Silva Ranch is comprised of 150 Single Family residential lots and an exempt drainage basin parcel and is located in the southern portion of the City. This development is generally located north of the Pajaro Dunes development, east of Shaffer Road, and west of the Price Annexation development.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities, including a storm drain percolation basin. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Silva Ranch on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Silva Ranch includes a total of 37 internal streetlights.

The drainage improvements for Silva Ranch includes a total of 22 catch basins located within the development. The Silva Ranch drainage basin is located in the southern portion of the development south of Silva Drive. The maintenance costs of the Silva Ranch drainage basin improvements are shared by all of the District’s assessable parcels.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 15
the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Mello Ranch 1
Mello Ranch 1 is comprised of 151 Single Family residential lots, an exempt drainage basin parcel and other exempt easement or public improvement area parcels. The District is located in the eastern portion of the City. This development is generally located south of Avenue Two and the Mello Ranch 2 development, east of Buhach Road, and north of Avenue One and the Atwater South development.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities, including a storm drain percolation basin. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Mello Ranch 1 on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Mello Ranch 1 includes a total of 50 streetlights, 45 being identified as internal street lighting and 5 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Mello Ranch 1 includes a total of 33 catch basins, 30 being catch basins located within the District and 3 catch basins located on the perimeter of the District. The drainage basin within Mello Ranch 1 is located in the northeast corner of the District on Nebela Drive. The costs to maintain the Mello Ranch 1 drainage basin improvements are shared by Mello Ranch 1 and Mello Ranch 2.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Mello Ranch 2
Mello Ranch 2 is comprised of 130 Single Family residential lots and exempt easement or public improvement area parcel. The District is located in the eastern portion of the City. This development is generally located south of Avenue Two, east of Buhach Road, and north of Avenue Two and the Mello Ranch 1 development.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities, including a storm drain percolation basin. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Mello Ranch 2 on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Mello Ranch 2 include a total of 51 streetlights, 46 being identified as internal street lighting and 5 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 16
The drainage improvements for Mello Ranch 2 includes a total of 27 catch basins, 23 being catch basins located within the District and 4 catch basins located on the perimeter of the District. The drainage basin within Mello Ranch 1 is located in the northeast corner of Mello Ranch 1 on Nebela Drive. The costs to maintain the Mello Ranch 1 drainage basin improvements are shared by Mello Ranch 1 and Mello Ranch 2.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Juniper Meadows I
Juniper Meadows I is comprised of 5 Single Family residential lots. This development is generally located north of Juniper Avenue, west of Rancho Del Rey Drive, and east of Shaffer Road in the central portion of the City.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Juniper Meadows I on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Juniper Meadows I includes a total of 2 streetlights, 1 being identified as internal street lighting and 1 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

Juniper Meadows I does not have any catch basins or drainage basins located within the District but is served by the drainage basin located at the southwest corner of Wildwood Estates adjacent to Andy Albiani Park. Juniper Meadows I shares in the costs to maintain the drainage improvements of the drainage basin with Juniper Meadows II, Wildwood Estates, and surrounding developments including a portion of Price Annexation.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Camellia Meadows
Camellia Meadows is comprised of 31 residential lots and an exempt drainage basin parcel.

This development is generally located south of Gertrude Avenue, north of Camellia Avenue and west of the Camellia Estates development in the northern portion of the City.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities, including a storm drain basin.

The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Camellia Meadows on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 17
The lighting improvements for Camellia Meadows include a total of 12 streetlights, 11 being identified as internal street lighting and 1 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Camellia Meadows includes a total of 7 catch basins located within the District. The parcels within Camellia Meadows and Camellia Estates share in the cost of maintenance of a drainage basin that serves both subdivisions. The shared basin is located on two parcels, one parcel from each District.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Stone Creek
Stone Creek is comprised of 187 Single Family residential lots and 3 exempt parcels (1 drainage basin parcel and 2 easement or public area parcels). This development is generally located south of Bellevue Road and northeast of the Livingston Canal in the central portion of the City.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Stone Creek on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Stone Creek include a total of 47 streetlights, 41 being identified as internal street lighting and 6 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The drainage improvements for Stone Creek includes a total of 24 catch basins located within the District. The Stone Creek drainage basin is located in the southern portion of the development south of Stone Creek Drive and north of the canal. The maintenance costs of the Stone Creek drainage basin improvements are shared by all of the District’s assessable parcels.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

America West Business Park
American West Business Park is comprised of 17 Non-Residential parcels on 11.7 acres. This development is generally located south of Bell Drive and west of Applegate Road in the western portion of the City.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining drainage basin parcels. The special benefit costs for street

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 18
lighting and maintenance of drainage basin parcels are apportioned and assessed proportionately to both developed and undeveloped Non-Residential properties within America West Business Park on a per Acre basis.

The lighting improvements for America West Business Park include a total of 16 streetlights, 10 being identified as internal street lighting and 6 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

Certain costs to maintain a 4-acre off-site drainage basin parcel located approximately 500 feet southeast of America West Business Park are shared by America West Business Park, Applegate Ranch, Simon District, portions of Bell Crossing and other properties.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights and drainage basin parcels within the District boundaries.

Bell Crossing
Bell Crossing is comprised of 188 Single Family residential lots and 17 exempt parcels, including 2 undeveloped City-owned lots and multiple parcels identified as improvement areas, easements or HOA common areas. Bell Crossing is a gated community. This development is generally located northeast of Bell Drive and southwest of Highway 99 in the western portion of the City.

The lighting improvements for Bell Crossing incorporate a total of 53 streetlights, 47 internal HOA maintained streetlights within the gated community, 4 additional streetlights on the entryway to the development and 2 perimeter lights located on Bell Drive. The 6 streetlights outside of the gated portion of the development are owned by the City and the cost to maintain these lights are assessed to the residential lots of this development.

The drainage improvements for Bell Crossing includes a total of 17 catch basins located within the District gates and are maintained by the HOA.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District Boundaries. Each improvement labeled as a “District Light” is maintained by the District. Each improvement labeled as an “HOA Light” or “Catch Basin” are within the gated community are to be maintained by the HOA.

Atwater South
Atwater South is comprised of 151 Single Family residential lots together with an exempt drainage basin parcel and two exempt parcels of common areas, easements, or other public areas. This development is generally located north of Green Sands Avenue, south of Avenue One and the Mello Ranch 1 development and east of Buhach Road in the eastern portion of the City.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining the storm drainage basin parcel. The special benefit costs

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 19
for street lighting and maintenance of drainage basin parcel are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Atwater South on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Atwater South include a total of 58 streetlights, 48 being identified as internal street lighting and 10 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The Atwater South Drainage Basin is located within the development at the northeast corner of Buhach Road and Green Sands Avenue.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights and drainage basin parcels within the District boundaries.

Beluga Court
Beluga Court is comprised of 5 vacant non-residential parcels and is located in the southern portion of the City. This development is generally located south of Commerce Avenue, east of Industry Way, north of Airpark Road and west of Enterprise Court.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining share of the storm drainage basin serving Beluga Court.

The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed proportionately to both developed and undeveloped Non-Residential properties within Beluga Court on a per Acre basis.

The lighting improvements for Beluga Court include a total of 2 streetlights identified as internal streetlights. Beluga Court does not have any catch basins located within the District but proportionately shares in the off-site drainage basin located within the Airport Business Park located on the west side of Industry Way, which is shared by Airport Business Park, Beluga Court and other areas.

Beluga Court proportionately shares in the costs of maintaining the off-site drainage basin located within the Airport Business Park located on the west side of Industry Way, which is shared by Airport Business Park, Beluga Court and surrounding non-district developments.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights and drainage basin parcels within the District boundaries.

Meadow View Estates
Meadow View Estates is comprised of 129 Single Family residential lots and an exempt drainage basin parcel, and exempt easements or other public areas. This development is generally located south of Castle Park, east of Buhach Road and north of the Livingston Canal in the northeast area of the City.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 20
Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining the drainage basin parcel. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Meadow View Estates on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Meadow View Estates includes a total of 36 streetlights, 31 being identified as internal street lighting and 5 being identified as perimeter/entryway street lighting.

The Meadow View Estates drainage basin is located in the northeast corner of the District on Nebela Drive.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights and drainage basin parcel within the District boundaries.

Aspenwood
Aspenwood is comprised of 38 residential lots and an exempt drainage basin parcel.

Aspenwood is located in the northern portion of the City. This development is generally located north of Camellia Drive and east of Shaffer Road.

The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Aspenwood on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities including the drainage basin and its perimeter fencing.

The lighting improvements for Aspenwood include a total of 24 streetlights, 19 being identified as internal street lighting and 5 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

The Aspenwood Drainage Basin is located within the development at the end of Kelly Court.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights and drainage basin parcels within the District boundaries.

Applegate Ranch
Applegate Ranch Subdivision is comprised of 15 commercial parcels totaling 41.74 acres and is located in the southwestern portion of the City. This development is generally located south of Highway 99 and east of Applegate Road.

Streetlights within this development are owned by the City, and the cost to maintain the lights are assessed to property owners within this development. The parcels within this development also share in the cost of maintaining storm drainage facilities. The special benefit costs for

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 21
street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed proportionately to both developed and undeveloped Non-Residential properties within Applegate Ranch on a per Acre basis.

The lighting improvements for Applegate Ranch includes a total of 18 streetlights, 11 being identified as internal street lighting and 7 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

Certain costs to maintain a 4-acre off-site drainage basin parcel located approximately 500 feet southeast of America West Business Park are shared by America West Business Park, Applegate Ranch, Simon District, portions of Bell Crossing and other properties.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights and drainage basin parcels within the District boundaries.

The Reserve
The Reserve Subdivision is a development currently comprised of 20 residential lots an exempt drainage basin parcel, and exempt easement/other public area parcel. This development is located in the northern portion of the City, generally south of Gertrude Avenue, north of Camellia Drive, west of Shaffer Road and east of the Camellia Meadows and Camellia Estates developments.

The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within the Reserve Subdivision on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

Currently this entire development is vacant residential lots.

There are currently no street lighting improvements established for the Reserve Subdivision, neither internal nor perimeter streetlights.

The drainage improvements for Reserve Subdivision includes a total of 5 catch basins located within the District. The Drainage basin within Reserve Subdivision is located in the southeast corner of the development on Reserve Court.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with any streetlights, catch basins and/or drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Simon
Simon is comprised of 3 incorporating 2 assessed Non-Residential parcels and an exempt easement parcel. The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed proportionately to both developed and undeveloped Non-Residential properties within Simon on a per Acre basis.

The lighting improvements for Simon include a total of 11 streetlights, 3 being identified as internal street lighting and 8 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 22
The drainage improvements for Simon includes a total of 4 catch basins, 2 being catch basins located adjacent to the development and 2 catch basins located on the perimeter (across the street from the development). A 4-acre off-site drainage basin parcel located approximately 500 feet southeast of America West Business Park are shared by America West Business Park, Applegate Ranch, Simon District, portions of Bell Crossing and other properties.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

Juniper Meadows II
Juniper Meadows II is comprised of twelve (12) Single Family residential lots, located on the west side of Rancho Del Rey Drive and the north side of East Juniper Avenue adjacent to and west of Juniper Meadows Phase I.

The special benefit costs for street lighting and drainage are apportioned and assessed to each Single-Family Residential property within Juniper Meadows II on a per Lot/Parcel basis.

The lighting improvements for Juniper Meadows II include a total of 4 streetlights, 3 being identified as internal street lighting and 1 being identified as perimeter street lighting.

Juniper Meadows II does not have any catch basins located within the District but proportionately shares in the drainage basin located at the southwest corner of Wildwood Estates and adjacent to Andy Albiani Park/ which is shared by Juniper Meadows I, Juniper Meadows II, Wildwood Estates, and surrounding developments including a portion of Price Annexation.

A diagram illustrating the improvements maintained within each District is provided in Appendix A of this Report. The diagram for this District provides a visual depiction of the parcels within the District along with the streetlights, catch basins and any drainage basins within the District boundaries.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 23
III. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT
As generally defined by the Benefit Assessment Act of 1982 and applicable to the Districts, the City may impose a benefit assessment to finance the maintenance and operation costs of streets and road improvements.

In addition to imposing a benefit assessment for the annual maintenance and operation of the District’s improvements, the City may also authorize an assessment or utilize existing assessment revenues to finance the installation, construction or replacement of street and road improvements. While such activities are permitted under the 1982 Act, the budget and assessments for this District only provide for normal maintenance and operation of the improvements. Since most major rehabilitation/construction projects result from unforeseen damages, the extent and cost of such projects are not easily predicted and to accumulate funds as part of the normal annual assessments would not be reasonable. If such funding becomes necessary, the City may present a new or increased assessment to the property owners to support the projects.

The 1972 Act permits the establishment of assessment districts by agencies for the purpose of providing certain public improvements, including the acquisition, construction, installation, and servicing of street lighting improvements and related facilities. The 1972 Act requires that the cost of these improvements be levied according to benefit rather than assessed value:
“The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements.”
The formulas used for calculating assessments reflect the composition of parcels within the District and the improvements and activities to be provided and have been designed to fairly apportion costs based on a determination of the proportional special benefits to each parcel, consistent with the requirements of the 1972 Act and the provisions of Proposition 218 and Article XIII D of the California Constitution.

A. PROPOSITION 218 BENEFIT ANALYSIS
The costs of the proposed improvements for fiscal year 2025/26 have been identified and allocated to properties within the District based on special benefit. The improvements provided by the Districts and for which properties are assessed are public street lighting improvements.

These improvements generally were installed in connection with the development of the properties within the District and were required by the City as a condition of development.

Article XIIID Section 2(d) defines District as follows:
“District means an area determined by an agency to contain all parcels which will receive a special benefit from a proposed public improvement or property-related service”; Article XIIID Section 2(i) defines Special Benefit as follows:

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 24
“Special benefit” means a particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large. General enhancement of property value does not constitute “special benefit.” Article XIIID Section 4a defines proportional special benefit assessments as follows:
“An agency which proposes to levy an assessment shall identify all parcels which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and upon which an assessment will be imposed. The proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel shall be determined in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of a public improvement, the maintenance and operation expenses of a public improvement, or the cost of the property related service being provided. No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel.” These Districts were formed to establish and provide for the improvements that enhance the presentation of the surrounding properties and developments. These improvements will directly benefit the parcels to be assessed within the Districts. The assessments and method of apportionment is based on the premise that the assessments will be used to construct and install landscape and lighting improvements within the existing districts as well as provide for the annual maintenance of those improvements, and the assessment revenues generated by Districts will be used solely for such purposes.

The costs of the proposed improvements have been identified and allocated to properties within the Districts based on special benefit. The improvements to be provided by this District and for which properties will be assessed have been identified as an essential component and local amenity that provides a direct reflection and extension of the properties within the Districts which the property owners and residents have expressed a high level of support.

The method of apportionment (method of assessment) set forth in the Report is based on the premise that each assessed property receives special benefits from the landscape and lighting improvements within the Districts, and the assessment obligation for each parcel reflects that parcel’s proportional special benefits as compared to other properties that receive special benefits.

To identify and determine the proportional special benefit to each parcel within the Districts, it is necessary to consider the entire scope of the improvements provided as well as the properties that benefit from those improvements. The improvements and the associated costs described in this Report, have been carefully reviewed and have been identified and allocated based on a benefit rationale and calculations that proportionally allocate the net cost of only those improvements determined to be of special benefit to properties within the Districts. The various public improvements and the associated costs have been identified as either “general benefit” (not assessed) or “special benefit”.

B. BENEFIT ANALYSIS
The improvements identified in the designated Districts are clearly a special benefit to the properties within the respective Districts because these improvements provide public amenities not found in all areas of the City and the properties to be assessed were part of the overall development or planned development that created the need for the improvements and such improvements would otherwise not be necessary or required without the development of

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 25
those properties. Therefore, the ongoing operation and maintenance of those improvements and the level of service provided have a direct and particular impact on those properties, including but not limited to enhanced aesthetics, and serve as a shared extension and representation of the individual properties into the public areas in close proximity to those properties that are not provided or shared by other properties outside the specific Districts.

While these improvements are often directly associated with the development of the properties within the respective Districts and these improvements have a direct impact on only those properties, it may be reasonable to conclude that the maintenance of such improvements would be considered entirely special benefits to those properties. An analysis of the costs identified as general benefit (to be funded by the City) has been performed and those estimated costs have been incorporated into the budget.

The improvements (both street lighting and drainage) have been designed and constructed to serve the parcel(s) within the developments and are a direct and shared responsibility (collective responsibility) of those individual properties, (similar to any other privately funded and maintained common area, parking lot or other on-site amenities.) Like many other development related improvements and infrastructure, the lighting and drainage improvements to be maintained by the Districts and funded through special benefit assessments, collectively serve as a direct physical extension of the parcel(s) and would otherwise not be necessary to be provided by the City, if not for the development of the parcel(s). The fact that these improvements are located within public rights-of-way or easements and will be maintained by the City through an assessment district rather than privately by the individual property owners or association, does not make these improvements less of a direct and special benefit to the parcel(s). In addition, simply because the improvements may be identified or termed “public improvements” does necessarily mean that those improvements must also have a benefit to the City or to the public at large. Like the installation of the improvements themselves, the ongoing maintenance and servicing of the District improvements is an integral part of the use, protection and preservation of the properties within the Districts and the services and activities to be funded by annual assessments confer a particular and distinct special benefit to those parcels.

If such improvements were provided and maintained privately through a property association or by individual property owners, the cost of similar maintenance and services would likely be much greater in part because of the limited scale of the improvements to be maintained (the City achieves an economy of scale and cost savings through multiple districts with similar services). Likewise, privately maintained lighting and drainage facilities generally have greater overhead costs in large part due to the cost of liability insurance coverage. In addition, through the utilization of exiting public infrastructure, the drainage basin required for development can be located off-site, but a privately owned and maintained drainage basin would most likely need to be constructed on-site which would have limited the development of the properties within the Districts.

The Streetlights associated with these Districts provide direct special benefits to nonresidential parcels not only by allowing such parcels to be developed to their full and best use, but also by ensuring the safe and efficient movement of both people and goods to and from the properties, enhanced security afforded by well lighted surroundings, and the potential for expanded business hours.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 26
Like the Streetlights, the drainage improvements associated with these Districts have been installed specifically for and in connection with the development of those properties and the ongoing maintenance of these drainage improvements will help ensure proper water flow and control of excess water during periods of rain. This is essential to preservation and protection of property within the District.

The Districts and assessments provide for the continued maintenance, servicing and operation of the improvements within the District boundaries.

Parcels identified as being within the Districts share in both the cost and the benefits of the improvements. The costs associated with the improvements are equitably spread between benefiting parcels within the Districts. Only parcels that receive benefit from the improvements are assessed, and each parcel is assessed in proportion to the estimated benefit received.

The funds collected from the assessments are dispersed and used for the maintenance, services and operation of the improvements provided within the District.

C. ADJUSTMENT FACTOR TO OFFSET INFLATION
As part of the assessment approval process, property owners for the following Districts authorized an annual increase in the assessments to enable the Districts to keep current with increases in the cost of labor and materials. The Districts with their approved increases are listed in the following table:

District Annual Increase
Silva Ranch CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City Average for Y/E Dec 31 Mello Ranch Unit 1 CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City Average for Y/E Dec 31 Mello Ranch Unit 2 (Las Casas) CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City Average for Y/E Dec 31 Camellia Estates CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City Average for Y/E Dec 31 Juniper Meadows 4%
Camellia Meadows 4%
Stone Creek 4%
America West Business Park 4%
Bell Crossing 4%
Atwater South 4%
Beluga Court 4%
Meadow View Estates 4%
Aspenwood CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City Average for Y/E Dec 31 Applegate Ranch CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City Average for Y/E Dec 31 The Reserve CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City Average for Y/E Dec 31 Simon CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City Average for Y/E Dec 31 Juniper Meadows II 4%
There is no allowable annual increase in the rates for the following districts: Northwood Village, Orchard Park Estates, Wildwood Estates, Woodview Garland, Shaffer Lakes West, Woodhaven, Sierra Park 2, Shaffer Lakes East, Price Annexation, Sandlewood Square, Pajaro Dunes, Redwood Estates, Cottage Gardens, and Airport Business Park.

The annual percentage increase for FY 2025/26 for each District allowed a Consumer Price Index (CPI) based rate increase was 2.88% based on the CPI, All Urban Consumers, US City

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 27
Average calculated from December to December. Should the Bureau of Labor Statistics revise such index or discontinue the preparation of such index, the Engineer shall use the revised index, or a comparable system as approved by the City Council for determining fluctuations in the cost of living.

D. METHODOLOGY
In accordance with the provisions of the California Constitution Article XIIID, the proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel shall be determined in relationship to the entirety of the maintenance and operation expenses of a public improvement and each parcel’s assessment may not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred to that parcel. The benefit formula used to determine the proportional assessment obligation for each parcel in the Districts is therefore based upon the entirety of the estimated annual expenses to operate and maintain the improvements that provide special benefits to the parcels therein and those costs are allocated to the parcels based on a method of apportionment that reflects the proportional special benefit conferred to each parcel.

Equivalent Benefit Unit Application:

To proportionally allocate special benefit to each parcel, it is necessary to correlate each property’s proportional benefit to other properties that benefit from the improvements and services being funded. In order to do this, the assessment methodology assigns each parcel a number of EBUs (Equivalent Benefit Units) based on its land use as of March 1st, preceding the fiscal year addressed herein. One EBU is defined as the special benefit allocable to a single-family home lot (basic EBU unit). In each case, a parcel is only allocated EBUs if the landscaping lighting or drainage serving the District has been accepted by the City or will be accepted by the City during the upcoming fiscal year.

E. CALCULATION OF ASSESSMENTS
Residential lots in each specific District are assigned (one) 1 EBU per parcel for the benefits they receive from the District street lighting and storm drainage facilities. Commercial, multifamily and undeveloped (planned acreage) residential parcels are assessed their proportionate shares of the total street lighting and storm drainage maintenance costs of the District based on their acreage. An undeveloped residential parcel shall be considered a “residential lot” if a building permit can be issued on such parcel without further subdivision and the parcel is adjacent to curb and gutter improvements associated with that development. The following formula is used to calculate each parcel’s EBU (proportional benefit).

Parcel Acres = Parcel EBU
or
1 Lot = 1 EBU
The total number of Equivalent Benefit Units (EBU’s) is the sum of all individual EBU's applied to parcels that receive special benefit from the improvements. An assessment amount per EBU (Assessment Rate) for the improvements is established by taking the total cost of the improvements and dividing that amount by the total number of EBU’s of all parcels benefiting from the improvements. This Rate is then applied back to each parcel’s individual EBU to determine the parcel’s proportionate benefit and assessment obligation for the improvements.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 28
Total Balance to Levy / Total EBU = Levy per EBU
Levy per EBU x Parcel EBU = Parcel Levy Amount
Exceptions to the above methodology are described below. Shaffer Lakes East, Price Annexation, and Redwood Estates are assessed different rates for different subdivisions within the District.

Sierra Park 2: Lighting costs and drainage costs are apportioned on a per parcel basis regardless of size.

Airport Business Park: Lighting costs are apportioned per parcel and drainage costs are apportioned per acreage.

Redwood Estates: Lighting costs are apportioned to residential parcel only on a per lot basis.

Drainage costs are apportioned on a per lot basis to developed residential lots and a per acre basis for undeveloped and developed non-residential parcels.

Applegate Ranch and Price Annexation: Lighting and Drainage costs are apportioned per acreage.

Lighting Cost:

Total cost of Energy and Maintenance / Number of Parcels = Lighting Cost per Parcel Drainage Cost:

Total cost of Drainage System Maintenance and Operation / Number of Parcels = Drainage Cost per Parcel
Administration Cost:

Total Administration Cost / Number of Parcels = Administration Cost per parcel Total assessment rate per parcel:

Lighting Cost + Drainage Cost + Administration Cost = Total assessment rate per parcel

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 29
IV. DISTRICT BUDGET & RATE TABLES
A. BUDGET AND ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
The assessments in this Report are based on estimated annual costs to maintain, service and operate each District’s improvements and provide for applicable incidental expenses.

Budgeted cost projections are outlined in Sections C and D below.

B. MAXIMUM RATES - INFLATIONARY DISTRICTS
The following table shows each District subject to annual escalation of its maximum assessment rates, together with annual inflator information and comparative maximum assessment rates for FY 2024/25 and 2025/26 of each:

District Annual
Escalator
FY 2025/26
Inflator %
FY 2024/25
Maximum Rates
$/EBU 1
FY 2025/26
Maximum Rates
$/EBU 1
Silva Ranch LD CPI (Dec-Dec) 2.88% $148.8994 $153.1877
Mello Ranch Unit 1 LD CPI (Dec-Dec) 2.88% $186.7754 $192.1545 Mello Ranch Unit 2 LD CPI (Dec-Dec) 2.88% $217.7683 $224.0400 Camellia Estates LD CPI (Dec-Dec) 2.88% $270.6695 $278.4648 Juniper Meadows LD 4% 4.00% $1,216.1132 $1,264.7578
Camellia Meadows LD 4% 4.00% $1,063.5537 $1,106.0958
Stone Creek LD 4% 4.00% $296.2367 $308.0862
America West LD 4% 4.00% $747.5466 $777.4484
Bell Crossing LD 4% 4.00% $98.7001 $102.6481
Atwater South LD 4% 4.00% $380.7172 $395.9458
Beluga Court LD 4% 4.00% $712.7563 $741.2665
Meadow View LD 4% 4.00% $454.6789 $472.8661
Aspenwood LD CPI (Dec-Dec) 2.88% $514.4648 $529.2814
Applegate Ranch LD CPI (Dec-Dec) 2.88% $210.3195 $216.3767 The Reserve LD CPI (Dec-Dec) 2.88% $697.0192 $717.0934
Simon LD CPI (Dec-Dec) 2.88% $1,983.9717 $2,041.1101
Juniper Meadows II LD 4% 4.00% $232.6567 $241.9630
1 Rates have been rounded for presentation purposes.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 30
C. FY 2025/26 ESTIMATED COSTS
Fund District
Lighting
O&M
Drainage
O&M
Pump
Replacement
Contribution
Admin
Costs
Prof
Services
Total
Costs
Replacement
Project
Expenditures
General
Benefit
Contribution 1
Total
Budget
5001 Northwood Village LD $4,685 $4,443 $3,180 $653 $784 $13,745 $0 ($350) $13,395 5002 Orchard Park Estates LD 5,420 4,089 7,510 544 658 18,221 0 (205) 18,016 5003 Wildwood Estates LD 1,549 2,007 4,760 210 247 8,773 0 (546) 8,227 5004 Woodview Garland LA 912 504 1,000 121 145 2,682 0 (183) 2,499 5005 Shaffer Lakes West LD 2,483 2,140 1,820 292 350 7,085 0 (156) 6,929 5006 Woodhaven LD 857 867 1,000 198 238 3,160 0 (212) 2,948 5007 Sierra Park 2 LD 1,410 2,244 790 136 163 4,743 0 (78) 4,665 5008 Shaffer Lakes East LD 11,095 15,006 7,510 1,217 1,460 36,288 0 (618) 35,670 5009 Price Annexation LD 31,735 26,599 8,510 3,737 4,652 75,233 0 (6,060) 69,173 5011 Sandlewood Square LD 3,480 9,282 1,300 408 523 14,993 0 (182) 14,811 5013 Pajaro Dunes LD 1,556 2,746 1,000 226 271 5,799 0 (117) 5,682 5015 Redwood Estates LD 5,149 5,058 3,640 455 546 14,848 0 (181) 14,667 5017 Cottage Gardens LD 556 194 2,000 54 65 2,869 0 (33) 2,836 5019 Airport Business Park LD 2,434 11,997 4,000 62 75 18,568 0 (1,325) 17,243 5021 Silva Ranch LD 7,229 3,459 2,000 583 700 13,971 0 (70) 13,901 5023 Mello Ranch 1 LD 10,293 8,549 3,000 587 705 23,134 0 (502) 22,632 5025 Camellia Estates LD 2,643 1,679 1,000 148 177 5,647 0 (157) 5,490 5026 Juniper Meadows LD 400 119 470 19 23 1,031 0 (118) 913 5028 Camellia Meadows LD 2,488 1,746 1,000 121 145 5,500 0 (111) 5,389 5030 Stone Creek LD 9,071 3,513 7,010 727 873 21,194 0 (336) 20,858 5032 America West LD 3,391 758 0 66 79 4,294 0 (219) 4,075 5034 Bell Crossing LD 175 758 0 731 877 2,541 0 (201) 2,340 5036 Atwater South LD 11,583 2,030 0 587 705 14,905 0 (398) 14,507 5038 Beluga Court LD 422 369 0 19 23 833 0 0 833
5039 Mello Ranch 2 LD 10,618 8,364 4,000 506 607 24,095 0 (562) 23,533 5041 Meadow View LD 6,961 1,779 0 502 602 9,844 0 (323) 9,521 5043 Aspenwood LD 5,005 941 0 148 177 6,271 0 (208) 6,063 5045 Applegate Ranch LD 3,844 758 0 58 70 4,730 0 (397) 4,333 5047 The Reserve LD 0 1,727 0 78 93 1,898 0 (8) 1,890
5053 Simon LD 2,389 5,495 0 8 9 7,901 0 (4) 7,897
5055 Juniper Meadows II LD 804 401 1,120 47 56 2,428 0 (47) 2,381 Total: $150,637 $129,621 $67,620 $13,248 $16,098 $377,224 $0 ($13,907) $363,317 1 This amount represents the General Benefit portion of the costs to maintain the improvements. This General Benefit portion of the costs is deducted so that it is not charged to the property owners.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 31
D. FY 2025/26 ESTIMATED BUDGETS, RATES, AND FUND BALANCES Fund District
Total
Budget
Replenish/
(Use) of
Reserves 1
Balance
to Levy
Total Max
Assessment
No. of
Lots or
Acres 3 4
Unfunded
Costs
Per EBU 2 3
Max
Rate per
EBU 3 4
Applied
Rate per
EBU 3 4
Prior Year
GF Advance/
(Repayment)
5 Beginning
Reserve
Bal. (est.)
Replenish/
(Use) of
Reserves 1
Current
Year GF
Advance/
(Repayment)
6 Ending
Reserve
Bal. (est.)
Replacement &
Operating
Reserve
Target Bal.
5001 Northwood Village LD $13,395 ($8,755) $4,640 $4,642 168 ($52.12) $27.63 $27.62 $4,410 $0 ($8,755) $8,755 $0 $54,398 5002 Orchard Park Estates LD 18,016 (11,341) 6,675 12,580 141 $89.22 $47.34 0 98,485 (11,341) 0 87,144 121,658 5003 Wildwood Estates LD 8,227 (4,669) 3,558 3,558 53 $67.14 $67.14 0 10,947 (4,669) 0 6,278 75,514 5004 Woodview Garland LA 2,499 (2,048) 451 451 31 ($66.06) $14.56 $14.56 658 0 (2,048) 2,048 0 16,250 5005 Shaffer Lakes West LD 6,929 (4,571) 2,358 2,358 75 Varies 3 Varies 3 0 27,202 (4,571) 0 22,631 30,765 5006 Woodhaven LD 2,948 (1,416) 1,532 2,641 51 $51.78 $30.04 0 16,496 (1,416) 0 15,080 16,474 5007 Sierra Park 2 LD 4,665 (2,583) 2,082 2,082 Note 3 Varies 3 Varies 3 Varies 3 0 2,267 (2,583) 316 0 14,183 5008 Shaffer Lakes East LD 35,670 (21,313) 14,357 14,358 Note 3 Varies 3 Varies 3 0 128,166 (21,313) 0 106,853 130,485 5009 Price Annexation LD 3 69,173 (39,576) 29,598 29,598 Note 3($17.02) Varies 3 Varies 3 0 22,400 (39,576) 17,176 0 162,237 5011 Sandlewood Square LD 14,811 (11,727) 3,084 3,086 112 $27.55 $27.54 0 19,103 (11,727) 0 7,376 26,906 5013 Pajaro Dunes LD 5,682 (5,682) 0 4,504 58 $77.66 $0.00 0 41,187 (5,682) 0 35,505 17,841 5015 Redwood Estates LD 14,667 (12,040) 2,627 7,557 Note 3 Varies 3 Varies 3 0 65,523 (12,040) 0 53,483 61,934 5017 Cottage Gardens LD 2,836 (2,379) 457 457 14 ($169.94) $32.64 $32.64 109 0 (2,379) 2,379 0 31,418 5019 Airport Business Park LD 17,243 (11,820) 5,423 5,423 Note 3 Varies 3 Varies 3 0 15,092 (11,820) 0 3,272 68,622 5021 Silva Ranch LD 13,901 (13,901) 0 22,977 150 $153.18 $0.00 0 52,197 (13,901) 0 38,296 36,951 5023 Mello Ranch 1 LD 22,632 (9,495) 13,137 29,015 151 $192.15 $87.00 0 61,090 (9,495) 0 51,595 56,316 5025 Camellia Estates LD 5,490 (4,212) 1,278 10,581 38 $278.46 $33.64 0 19,575 (4,212) 0 15,363 17,745 5026 Juniper Meadows LD 913 (913) 0 6,324 5 $1,264.75 $0.00 0 10,074 (913) 0 9,161 7,507 5028 Camellia Meadows LD 5,389 (5,389) 0 34,289 31 $1,106.09 $0.00 0 37,127 (5,389) 0 31,738 17,695 5030 Stone Creek LD 20,858 (12,488) 8,370 57,611 187 $308.08 $44.76 0 116,431 (12,488) 0 103,943 115,579 5032 America West LD 4,075 (4,075) 0 9,150 11.77 $777.44 $0.00 0 26,302 (4,075) 0 22,227 2,038 5034 Bell Crossing LD 2,340 2,337 4,677 19,296 188 $102.64 $24.88 4,474 0 2,337 0 2,337 2,340 5036 Atwater South LD 14,507 (14,507) 0 59,787 151 $395.94 $0.00 0 69,065 (14,507) 0 54,558 7,254 5038 Beluga Court LD 833 (833) 0 3,706 5 $741.26 $0.00 0 7,348 (833) 0 6,515 417 5039 Mello Ranch 2 LD 23,533 (13,747) 9,786 29,125 130 $224.04 $75.28 0 76,063 (13,747) 0 62,316 71,767 5041 Meadow View LD 9,521 (9,521) 0 60,999 129 $472.86 $0.00 0 80,221 (9,521) 0 70,700 4,761 5043 Aspenwood LD 6,063 (6,063) 0 20,113 38 $529.28 $0.00 0 10,001 (6,063) 0 3,938 3,032 5045 Applegate Ranch LD 4 4,333 (4,333) 0 9,031 41.74 $216.37 $0.00 0 18,356 (4,333) 0 14,023 2,167 5047 Reserve LD 1,890 (1,890) 0 14,342 20 $717.09 $0.00 0 10,073 (1,890) 0 8,183 945 5053 Simon LD 4 7,897 (7,897) 0 6,634 3.25 $2,041.11 $0.00 0 12,332 (7,897) 0 4,435 3,949 5055 Juniper Meadows II LD 2,381 (1,727) 654 2,904 12 $241.96 $54.52 0 14,853 (1,727) 0 13,126 17,991 Total: $363,317 ($248,571) $114,746 $489,177 $9,651 $1,067,976 ($248,571) $30,673 $850,078 $1,197,129 1 A “Replenishment” of the Reserve increases the levy to replenish the Reserve. A “(Use)” of the Reserve decreases the levy by drawing funds from the Reserve to pay current year expenditures after considering the amount shown in the Prior Year General Fund (Advance) / Repayment column, if any. 2 Represents the average shortfall per EBU expected to be advanced from the General Fund due to costs exceeding the District's maximum assessment revenues. 3 Represents a district with two or more applied and maximum assessment rates. See Section E of this Report for rates by applicable subdivision or subarea. Lot and acreage detail of each parcel are provided in the preliminary assessment roll of this Report.
4 The Maximum and Applied Rates per EBU for America West LD, Applegate Ranch LD and Simon LD shown above are per acre for 11.77 acres, 41.74 acres and 3.25 acres, respectively. 5 Represents funds transferred to/(from) the City's General Fund during the 12 months prior to FY 2025/26 in connection with the prior year’s projected unfunded costs. A positive amount represents a projected advance to a District, while a negative amount represents a repayment of a previous advance from the General Fund. 6 Represents unfunded costs exceeding revenues expected to be advanced from the City's General Fund due to assessment revenue limitations of the District. A negative amount represents a projected repayment of a prior year General Fund advance, while a positive amount represents a projected deficit that would require an advance from the General Fund.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 32
E. FY 2025/26 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET INFORMATION
Sierra Park 2. The following table provides assessment rate information for subdivisions or areas within this District which are not detailed within the preceding budget tables in Sections C & D:

Subdivision / Land Use
FY 2025/26
Applied Rate
$/EBU
FY 2025/26
Maximum Rate
$/EBU
Sierra Park Residential Area Lighting per Lot $9.60 $9.60 Sierra Park Residential Area Drainage per lot 32.46 32.46 Total Residential $42.06 $42.06
Subdivision / Land Use
FY 2025/26
Applied Rate
$/EBU
FY 2025/26
Maximum Rate
$/EBU
Sierra Parks Commercial Area Lighting per acre $9.60 $9.60 Sierra Parks Commercial Area Drainage per acre 336.22 336.22 Total Non-Residential $345.82 $345.82
Shaffer Lakes East. The following table provides assessment rate information for subdivisions / areas within this District which are not detailed within the preceding budget tables in Sections C & D:

Subdivision / Land Use
FY 2025/26
Applied Rate
$/EBU
FY 2025/26
Maximum
Rate $/EBU
Villas at Shaffer Lakes 8 Lot 1 to 33 per parcel $10.36 $10.37 Shaffer Lakes East # 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 per parcel $48.20 $48.20 Shaffer Lakes East # 3 Lot 163 Multi-Family per parcel $564.00 $564.00 Redwood Estates. The following table provides assessment rate information for subdivisions / areas within this District which are not detailed within the preceding budget tables in Sections C & D:

Sub Area / Land Use
FY 2025/26
Applied Rate
$/EBU
FY 2025/26
Maximum Rate
$/EBU
Sub Area A - Residential Lighting per lot $5.46 $15.70
Sub Area B - Non-Residential Lighting (none) n/a n/a
Sub Area C - Non-Residential Lighting (none) n/a n/a
Sub Area A - Residential Drainage per lot $8.96 $25.82
Sub Area B - Non-Residential Drainage per acre $13.93 $40.08 Sub Area C - Non-Residential Drainage per acre $63.89 $183.82

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 33
Price Annexation The following table provides assessment rate information for subdivisions / areas within this District which are not detailed within the preceding budget tables in Sections C & D:

Subdivision / Area Assessable
Acres
FY 2025/26
Applied Rate
$/EBU
FY 2025/26
Maximum Rate
$/EBU
Cott Vent Del Rey #1 n/a $4.50 $4.50
Cott Vent Del Rey #2, Vintage #1 and #2 n/a $6.24 $6.25 Casa Del Rey #1, Vintage #3 n/a $33.68 $33.68
Vista Del Rey #1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Wildwood Est. #2 n/a $33.68 $33.68 Casa Del Rey #2 and #3 n/a $33.68 $33.68
Par 5 Sub #4, #5 and #6 n/a $33.68 $33.68
Fairway Est. Unit #1 n/a $33.68 $33.68
Fairway Est. Unit #2 and #3 n/a $33.68 $33.68
Price Sub Lot 7 per acre 8.5 $27.38 $27.38
Price Sub Lot 12 per acre 20.54 $28.66 $28.67
Price Sub Lot 13 rate per acre 4.2 $27.52 $27.52
Villa Italia n/a $76.06 $76.06
Airport Business Park. The following table provides assessment rate information for subdivisions / areas within this District which are not detailed within the preceding budget tables in Sections C & D:

Land Use / Services
FY 2025/26
Applied Rate
$/EBU
FY 2025/26
Maximum Rate
$/EBU
Airport Business Lighting per Lot/Parcel $69.84 $69.85
Airport Business Drainage per Acre $124.07 $124.07

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 34
F. RATE INCREASE OR DECREASE FROM PRIOR YEAR
Fund District
Subdivision / Area
2024/25
Applied
Rate
2025/26
Proposed
Rate
$ Rate
Increase /
(Decrease)
5001 Northwood Village LD $27.62 $27.62 $0.00
5002 Orchard Park Estates LD $47.34 $47.34 $0.00
5003 Wildwood Estates LD $67.14 $67.14 $0.00
5004 Woodview Garland LA $14.56 $14.56 $0.00
5005 Shaffer Lakes West LD $31.44 $31.44 $0.00
5006 Woodhaven LD $30.04 $30.04 $0.00
5007 Sierra Parks LD
Sierra Parks Residential per EBU $42.06 $42.06 $0.00
Sierra Parks Commercial per EBU $345.82 $345.82 $0.00
5008 Shaffer Lakes East LD
Villas At Shaffer Lakes 8 Lot 1 to 33 $10.36 $10.36 $0.00 Shaffer Lakes East # 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 $48.20 $48.20 $0.00 Shaffer Lakes East # 3 Lot 163 (MF) per parcel $564.00 $564.00 $0.00 5009 Price Annexation LD
Cott Vent Del Rey #1 $4.50 $4.50 $0.00
Cott Vent Del Rey #2, Vintage #1 and #2 $6.24 $6.24 $0.00 Casa Del Rey #1, Vintage #3 $33.68 $33.68 $0.00
Vista Del Rey #1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Wildwood Est. #2 $33.68 $33.68 $0.00 Casa Del Rey #2 and #3 $33.68 $33.68 $0.00
Par 5 Sub #4, #5 & #6 $33.68 $33.68 $0.00
Fairway Est. Unit #1 $33.68 $33.68 $0.00
Fairway Est. Unit # 2 and 3 $33.68 $33.68 $0.00
Price Sub Lot 7 per Acre $27.38 $27.38 $0.00
Price Sub Lot 12 per Acre $28.67 $28.67 $0.00
Price Sub Lot 13 per Acre $27.52 $27.52 $0.00
Villa Italia $76.06 $76.06 $0.00
5011 Sandlewood Square LD $27.54 $27.54 $0.00
5013 Pajaro Dunes LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5015 Redwood Estates LD
Sub Area A - Residential Lighting per Lot $5.46 $5.46 $0.00 Sub Area A - Residential Drainage per Lot $8.96 $8.96 $0.00 Sub Area B - Non-Res Drainage per Acre $13.93 $13.93 $0.00 Sub Area C - Non-Res Drainage per Acre $63.89 $63.89 $0.00 5017 Cottage Gardens LD $32.64 $32.64 $0.00
5019 Airport Business Park LD
Lighting per Lot/Parcel $69.84 $69.84 $0.00
Lighting per Lot/Parcel $69.84 $69.84 $0.00

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 35
F. RATE INCREASE OR DECREASE FROM PRIOR YEAR (continued) Fund District
Subdivision / Area
2024/25
Applied
Rate
2025/26
Proposed
Rate
$ Rate
Increase /
(Decrease)
5021 Silva Ranch LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5023 Mello Ranch LD $87.00 $87.00 $0.00
5025 Camellia Estates LD $33.64 $33.64 $0.00
5026 Juniper Meadows 1 LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5028 Camellia Meadows LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5030 Stone Creek LD $44.76 $44.76 $0.00
5032 America West LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5034 Bell Crossing LD $1.72 $24.88 $23.16 [1]
5036 Atwater South LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5038 Beluga Court LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5039 Mello Ranch 2 LD $75.28 $75.28 $0.00
5041 Meadow View LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5043 Aspenwood LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5045 Applegate Ranch LD per Acre $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5047 Reserve LD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5053 Simon LD per Acre $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5055 Juniper Meadows 2 LD $54.52 $54.52 $0.00
[1] Indicates a proposed rate increase to generate sufficient revenues to fund district costs until the collection of next year’s assessments and to replenish reserves. If charged at a lesser rate, it is expected that supplemental funds will need to be advanced from the General Fund.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 36

APPENDIX A - DISTRICT DIAGRAMS
For general reference purposes, renderings of the Districts’ boundaries, showing the extent of the assessable parcels, are presented herein. More detailed District Diagrams are on file with the City Clerk and made part of this report by reference. The lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel within the Districts are those lines and dimensions shown on the maps of the Assessor of the County of Merced, for the year when this Report was prepared, and are also incorporated by reference herein and made part of this Report.

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 37
Airport Business Park

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 38
America West Business Park

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 39
Applegate Ranch

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 40
Aspenwood

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 41
Atwater South

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 42
Bell Crossing

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 43
Beluga Court

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 44
Camellia Estates

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 45
Camellia Meadows

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 46
Cottage Gardens

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 47
Juniper Meadows I

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 48
Juniper Meadows II

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 49
Meadow View Estates

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 50
Mello Ranch 1

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 51
Mello Ranch 2

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 52
Northwood Village

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 53
Orchard Park Estates

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 54
Pajaro Dunes

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 55
Price Annexation (Showing Improvements within the 9 Sub Zones)

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 56
Redwood Estates

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 57
The Reserve

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 58
Sandlewood Square

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 59
Shaffer Lakes East

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 60
Shaffer Lakes West

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 61
Sierra Park 2

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 62
Silva Ranch

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 63
Simon

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 64
Stone Creek

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 65
Wildwood Estates

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 66
Woodhaven

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 67
Woodview Garland

2025/26
City of Atwater
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Lighting and Drainage Maintenance Districts Page 68

APPENDIX B - ASSESSMENT ROLLS
Parcel identification for each lot or parcel within the District, shall be the parcel as shown on the Merced County Assessor's map for the year in which this Report is prepared. The land use classification for each parcel is based on the Merced County Assessor’s Roll. A listing of parcels assessed within this District, along with the proposed assessment amounts, shall be submitted to the City Clerk, under a separate cover, and by reference is made part of this Report.

Non-assessable lots or parcels may include areas of public streets and other roadways (typically not assigned an APN by the County); dedicated public easements, open space areas and rightsof-ways including public greenbelts and parkways; utility right-of-way areas; common areas; landlocked parcels, small parcels vacated by the County, bifurcated lots, and any other property that cannot be developed. These types of parcels are considered to receive little or no benefit from the improvements and are therefore exempted from assessment. Properties outside the District boundary receive no direct or special benefits from the improvements provided by the District and are not assessed.

Approval of this Report (as submitted or as modified) confirms the method of apportionment and the maximum assessment rate to be levied against each eligible parcel and thereby constitutes the approved levy and collection of assessments for the fiscal year. The parcels and the amount of assessment to be levied shall be submitted to the County Auditor/Controller and included on the property tax roll for the fiscal year.

If any parcel submitted for collection is identified by the County Auditor/Controller to be an invalid parcel number for the current fiscal year, a corrected parcel number and/or new parcel numbers will be identified and resubmitted to the County Auditor/Controller. The assessment amount to be levied and collected for the resubmitted parcel or parcels shall be based on the method of apportionment and assessment rate approved in this Report. Therefore, if a single parcel has changed to multiple parcels, the assessment amount applied to each of the new parcels shall be recalculated and applied according to the approved method of apportionment and assessment rate rather than a proportionate share of the original assessment.

APN SITE ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION EBU
LIGHT
EBU

DRAIN CHARGE
056-330-021-000 281 BUSINESS PR AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 5 1.0 1.0 $ 193.92 056-330-024-000 181 BUSINESS PR AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 8 1.0 1.0 $ 193.92 056-330-025-000 141 BUSINESS PR AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 9 1.0 1.1 $ 206.32 056-330-026-000 101 BUSINESS PR AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 10 1.0 1.4 $ 243.54 056-330-029-000 485 AVIATOR DR AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 14 1.0 2.0 $ 317.98 056-330-031-000 221 BUSINESS PR PARCEL 1 PM 85-09 SEC 12/7/12 1.0 0.5 $ 131.88 056-330-032-000 201 BUSINESS WAY PARCEL 2 PM 85-09 SEC 12/7/12 1.0 0.5 $ 131.88 056-330-035-000 241 BUSINESS PR PARCEL 1 PM 87-38 SEC 12/7/12 1.0 0.5 $ 131.88 056-330-036-000 237 BUSINESS PARK WAY #SUITE A PARCEL 2 PM 87-38 SEC 12/7/12 1.0 0.5 $ 131.88 056-330-037-000 301 BUSINESS PR PARCEL 1 PM 98-02 SEC 12/7/12 1.0 0.5 $ 131.88 056-330-038-000 291 BUSINESS PR PARCEL 2 PM 98-02 SEC 12/7/12 1.0 0.5 $ 131.88 056-410-003-000 341 BUSINESS PARK WAY AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 3 1.0 1.0 $ 193.92 056-410-005-000 541 INDUSTRY AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 15 1.0 4.6 $ 640.56 056-410-006-000 581 INDUSTRY AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 16 1.0 4.6 $ 640.56 056-410-008-000 550 INDUSTRY PR AIR BUS PK SUB LOT 12 & POR 11 1.0 13.0 $ 1,682.76 056-410-009-000 441 BUSINESS PR AIR BUS PK SUB LOTS 1-2 1.0 2.0 $ 317.98 Total 16.0 34.7 $ 5,422.74
City of Atwater
Airport Business Park Lighting and Drainage District
Fiscal Year 2025/26 Preliminary Assessment Roll
Willdan Financial Services Page 1 of 1

APN SITE ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION EBU CHARGE
001-241-001-000 1949 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 72 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-002-000 1945 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 73 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-003-000 1941 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 74 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-004-000 1937 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 75 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-005-000 1933 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 76 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-006-000 1929 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 77 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-007-000 1925 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 78 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-008-000 1927 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 79 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-009-000 1917 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 80 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-010-000 1913 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 81 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-011-000 1909 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 82 1.0 24.88$ 001-241-012-000 1905 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 83 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-001-000 2100 ARCATA WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 135 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-002-000 2104 ARCATA WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 134 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-003-000 2108 ARCATA WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 133 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-004-000 2112 ARCATA WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 132 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-005-000 2116 ARCATA WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 131 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-006-000 2120 ARCATA WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 130 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-007-000 2124 ARCATA WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 129 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-008-000 2129 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 128 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-009-000 2125 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 127 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-010-000 2121 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 126 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-011-000 2117 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 125 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-012-000 2113 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 124 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-013-000 2109 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 123 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-014-000 2105 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 122 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-015-000 2101 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 121 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-016-000 2100 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 120 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-017-000 2104 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 119 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-018-000 2108 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 118 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-019-000 2112 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 117 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-020-000 2116 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 116 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-021-000 2120 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 115 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-022-000 2124 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 114 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-023-000 2128 ROCKPORT CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 113 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-024-000 2133 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 112 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-025-000 2129 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 111 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-026-000 2125 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 110 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-027-000 2121 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 109 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-028-000 2117 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 108 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-029-000 2113 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 107 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-030-000 2109 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 106 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-031-000 BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 105 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-032-000 2101 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 104 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-033-000 2100 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 103 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-034-000 2104 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 102 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-035-000 2108 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 101 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-036-000 2112 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 100 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-037-000 2116 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 99 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-038-000 2120 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 98 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-039-000 2124 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 97 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-040-000 2128 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 96 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-041-000 2132 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 95 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-042-000 2136 UKIAH CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 94 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-043-000 2137 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 84 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-044-000 2133 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 85 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-045-000 2129 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 86 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-046-000 2125 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 87 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-047-000 2121 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 88 1.0 24.88$ City of Atwater
Bell Crossing Lighting & Drainage District
Fiscal Year 2025/26 Preliminary Assessment Roll
Willdan Financial Services Page 1 of 4

APN SITE ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION EBU CHARGE
City of Atwater
Bell Crossing Lighting & Drainage District
Fiscal Year 2025/26 Preliminary Assessment Roll
001-242-048-000 2117 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 89 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-049-000 2113 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 90 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-050-000 2109 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 91 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-051-000 2105 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 92 1.0 24.88$ 001-242-052-000 2101 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 93 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-001-000 2140 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 1 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-002-000 2136 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 2 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-003-000 2132 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 3 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-004-000 2128 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 4 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-005-000 2124 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 5 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-006-000 2120 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 6 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-007-000 2116 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 7 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-008-000 2112 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 8 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-009-000 2108 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 9 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-010-000 2104 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 10 1.0 24.88$ 001-243-011-000 2100 REDDING WAY BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 11 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-001-000 1956 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 24 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-002-000 1952 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 23 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-003-000 1948 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 22 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-004-000 1944 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 21 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-005-000 1940 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 20 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-006-000 1936 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 19 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-007-000 1932 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 18 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-008-000 1928 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 17 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-009-000 BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 16 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-010-000 1920 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 15 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-011-000 1916 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 14 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-012-000 BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 13 1.0 24.88$ 001-244-013-000 1908 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 12 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-001-000 1960 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 25 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-002-000 1964 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 26 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-003-000 1968 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 27 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-004-000 1972 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 28 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-005-000 1976 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 29 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-006-000 1980 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 30 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-007-000 1984 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 31 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-008-000 1988 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 32 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-009-000 1992 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 33 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-010-000 1996 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 34 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-011-000 2000 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 35 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-012-000 2004 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 36 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-013-000 2008 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 37 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-014-000 2012 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 38 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-015-000 2016 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 39 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-016-000 2101 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 40 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-017-000 2105 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 41 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-018-000 2109 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 42 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-019-000 2113 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 43 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-020-000 2117 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 44 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-021-000 2034 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 45 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-022-000 2038 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 46 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-023-000 2042 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 47 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-024-000 2045 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 48 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-025-000 2041 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 49 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-026-000 2037 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 50 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-027-000 2033 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 51 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-028-000 2029 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 52 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-029-000 2025 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 53 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-030-000 2021 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 54 1.0 24.88$ Willdan Financial Services Page 2 of 4

APN SITE ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION EBU CHARGE
City of Atwater
Bell Crossing Lighting & Drainage District
Fiscal Year 2025/26 Preliminary Assessment Roll
001-251-031-000 2017 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 55 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-032-000 2013 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 56 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-033-000 2009 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 57 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-034-000 2005 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 58 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-035-000 2001 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 59 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-036-000 1997 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 60 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-037-000 1993 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 61 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-038-000 1989 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 62 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-039-000 1985 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 63 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-040-000 1981 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 64 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-041-000 1977 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 65 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-042-000 1973 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 66 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-043-000 1969 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 67 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-044-000 1965 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 68 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-045-000 1961 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 69 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-046-000 1957 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 70 1.0 24.88$ 001-251-047-000 1953 SHASTA DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 1 LOT 71 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-002-000 BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 188 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-003-000 2112 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 187 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-004-000 2116 TRUCKEE DR BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 186 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-005-000 2121 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 185 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-006-000 2117 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 184 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-007-000 2113 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 183 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-008-000 2109 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 182 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-009-000 2105 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 181 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-010-000 2100 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 180 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-011-000 2104 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 179 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-012-000 2108 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 178 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-013-000 2112 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 177 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-014-000 2116 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 176 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-015-000 2120 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 175 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-016-000 2124 NOVATO CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 174 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-017-000 2129 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 173 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-018-000 2125 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 172 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-019-000 2121 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 171 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-020-000 2117 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 170 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-021-000 2113 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 169 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-022-000 2109 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 168 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-023-000 2105 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 167 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-024-000 2101 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 166 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-025-000 2100 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 165 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-026-000 2104 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 164 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-027-000 2108 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 163 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-028-000 BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 162 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-029-000 2116 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 161 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-030-000 2120 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 160 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-031-000 2124 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 159 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-032-000 2128 SONOMA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 158 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-033-000 2129 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 157 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-034-000 2125 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 156 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-035-000 2121 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 155 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-036-000 2117 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 154 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-037-000 2113 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 153 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-038-000 2109 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 152 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-039-000 2105 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 151 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-040-000 2101 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 150 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-041-000 2100 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 149 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-042-000 BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 148 1.0 24.88$ 001-252-043-000 2108 EUREKA CT BELL CROSSING PHASE 2 LOT 147 1.0 24.88$ Willdan Financial Services Page 3 of 4